www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
________________________________________ THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT
May 24, 2004 Vol. 4, No. 22
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Covering education news in Vermont and beyond...
Informative, provocative, unique...
Published by Vermonters for Better EducationNEWS & ANALYSIS...
VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.comIT'S OVER - AND THE WINNERS ARE...
The legislative session was gaveled to a close last week, and education reform was a loser for the most part as legislators left to return to their home towns and hit the campaign trail.
Only a few education-related bills were passed, and these ranged from the meaningful gesture (granting high school diplomas to Korean War vets who were honorably discharged) to the well-intentioned but unfunded mandate (the harassment bill).
Also of note, however, was the passage into law of Act 91, which appears on the surface to be nothing more than small changes to statute in order to expedite compliance with the No Child Left Behind Act. However, Act 91 should be labeled the "No School Choice in Spite of NCLB" Act, because Act 91 changes the definition of the "Local Education Agency" (LEA) in a way that makes it easier for school districts not to comply with choice components of NCLB.
Prior to Act 91, the LEA was defined as the supervisory union. That means that any time a school is designated as "needing improvement" under NCLB regulations, it should offer parents choice of other schools within the LEA. Vermont schools still managed to wiggle out of this requirement, though, because of the flexibility of NCLB requirements.
The legislature obviously felt it was necessary to codify this flexibility by defining LEAs as school DISTRICTS when it comes to NCLB "consequences," but as supervisory unions when it comes to NCLB funding issues. The upshot? The supervisory unions get to keep the Title I money flowing even if they have a "school needing improvement" within their boundaries, without having to deal with pesky NCLB consequences like school choice within the LEA.
Which brings us to the biggest loser of all this session - school choice itself. After a promising start, the Administration and House leadership faded on this issue. Maybe next year?
Another loser was the early education initiative that failed to progress beyond the Senate. This "loss," however, is really a gain. S.166 is a flawed bill, one that would have harmed private preschool and daycare providers across the state, added significant expense to Vermont's education bill, and provided little benefit.
VER GOES TO SUMMER SCHEDULE
After next week, the Vermont Education Report will appear every other week instead of weekly. However, we'll be sure to share breaking news bulletins when the occasion warrants!
HUMANITIES EDUCATOR AWARD - NOMINEES BEING ACCEPTED
The Vermont Humanities Council is seeking nominations for the second annual Victor Swenson Humanities Educator Award. Nominees should teach in grades 6 through 12, "inspire students and encourage an appreciation for lifelong learning; and possess extraordinary passion, knowledge, ability, and accomplishment in the teaching of language, literature, history, social studies, or other humanities fields."
The recipient receives a $1,000 prize and public recognition.
To nominate someone, send a one- to two-page letter, vita, and up to four letters of support from a school administrator, co-workers, and students to the VHC by July 1. For info, write to info@vermonthumanities.org or call 802.828.3183
* * *
ELSEWHEREFROM THE EDUCATION INTELLIGENCE AGENCY "EIA COMMUNIQUE"
On the Web at: http://www.www.eiaonline.comNEA MEMO: KERRY BACKS AWAY FROM "PAY FOR PERFORMANCE"
A confidential memo from National Education Association President Reg Weaver to union officials detailed a meeting he had last week with U.S. Senator John Kerry in which Kerry backed away from the "pay for performance" language in his proposed education plan.
Senator Kerry gave an education policy speech at a California high school on May 6 that expressed support for higher pay for math and science teachers and for those who work in hard-to-staff schools. He also stated the need "to find ways to reward teachers for excellence, and to reward the students' teachers who obviously show tremendous success." Kerry said that greater achievement "ought to be able to command greater pay just the way it does in every other sector of professional employment in the United States of America."
"...will establish new systems that reward teachers for excellence in the classroom, including pay based on improvement in student achievement."
Many elements of Kerry's plan caused consternation at NEA headquarters, but none more so than the reference to performance pay, which NEA strictly opposes. NEA released a press statement in response to Kerry's speech, saying, "We look forward to discussing ways to help strengthen Senator Kerry's proposals in ways that will meet the needs of America's public school students."
That opportunity evidently occurred last week in Washington, D.C., when NEA President Weaver, Executive Director John Wilson, and Director of Government Relations Diane Shust met with Kerry. In a memo dated May 21 and disseminated widely to high-ranking NEA officials nationwide, Weaver described what he called "a very positive meeting in which the Senator expressed strong interest in working closely with NEA and outlined his support for a number of NEA priorities."
On the issue of performance pay, Weaver reported, "We raised our concerns that the Kerry campaign used the language 'pay-for-performance' in his press release, although the Senator himself did not use those words in his remarks and the formal policy document did not use it. The Senator clarified that the campaign did not intend to use that language and would not do so in the future. He asked that I convey this point to NEA leaders."
Weaver went on to note Kerry's commitment to fully fund the No Child Left Behind Act, to advance early childhood education programs and to "roll back the Bush tax cuts" to pay for education and health care. Weaver's memo did not mention Kerry's proposals for differential pay, teacher testing, or expedited teacher dismissal procedures.
In a May 7 speech to the Democratic Leadership Council, Kerry said, "Yesterday, I proposed the most far-reaching reforms in teacher pay in our nation's history." Whether or not Kerry uses the words "pay for performance" in the future is irrelevant to the central question: Will those reforms survive the resistance of education's most powerful special interest group?
* * *
FROM....THE TEACHER QUALITY BULLETIN!
TQ Bulletin is a bi-monthly e-mail newsletter brought to you by the
National Council on Teacher Quality (http://www.nctq.org)THE CERTIFICATION DEBATE CONTINUES
Editorial by NCTQ President, Kate WalshOnce again, does teacher certification matter? The question has been asked and answered so many times for so long, that the debate has entered some kind of existential realm, disembodied from reason and logic. Believers will continue to believe and cynics will continue to question.
The journal of record for education, Education Week, came out this week with its latest rushed pronouncement that three new research studies find that certification matters. (The newspaper already featured an earlier metamorphosis of one of these studies four years ago but it's been a slow news millennium.) Before we all enroll in five-year ed programs and sign up for the NEA, let's take a look at the studies.
The first study is by Kristie J. Rowley, a graduate student at Vanderbilt's Peabody College. Using an important data set and survey from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Ms. Rowley finds that kindergarten students assigned to teachers with "full certification" made more math gains than students assigned to teachers on emergency licenses. Even though the data set included reading and language scores, Rowley doesn't report these. Hmmm. She gives as her reason that "mathematics is the area most influenced by schooling." In kindergarten? She bungles the reporting of her statistics claiming that certified teachers in both elementary ed and early ed were the most effective, when in fact teachers with no certification (private school teachers) were more effective than early ed certified teachers.
A second study is from the American Institute for Research. This study looked at NAEP data to conclude that 8th grade students in Texas who had certified teachers did better on NAEP math. But here's the catch (as with all three studies.) The authors define anyone who is "provisional" as fully certified. So for example, a Teach For America teacher or any other alt cert teacher would have been defined, for the purposes of this study, as fully certified, leaving basically only those teachers at the bottom of the barrel to provide the comparison in quality. The study was only able to partially control for prior student achievement for about half of the students (most people theorize that high performing teachers gravitate to high performing students). Greenberg et al. warn: "the reader is advised to exercise caution to inferring any causality in the relationship between teacher qualifications and student achievement highlighted in the paper." Duly noted ...by us anyway.
The third brief paper by Ed Fuller of the Dana Center and Celeste Alexander from the Southwestern Educational Development Laboratory appears to have been rushed into some readable form to help wage the PR wars over the recent Texas decision to allow high school teachers in the classroom without ed coursework. (The authors say as much.) Fuller had collected similar data five years ago which made their way into an Ed Week headline but the study not only didn't get published, it was never written up. Anyway, Fuller and his colleague find here that students with certified teachers did better on the TAAS math assessment than students with non-certified teachers. But the authors jump to their conclusions after only one year of data, not just violating the rules for value-added studies but evoking William Sander's name in the process, a researcher who is adamant that three years of data are critical. Also, it's not clear how alt cert teachers were classified -- as fully certified or emergency certified.
While the two sides of this debate are not likely to converge, it would be good to agree about what would constitute a legitimate certification study.
First, (as Fuller's did) it would ideally look at groups of teachers within the same state so we don't have to argue over the state differences in certification requirements.
Second, it would look at student gains over a sufficient period of time to make sure the results aren't spurious and it would tie student gains to individual teachers. Without a good prior achievement measure, the minimal window of analysis needs to be three years and even this bar set by value-added guru, William Sanders, is questioned by some economists.
Third, it would use proper controls for prior student achievement, student socioeconomic status and other critical factors...and the paper would be published under a peer review process before newspapers write about it.
Fourth and most importantly, the important policy question here is whether teachers who go through regular certification routes are better than teachers who come from other routes with other talents. To compare certified teachers with uncertified teachers who don't have the basic smarts to pass a simple licensing test is just not very interesting or helpful (see Margaret Raymond's study of Houston teachers where many emergency certified teachers didn't even have college degrees.) The preparation that leads to certification is what this debate is supposed to be about, not whether states should be recruiting teachers from the fast food window at McDonalds.
"What the Research Says"
NEA Website
http://www.nea.org/math/research-math.html"Pupils of Licensed Teachers Found to Score Higher on Math"
Education Week, April 28, 2004
http://www.agentk-12.edweek.org/edweek_article.cfm?slug=33Certify.h23&sec=seekers"Teacher Experience, Certification, & Education" Characteristics that Matter Most in Kindergarten Math Achievement"
Kristie J. Rowley, Vanderbilt University
(Not available on-line. Please contact us [NCTQ] if you would like a copy.)"The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data"
Jonah E. Rockoff, Harvard University, March, 2004
http://econwpa.wustl.edu/eps/pe/papers/0304/0304002.pdf"Prepared to Teach: Teacher Preparation and Student Achievement in Eighth-Grade Mathematics"
Elizabeth Greenberg, David Rhodes, Xioalan Ye, Fran Stancavage, April 2004
http://www.air.org/pubs/PreparedtoTeach.pdf"Does Teacher Certification Matter? Teacher Certification And Middle School Mathematics Achievement in Texas"
Celeste Alexander, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory and Ed Fuller,
The University of Texas at Austin, April 2004
(Not available on-line. Please contact us [NCTQ] if you would like a copy.)* * *
FROM U.S. FREEDOM FOUNDATION
(http://www.freedomfoundation.us)CHARTER SCHOOLS: HERE TO STAY
by David W. Kirkpatrick, Senior Education FellowWashington state recently became the 41st state, plus the District of Columbia, to create a charter school law, one that authorizes 45 such schools over the next five years. The Washington Education Association, the teachers' union, opposed the law. It has now begun a drive to place an initiative on the ballot this fall to overturn it before it has had a chance to show results. An op-ed piece objecting to charter schools, by a member of the Association's board of directors, more than once referred to them as an "expensive experiment." That's wrong on both counts.
She estimated the cost of the proposed charter schools to exceed $100 million. It is not clear how that can be determined in advance, but assume the figure is correct. If that is expensive, what word describes the more than $10 billion the state spends annually on the regular public system. She doesn't say. Nor does she note that on an individual school or per student basis, charter schools get less funding than traditional schools.
As for being an experiment, in the case of charter schools it's far too late for that argument. The first such school, City Academy in St. Paul, MN, was started by two school district teachers, both union members, in 1992. Successful from the start, it is today still operating with positive results.
More than that, City Academy quickly ceased to be the only charter school in the nation. It is now only one of some 3,000 charter schools nationwide, enrolling an estimated 750,000 students.
The Center for Education Reform has published a document which looks at the 23 states and the District of Columbia which provide good data on their charter schools. The publication is entitled, Charter Schools Today: Changing the Face of American Education," and its subtitle, "A Record of Success," says it all.
Admittedly CER favors charter schools and its critics thus charge it with being biased. Normally such an accusation means the individual or group so charged has some direct interest in the outcome of an issue, pro or con. CER, as its name indicates, does favor education reform and it is doubtful if there is any such thing as pure objectivity on anyone's part. But, unlike many opponents of charter schools, CER does not have a vested interest in the issue.
It often notes, for example, where something is not working, as well as where it is. Thus its "bias," if it has one, is determined by what the facts seem to indicate. In this instance, the facts are reinforced by a bibliography of 36 sources plus a listing of seventeen education experts.
A breakdown is given of all 24 jurisdictions. For example, Arizona was early in this movement and has more charter schools than any other state. Last year, "statewide results from the Stanford 9 language, math and reading tests found that 17 out of the state's 25 highest performing elementary and middle schools are charter schools." In California, second only to Arizona in the number of charter schools but first in the enrollment of charter school students, 80 charters schools operating for five years or more outperformed all public schools on the 2002 scores of the states Academic Performance Index.
And these are just the first two states in the CER report, not two carefully selected from the 24.
Overall, the CER finds that "charters have made notable gains, particularly in serving a wide spectrum of students. In addition to serving 'average' populations, charters are serving exceptionally well children of color, children with special needs and huge numbers of poor children. More importantly, parents of these students report high satisfaction with the education their children are finally receiving."
The charter school movement might be said to be at the stage of the battles of Stalingrad and Midway in 1942. Before that the Allies had never won a major campaign. After that they never lost one. The war continued but, as later became clear, the outcome was determined after those victories.
So, too, with charter schools. Skirmishes, yes. But the outcome is no longer in doubt.
* * *
SCHOOL CHOICE ADS COMING!
Thanks to those who've sent in their ideas for school choice radio scripts. We'll be printing samples in the near future! Those who want to send in their ideas still have time. Email them to: VTBetterEd@aol.com.
* * *
The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.
SubscribeRemove
..
..
..
..