Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Flawed Research: Preschool Juggernaut by Chester Finn
Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut is a new book published online by the Hoover Institution and authored by the Fordham Institution’s Chester Finn. It is an inaccurate and poorly reasoned attack on the movement to secure all children a good preschool education. The book cherry-picks a few weak studies to fit its preconceptions, and it builds the case for targeted programs based on errors, exaggeration, misrepresentation, and logical inconsistency. Below, I set forth 14 points to consider which together demonstrate these flaws and explain why an even-handed review of all costs and benefits tends to support preschool for all.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
New Report on Charter Schools and Student Achievement
Charter Schools Found Not To Have Raised Student Achievement Significantly
The Washington Times (6/16, Billups) reports, "Even as the president has touted the growth of charter schools and his education secretary has decried state caps on their numbers, a new study from Stanford University has found that the nation's charter schools have not significantly raised student achievement when compared with traditional public schools. The study of collective reading and math progress in 2,403 charter schools in 15 states and cities, including the District of Columbia was released Monday by researchers at Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO)." Findings "showed that almost half of the charter schools produced results similar to those from comparable public schools, and schools producing worse results than the traditional schools outnumbered those with better numbers by more than 2 to 1."
The Washington Times (6/16, Billups) reports, "Even as the president has touted the growth of charter schools and his education secretary has decried state caps on their numbers, a new study from Stanford University has found that the nation's charter schools have not significantly raised student achievement when compared with traditional public schools. The study of collective reading and math progress in 2,403 charter schools in 15 states and cities, including the District of Columbia was released Monday by researchers at Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO)." Findings "showed that almost half of the charter schools produced results similar to those from comparable public schools, and schools producing worse results than the traditional schools outnumbered those with better numbers by more than 2 to 1."
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Western Heights Acknowledges Dropouts
This story appeared in the Oklahoman today. Western Heights Superintendent Joe Kitchens is an OEA member and strong advocate for public schools.
District’s telling symbol Western Heights’ dropouts gone but not forgotten
By Christy Watson
Most everything about the Western Heights High School graduation was typical. Valedictorian Ashley Ozment spoke of good memories and exciting futures. The band played "Rise and Shine” in tribute to the graduates. And Principal Jean Adams offered words of wisdom and encouragement.
But as the 133 graduates made their way across the Cox Convention Center stage and back to their seats, they had to pass by what made the ceremony most unusual: empty chairs. One for each of the 56 former Western Heights students the school counted as Class of 2009 dropouts.
At some point during the past four years, 339 students were part of the Class of 2009, Superintendent Joe Kitchens explained to graduates and the crowd. School officials confirmed that 146 of those students ended up at another school. Four received a GED. That left the 133 graduates and 56 students the school officially counts as dropouts. They were gone but not forgotten. They still had chairs.
Kitchens is frustrated at the district’s 29 percent dropout rate. But two years ago, the rate was 40 percent. In real numbers, 97 kids from the Class of 2007 dropped out. That fell to 81 last year. Behind those numbers are real kids with a shot at a better future.
In a few years, all Oklahoma schools will have to follow the more rigorous dropout formula Western Heights has embraced. Will all be as brutally truthful?
Western Heights is a district well known for its impressive student data system. The data are telling. Students who didn’t begin ninth grade at Western Heights dropped out at twice the rate of other students. These mobile students also failed classes at twice the rate of their peers.
Those figures mean little without action. "We know who the mobile students are and we know when they come into our school system,” Kitchens said. "It is our job to effectively identify those students and put people out there who are specifically charged with helping them the day they enter our school system.” It’s working.
Kitchens acknowledges the pressure that his focus on dropouts puts on school staff. Despite some criticism about the empty chair display, he isn’t ignoring the success of graduates. Most have college plans, and some already have several hours of college credit through a partnership with Oklahoma City Community College. But he doesn’t want parents and patrons to miss the big picture. With an entire section of empty chairs at graduation, that picture was impossible to ignore.
Watson is an editorial writer for The Oklahoman.
District’s telling symbol Western Heights’ dropouts gone but not forgotten
By Christy Watson
Most everything about the Western Heights High School graduation was typical. Valedictorian Ashley Ozment spoke of good memories and exciting futures. The band played "Rise and Shine” in tribute to the graduates. And Principal Jean Adams offered words of wisdom and encouragement.
But as the 133 graduates made their way across the Cox Convention Center stage and back to their seats, they had to pass by what made the ceremony most unusual: empty chairs. One for each of the 56 former Western Heights students the school counted as Class of 2009 dropouts.
At some point during the past four years, 339 students were part of the Class of 2009, Superintendent Joe Kitchens explained to graduates and the crowd. School officials confirmed that 146 of those students ended up at another school. Four received a GED. That left the 133 graduates and 56 students the school officially counts as dropouts. They were gone but not forgotten. They still had chairs.
Kitchens is frustrated at the district’s 29 percent dropout rate. But two years ago, the rate was 40 percent. In real numbers, 97 kids from the Class of 2007 dropped out. That fell to 81 last year. Behind those numbers are real kids with a shot at a better future.
In a few years, all Oklahoma schools will have to follow the more rigorous dropout formula Western Heights has embraced. Will all be as brutally truthful?
Western Heights is a district well known for its impressive student data system. The data are telling. Students who didn’t begin ninth grade at Western Heights dropped out at twice the rate of other students. These mobile students also failed classes at twice the rate of their peers.
Those figures mean little without action. "We know who the mobile students are and we know when they come into our school system,” Kitchens said. "It is our job to effectively identify those students and put people out there who are specifically charged with helping them the day they enter our school system.” It’s working.
Kitchens acknowledges the pressure that his focus on dropouts puts on school staff. Despite some criticism about the empty chair display, he isn’t ignoring the success of graduates. Most have college plans, and some already have several hours of college credit through a partnership with Oklahoma City Community College. But he doesn’t want parents and patrons to miss the big picture. With an entire section of empty chairs at graduation, that picture was impossible to ignore.
Watson is an editorial writer for The Oklahoman.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Secretary Duncan's Response to "The Condition of Education"
United States Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has issued the following statement in response to “The Condition of Education” report for 2009 released today by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES):
“These findings clearly show the need for us to make college available to all young people and adults and the bottom line benefits of a higher education. Over the last three decades immediate college enrollment increased for all income levels, although we still need to help close the gap between those who need financial help and those who don’t. The enrollment gap between students from low- and high-income families shrunk by nearly 50 percent, which means more low-income students are accessing college. This is extremely encouraging, as they have the potential to lift families out of circumstances of poverty. The financial advantages provided by a college education are clear. Young people with a bachelor’s degree earn twice as much as those without a high school diploma, according to this research.
President Obama has set a goal that by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. This requires more college enrollment right out of high school and more adults going back to college as our workforce reinvents itself. Stimulus funds and our proposed 2010 budget are targeted to do just that by increasing access to college and reducing high school and college dropout rates.
While the findings of the 2009 Condition of Education report show that young students are showing some progress, we can’t overlook the fact that adults need more help in preparing for the work world or further education.
As I reflect on these findings, I am confident that we are on the right course as the Administration implements a comprehensive cradle-to-career education agenda to prepare our citizenry to compete in the global economy. Every single child deserves the very best education possible and our job is to give it to them.”
The Condition of Education 2009 summarizes important developments and trends in education using the latest available data. To view the report, visit <http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/>.
“These findings clearly show the need for us to make college available to all young people and adults and the bottom line benefits of a higher education. Over the last three decades immediate college enrollment increased for all income levels, although we still need to help close the gap between those who need financial help and those who don’t. The enrollment gap between students from low- and high-income families shrunk by nearly 50 percent, which means more low-income students are accessing college. This is extremely encouraging, as they have the potential to lift families out of circumstances of poverty. The financial advantages provided by a college education are clear. Young people with a bachelor’s degree earn twice as much as those without a high school diploma, according to this research.
President Obama has set a goal that by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. This requires more college enrollment right out of high school and more adults going back to college as our workforce reinvents itself. Stimulus funds and our proposed 2010 budget are targeted to do just that by increasing access to college and reducing high school and college dropout rates.
While the findings of the 2009 Condition of Education report show that young students are showing some progress, we can’t overlook the fact that adults need more help in preparing for the work world or further education.
As I reflect on these findings, I am confident that we are on the right course as the Administration implements a comprehensive cradle-to-career education agenda to prepare our citizenry to compete in the global economy. Every single child deserves the very best education possible and our job is to give it to them.”
The Condition of Education 2009 summarizes important developments and trends in education using the latest available data. To view the report, visit <http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/>.
Monday, June 01, 2009
The Condition of Education 2009
An interesting article about the new National Center for Education Statistics report.
Washington Post: A Changing Student Body
(Maria Glod, News, National)
“Public school enrollment across the country is hitting a record this year with just less than 50 million students, and classrooms are becoming more diverse, largely because of growth in the Latino population, according to a new federal report.”
Washington Post: A Changing Student Body
(Maria Glod, News, National)
“Public school enrollment across the country is hitting a record this year with just less than 50 million students, and classrooms are becoming more diverse, largely because of growth in the Latino population, according to a new federal report.”
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
NCLB Issues: Restructuring Schools Won’t Raise Student Achievement
A policy brief by William J. Mathis debunks the NCLB school restructuring alternatives.
RESTRUCTURING SCHOOLS WON’T RAISE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Research predicts failure for NCLB’s ultimate sanctions, concludes new report
EAST LANSING, MI, (April 8, 2009)—A new policy brief finds little evidence that sweeping school restructuring—mandated by the federal government for so-called failing schools—will raise student achievement.
The report is titled NCLB’s Ultimate Restructuring Alternatives: Do They Improve the Quality of Education? It was written by William J. Mathis, adjunct associate professor of school finance at the University of Vermont and a superintendent of schools. The report was released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.
Mathis’s brief examines the impact of the specific school restructuring approaches required under the federal No Child Left Behind law. Under the law, enacted in 2001, schools are required to be restructured if they fail to make “adequate yearly progress” (measured by meeting test score targets) for six consecutive years.
NCLB school restructuring can take one of the following forms: takeover of the school by the state; turning management of the school over to a private firm; shutting down and reopening as a charter school; or reconstitution of the school by replacing some or all administrators, staff, or faculty. A fifth option provided under the law endorses “any other major restructuring of a school’s governance arrangement.”
The brief reviews the existing body of research on each of the five restructuring options and finds that “there is little or no evidence to suggest that any of these options delivers the promised improvements in academic achievement” but notes that “negative side effects are frequently recorded including increased segregation, substantial, short-term drops in achievement scores and organizational instability.”
Mathis concludes: “Given that these approaches are being proposed for the nation’s most troubled schools, the solutions [currently set forth by NCLB] are likely to be woefully inadequate” and that “reliance on these restructuring options could actually deter schools from exploring more promising approaches of achieving the goal of a sound basic education for every child.”
In light of such findings, Mathis recommends against relying on restructuring sanctions to promote school improvement and encourages the support of research on the effectiveness of other school improvement strategies. He also recommends support for strategies that have been shown increase school improvement including early education, small school communities, and strong counseling and social support systems for students.
Find William Mathis’s report, NCLB’s Ultimate Restructuring Alternatives: Do They Improve the Quality of Education? on the web at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
RESTRUCTURING SCHOOLS WON’T RAISE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Research predicts failure for NCLB’s ultimate sanctions, concludes new report
EAST LANSING, MI, (April 8, 2009)—A new policy brief finds little evidence that sweeping school restructuring—mandated by the federal government for so-called failing schools—will raise student achievement.
The report is titled NCLB’s Ultimate Restructuring Alternatives: Do They Improve the Quality of Education? It was written by William J. Mathis, adjunct associate professor of school finance at the University of Vermont and a superintendent of schools. The report was released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.
Mathis’s brief examines the impact of the specific school restructuring approaches required under the federal No Child Left Behind law. Under the law, enacted in 2001, schools are required to be restructured if they fail to make “adequate yearly progress” (measured by meeting test score targets) for six consecutive years.
NCLB school restructuring can take one of the following forms: takeover of the school by the state; turning management of the school over to a private firm; shutting down and reopening as a charter school; or reconstitution of the school by replacing some or all administrators, staff, or faculty. A fifth option provided under the law endorses “any other major restructuring of a school’s governance arrangement.”
The brief reviews the existing body of research on each of the five restructuring options and finds that “there is little or no evidence to suggest that any of these options delivers the promised improvements in academic achievement” but notes that “negative side effects are frequently recorded including increased segregation, substantial, short-term drops in achievement scores and organizational instability.”
Mathis concludes: “Given that these approaches are being proposed for the nation’s most troubled schools, the solutions [currently set forth by NCLB] are likely to be woefully inadequate” and that “reliance on these restructuring options could actually deter schools from exploring more promising approaches of achieving the goal of a sound basic education for every child.”
In light of such findings, Mathis recommends against relying on restructuring sanctions to promote school improvement and encourages the support of research on the effectiveness of other school improvement strategies. He also recommends support for strategies that have been shown increase school improvement including early education, small school communities, and strong counseling and social support systems for students.
Find William Mathis’s report, NCLB’s Ultimate Restructuring Alternatives: Do They Improve the Quality of Education? on the web at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Monday, December 01, 2008
High School Reform:Multiple Pathways
Making sure Multiple Pathways is done correctly will help prepare students for college and the work place, but if not done correctly, it won't address previous problems. The issue is making sure you have everything in place to be successful.
Multiple Pathways prepares students for college and careers
New report focuses on high school reform done right
EAST LANSING, Mich., (December 1, 2008)—The Multiple Pathways approach to high school reform is being advanced by states and supported by philanthropy groups around the country. The approach was developed as a way to prepare students for both college and careers while rejecting a tracking system that provides academic preparation for some students but only vocational preparation to others. A new report highlights the potential of this approach but warns that if poorly designed and implemented, past problems will not be addressed.
Released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, this legislation policy brief was co-authored by Dr. Marisa Saunders, a research associate at UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education and Access, and Christopher Chrisman, an associate with the Denver office of the law firm Holland & Hart.
The first half of the report explains the key elements of effective Multiple Pathways reform. The second half translates these elements into statutory language, concretely providing the details necessary to move forward with this important reform.
The Multiple Pathways approach to high school reform connects rigorous academic preparation and technical knowledge to opportunities to learn from adult, real-world settings such as the workplace. The reform rests on three research-based propositions:
*Learning both academic and technical knowledge is enhanced when the two are combined and contextualized in real-world situations;
*Connecting academics to such real-world contexts promotes student interest and engagement; and
*Students provided with both academic and career education are more likely to be able to later choose from the full range of postsecondary options.
Saunders points out that Multiple Pathways is not a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Students and families choose from a number of “pathways” which offer both the academic and real-world experiences that students need. Though each “pathway” differs in terms of curricular content, how courses are organized and how much time students spend on and off campus, Saunders says that what is most important is that “every pathway leads to the same destination: preparation to succeed in both college and career, not one or the other.”
However, Saunders cautions, “If poorly designed or enacted, the reform will only maintain the same old vocational education programs or alternative schools, continuing discredited practices of ability tracking rather than transforming the comprehensive high school.”
A well-designed Multiple Pathways reform must include the following four essential components within each and every pathway that is offered to students:
*A college-preparatory academic core that satisfies the course requirements for entry into a state’s flagship public university, using project-based learning and other engaging classroom strategies;
*A professional/technical core well-grounded in academic and real-world standards;
*Field-based learning and realistic workplace simulations that deepen students’ understanding of academic and technical knowledge through application in real-world situations; and
*Additional support services to meet the particular needs of students and communities, which can include supplemental instruction, counseling, and transportation.
According to Saunders, effective Multiple Pathways reform as proposed in the brief can, “meet the educational needs of a diverse student population by bridging the divide between education for work and education for college.”
Find Saunders’ and Chrisman’s report, Multiple Pathways: 21st Century High Schools that Prepare All Students for College, Career and Civic Participation on the web at:http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Multiple Pathways prepares students for college and careers
New report focuses on high school reform done right
EAST LANSING, Mich., (December 1, 2008)—The Multiple Pathways approach to high school reform is being advanced by states and supported by philanthropy groups around the country. The approach was developed as a way to prepare students for both college and careers while rejecting a tracking system that provides academic preparation for some students but only vocational preparation to others. A new report highlights the potential of this approach but warns that if poorly designed and implemented, past problems will not be addressed.
Released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, this legislation policy brief was co-authored by Dr. Marisa Saunders, a research associate at UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education and Access, and Christopher Chrisman, an associate with the Denver office of the law firm Holland & Hart.
The first half of the report explains the key elements of effective Multiple Pathways reform. The second half translates these elements into statutory language, concretely providing the details necessary to move forward with this important reform.
The Multiple Pathways approach to high school reform connects rigorous academic preparation and technical knowledge to opportunities to learn from adult, real-world settings such as the workplace. The reform rests on three research-based propositions:
*Learning both academic and technical knowledge is enhanced when the two are combined and contextualized in real-world situations;
*Connecting academics to such real-world contexts promotes student interest and engagement; and
*Students provided with both academic and career education are more likely to be able to later choose from the full range of postsecondary options.
Saunders points out that Multiple Pathways is not a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Students and families choose from a number of “pathways” which offer both the academic and real-world experiences that students need. Though each “pathway” differs in terms of curricular content, how courses are organized and how much time students spend on and off campus, Saunders says that what is most important is that “every pathway leads to the same destination: preparation to succeed in both college and career, not one or the other.”
However, Saunders cautions, “If poorly designed or enacted, the reform will only maintain the same old vocational education programs or alternative schools, continuing discredited practices of ability tracking rather than transforming the comprehensive high school.”
A well-designed Multiple Pathways reform must include the following four essential components within each and every pathway that is offered to students:
*A college-preparatory academic core that satisfies the course requirements for entry into a state’s flagship public university, using project-based learning and other engaging classroom strategies;
*A professional/technical core well-grounded in academic and real-world standards;
*Field-based learning and realistic workplace simulations that deepen students’ understanding of academic and technical knowledge through application in real-world situations; and
*Additional support services to meet the particular needs of students and communities, which can include supplemental instruction, counseling, and transportation.
According to Saunders, effective Multiple Pathways reform as proposed in the brief can, “meet the educational needs of a diverse student population by bridging the divide between education for work and education for college.”
Find Saunders’ and Chrisman’s report, Multiple Pathways: 21st Century High Schools that Prepare All Students for College, Career and Civic Participation on the web at:http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Quality Research:Preschool Education
Oklahoma has a great commitment to early education programs and now there is a new policy brief to support that commitment.
Children Reap Lasting Benefits from Quality Preschool Programs
As candidates debate national preschool policy, expert urges policymakers to stick with what works
EAST LANSING, Mi., (Sept. 10, 2008)—Amid a contentious debate over the value of preschool programs, a new policy brief, Preschool Education and Its Lasting Effects: Research and Policy Implications examines what researchers currently know about the short- and long-term effects of preschool. The brief concludes that preschool can strongly benefit children’s learning and development. But it also finds that the quality of programs varies dramatically and that increased public investment in preschool education should be focused on program designs that have been demonstrated to be highly effective.
The policy brief is written by W. Steven Barnett, director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University in New Jersey. It was released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.
Preschool programs have become increasingly common over the last several decades. Recommendations for or against various forms of universal, publicly funded preschool have emerged in the current presidential campaign. For example, Senator Barack Obama is proposing grants to encourage states to institute universal, voluntary preschool programs, while John McCain’s campaign has called for a more limited federal role, providing information and databases to help parents choose a preschool education program.
Barnett’s brief offers a solid research foundation upon which this policy debate can proceed.
In his brief, Barnett explains that well-designed preschool programs have been shown to produce long-term improvements in school success—raising students’ achievement test scores, reducing the rates of students being retained in grade, reducing the assignment of students to special education programs, and raising student educational attainment. He also finds that these well-designed programs are extraordinarily cost effective, with their long-term payoffs far exceeding their costs.
The strongest evidence suggests that children from all socioeconomic backgrounds reap long-term benefits from preschool, Barnett says. And he notes that the strongest benefits are received by economically disadvantaged children.
However, Barnett also warns that current public policies for child care, Head Start, and state pre-Kindergarten programs offer no assurance that American children will attend such highly effective preschool programs. Some attend no preschool and others attend educationally weak programs.
Although there are exceptions, highly effective preschool programs are generally characterized by small class sizes and the use of well-educated, adequately paid teachers, and Barnett recommends that policymakers stick with those approaches. Preschool teachers should undergo intensive supervision and coaching and “should be involved in a continuous improvement process for teaching and learning.” Preschool programs also should regularly monitor children’s learning and development.
Because preschool programs vary so much in quality, Barnett counsels against simply raising child care subsidies. Instead, he recommends greater public investment in effective preschool education programs, with a focus on state and local pre-K programs with high standards, which have been found to be the most effective. Such programs “need not be provided by public schools,” he notes; public, private and Head Start programs all “have produced similar results when operating with the same resources and standards as part of the same state pre-K program.”
Finally, Barnett recommends that policies expanding preschool access to children under four give priority to disadvantaged children because an earlier start and longer duration appear to produce better results.
Find Steve Barnett’s report, Preschool Education and Its Lasting Effects: Research and Policy Implications on the web at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Children Reap Lasting Benefits from Quality Preschool Programs
As candidates debate national preschool policy, expert urges policymakers to stick with what works
EAST LANSING, Mi., (Sept. 10, 2008)—Amid a contentious debate over the value of preschool programs, a new policy brief, Preschool Education and Its Lasting Effects: Research and Policy Implications examines what researchers currently know about the short- and long-term effects of preschool. The brief concludes that preschool can strongly benefit children’s learning and development. But it also finds that the quality of programs varies dramatically and that increased public investment in preschool education should be focused on program designs that have been demonstrated to be highly effective.
The policy brief is written by W. Steven Barnett, director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University in New Jersey. It was released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.
Preschool programs have become increasingly common over the last several decades. Recommendations for or against various forms of universal, publicly funded preschool have emerged in the current presidential campaign. For example, Senator Barack Obama is proposing grants to encourage states to institute universal, voluntary preschool programs, while John McCain’s campaign has called for a more limited federal role, providing information and databases to help parents choose a preschool education program.
Barnett’s brief offers a solid research foundation upon which this policy debate can proceed.
In his brief, Barnett explains that well-designed preschool programs have been shown to produce long-term improvements in school success—raising students’ achievement test scores, reducing the rates of students being retained in grade, reducing the assignment of students to special education programs, and raising student educational attainment. He also finds that these well-designed programs are extraordinarily cost effective, with their long-term payoffs far exceeding their costs.
The strongest evidence suggests that children from all socioeconomic backgrounds reap long-term benefits from preschool, Barnett says. And he notes that the strongest benefits are received by economically disadvantaged children.
However, Barnett also warns that current public policies for child care, Head Start, and state pre-Kindergarten programs offer no assurance that American children will attend such highly effective preschool programs. Some attend no preschool and others attend educationally weak programs.
Although there are exceptions, highly effective preschool programs are generally characterized by small class sizes and the use of well-educated, adequately paid teachers, and Barnett recommends that policymakers stick with those approaches. Preschool teachers should undergo intensive supervision and coaching and “should be involved in a continuous improvement process for teaching and learning.” Preschool programs also should regularly monitor children’s learning and development.
Because preschool programs vary so much in quality, Barnett counsels against simply raising child care subsidies. Instead, he recommends greater public investment in effective preschool education programs, with a focus on state and local pre-K programs with high standards, which have been found to be the most effective. Such programs “need not be provided by public schools,” he notes; public, private and Head Start programs all “have produced similar results when operating with the same resources and standards as part of the same state pre-K program.”
Finally, Barnett recommends that policies expanding preschool access to children under four give priority to disadvantaged children because an earlier start and longer duration appear to produce better results.
Find Steve Barnett’s report, Preschool Education and Its Lasting Effects: Research and Policy Implications on the web at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Research on Test Scores:Communication has Strong Influence
This is an interesting study that validates the concerns of teachers, administrators and legislators who participated in the OEA Summit on Staffing High Needs Schools. One of the recommendations dealt with having the time to collaborate with other teachers and administrators for the best success in staffing schools.This research not only supports the concept, but shows that the practice has a direct impact on student test scores.
Teachers will tell you that time is one of the greatest issues facing the profession. Having time to collaborate with your colleagues is an important factor in the success of schools. Too often, a majority of our teachers aren't given the time at school to discuss issues and strategies.
Study: Teacher communication has strong influence on test scores.
Pennsylvania's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (11/26, Roth) reports, "In an award-winning study of the Pittsburgh Public Schools," researchers from the University of Pittsburgh, "found that in the schools where teachers talked to each other the most about their jobs, and where the principals did the best job of staying in touch with the community, students had noticeably higher reading and math test scores." The study, which won the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation national prize for the best research paper published last year, found that "these communication networks had a much bigger impact on test scores than the experience or credentials of the staff did." Though researchers determined that "a student's family background and poverty level will have the biggest single impact on his test scores," they found that the most significant factor that schools could control was interaction between teachers, principals, parents and other members of the school community. According to the study's lead author, "If teachers from the same grades could get together for a half hour to an hour each week just to talk about classroom challenges together, it would probably have more benefit than all the special in-service days wrapped together."
Teachers will tell you that time is one of the greatest issues facing the profession. Having time to collaborate with your colleagues is an important factor in the success of schools. Too often, a majority of our teachers aren't given the time at school to discuss issues and strategies.
Study: Teacher communication has strong influence on test scores.
Pennsylvania's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (11/26, Roth) reports, "In an award-winning study of the Pittsburgh Public Schools," researchers from the University of Pittsburgh, "found that in the schools where teachers talked to each other the most about their jobs, and where the principals did the best job of staying in touch with the community, students had noticeably higher reading and math test scores." The study, which won the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation national prize for the best research paper published last year, found that "these communication networks had a much bigger impact on test scores than the experience or credentials of the staff did." Though researchers determined that "a student's family background and poverty level will have the biggest single impact on his test scores," they found that the most significant factor that schools could control was interaction between teachers, principals, parents and other members of the school community. According to the study's lead author, "If teachers from the same grades could get together for a half hour to an hour each week just to talk about classroom challenges together, it would probably have more benefit than all the special in-service days wrapped together."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
