July 2008 Archives

Some 500 educators attending the National Reading First Conference here in Nashville this week have signed up for more information about a new national association that will push for legislation and policies based on the tenets of the federal program. State Reading First directors came up with the idea for the National Association for Reading First after learning about plans in Congress to eliminate the $1 billion-a-year grant program, according to Debora Scheffel, who directs the program in Colorado.

The organization will promote inclusion of Reading First principles in the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act, and work to disseminate information on research-based instruction and intervention.

The association's founders hope to sign up enough members—annual membership is $50—to help bolster their case that Reading First has a lot of support from the field.

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 3:40 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | TrackBacks (0)

There's no shortage of cheerleaders among the nearly 6,000 attendees at the National Reading First Conference here in Music City. Calling it the "5th annual celebration of the success of Reading First," Joe Conaty, who directs the program for the U.S. Department of Ed, kicked off the national conference today with a plenary session touting the benefits of the federal reading program, and lamenting its potential demise if Congress proceeds with plans to zero it out in the next budget.

Deputy Secretary Ray Simon was up next, shaking his head at the looming cuts, saying Reading First "has given us a practical road map to success." The move to cut the program, which has pumped more than $6 billion into efforts to improve reading instruction since 2002, "just doesn't make sense. ... We need more Reading First, not less."

He then introduced first lady Laura Bush, who in her brief comments shared student achievement data from several model Reading First schools.

"The solution for our nation's struggling students is not less time and less resources" devoted to reading instruction, she said. "Congress must restore the $1 billion appropriation for Reading First."

There isn't too much optimism that that will happen in the fiscal 2009 budget. So many participants are trying to figure out how to sustain the program in their own schools and districts without the federal grant money.

More than 150 school leaders sat in on a workshop led by representatives of the Reading First technical-assistance centers to help them do just that. Stan Paine and Sarah Sayko had their close attention as they described how participants could craft a plan for sustaining the program. The session will be repeated each of the next two days.

When asked for a show of hands, everyone in the room agreed that Reading First had changed their district's approach to reading instruction. All again said they are worried about what the loss of funding will do to those efforts.

"It's not just about the money," Paine said. "We believe you can find ways to sustain the essential principles of Reading First."

Michael Johnson, an elementary school principal in Logan, W.Va., said his staff is working to do just that.

"This really works," he said. "We now have a way of identifying students' weaknesses and we have a number of interventions to address those weaknesses. We're teaching all students to read."

There's been confusing, incomplete, and even conflicting data on the effectiveness of the program—and very little of it is based on rigorous studies—but don't tell that to the enthusiastic group packing the sessions at the Reading First conference. The teachers and administrators have their own data and anecdotes to explain how the program has benefited their schools or districts. And many say they will remain committed to the program even without the money, and even work to spread the model to other schools.

We still need some definitive research on the impact the program is having on student achievement, especially if proponents want to convince lawmakers that the program has been worth the hefty investment. The participants at the conference, however, don't have time to wait, and most already seem convinced it is worth continuing.

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 3:20 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed a bill that would have required discussions of climate change to be added to the state's textbooks and curriculum, calling the measure an "overly prescriptive" approach.

The Republican governor is no skeptic when it comes to global warming. He speaks often of the dangers of climate change on his state and the country, and he has won praise from environmental advocates for leading a high-profile fight to attempt to get the federal government to allow California to set its own, more stringent auto-emissions standards.

The climate-change curriculum legislation was sponsored by Sen. Joe Simitian, a Democrat from Palo Alto. In his veto statement, Schwarzenegger said he supports education measures that increase students' understanding of climate change, but opposed making those changes through state-mandated legislation, according to the San Jose Mercury-News.

Simitian has argued that his measure, SB 908, would give state policymakers the flexibility to decide how this topic will be taught, and at which grades. I wrote about his measure earlier this year.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:45 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Jim Rubillo has announced that he is resigning as executive director of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics after seven years in that position.

NCTM, headquartered in Reston, Va., has had a strong influence on math instruction in the nation's classrooms, dating back decades. During Rubillo's tenure, NCTM released "Curriculum Focal Points for Prekindergarten through Grade 8: A Quest for Coherence" and took an active role in attempting to shape policy at many levels.

The organization's president, Hank Kepner, recently informed the board and staff of the 100,000-member organization of Mr. Rubillo's decision.

Kepner credited Rubillo for his ability to "direct and inspire a large staff during a period of significant growth, increasing influence, and continuing business improvements for the council," in a statement.

Rubillo will step down on July 31, 2009. NCTM will conduct a nationwide search for a successor to Rubillo, which will be led by Francis M. "Skip" Fennell, the organization's past president.

Rubillo's is the latest in a run of resignations in the curriculum-and-assessment world. Gerald F. Wheeler is leaving as the executive director of the National Science Teachers Association, and Charles Smith announced he will depart the National Assessment Governing Board, which sets policy for NAEP (see my previous post).

Rubillo said he is most proud of having helped bring more financial stability to NCTM, which has about 100 employees and a $16 million annual budget, during his tenure. The organization's reserve funds are strong, which is important, he says, since the NCTM takes very little money from outside sources and incurs significant costs to put out documents such as Focal Points. He's also sought to improve the services NCTM offers over the Web.

While he says he tends to defer to NCTM's presidents when it comes to voicing the organization's policy positions, Rubillo said he has encouraged NCTM to take a more active stance in promoting and defending its policies. He has also sought to reach out to some of its critics, as has its former president, Fennell. (See my previous post on this.)

"When I first started, people were complaining that NCTM was not at any policymaking tables," Rubillo said jokingly."Now, they're saying they don't like the other people at the table."

"We're trying to create a dialogue" during those discussions, he said. "You have to show people you're sincere, and work at it."

One of the reasons Rubillo says he is announcing his resignation a year in advance is to give NCTM the opportunity to conduct a careful search for his replacement. He says he won't have a role in that decision. Rubillo, who turns 67 on Friday, has been dividing his nonwork time between the D.C. area and his home state of Pennsylvania, where his family lives.

A former community college teacher and administrator, Rubillo says he'd like to do some teaching after he leaves NCTM. He also vows to spend some time "ruminating around the shores of Chesapeake Bay," where he owns a property.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:04 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

For years, arts education advocates have been pushing for restoring programs in schools hampered by budgets and curriculum plans that tend to marginalize those subjects. So when D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee promised art, music, and PE teachers in every school, she won widespread praise from those advocates, as well as from teachers and parents.

But a study released by a consortium of D.C. organizations this week claims that the plan—which is based on a new funding formula—would create budget disparities between the city's disadvantaged schools and better-off ones, such as "teacher shortages, large class-sizes, and per-pupil funding gaps," according to this Washington Post story.

Last month, this D.C. teacher blogger talked about the challenges she expects to face as a result of the new funding formula. Yet she cheers the changes.

"But I am okay with these drawbacks if it means that my students will have art, music, and PE," she writes.

In this column over at the Arts Journal, Richard Kessler calls the unusual turn a kind of "bizarro world of education," referring to a comic-book planet ruled by a code opposite that of our own.

With urban school officials putting money behind subjects that have long been sidelined, and public education activists questioning the move, he writes, the tables seem to have turned.

"Us do opposite of all Earthly things! Us hate beauty!," the bizarro code states. "Us love ugliness! Is big crime to make anything perfect on Bizarro World!"

I don't think anyone would call Rhee's plan perfect, but other big, urban districts—including New York City and Los Angeles—have been working hard to sustain their arts programs. And now the growing public concern over childhood obesity is generating new attention to physical education.

I guess the question is how essential are these programs to providing comprehensive and equitable schooling to all students, and how far are districts willing to go to pay and support them.

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 1:01 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Charles Smith, the executive director of the National Assessment Governing Board, has announced that he's stepping down from that post to take a position with the Washington office of ACT.

The governing board, which sets policy for the influential National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, has an important role in education policy, though one that, it's safe to say, is probably not well understood by the public at large.

Smith, 69, says he has sought to change that during his tenure on the board. He took the position of executive director in 2003, not long after the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act.

That federal law requires state participation in NAEP reading and math to be eligible for Title I funds. As the NAEP results became more visible, Smith said he and governing-board members and staff have sought to hone the reports and information about the test to make them more understandable to the public and policymakers.

"The reporting today is much more impactful, as far as policy is concerned," he told me. "We have dramatically changed the reports we release in conjunction with each assessment. They're much more concise and more appealing to the public."

He and governing-board members have also reached out to legislators and state education officials around the country to explain the role and purpose of NAEP. Last year, for instance, he spoke to members of the Oklahoma state legislature, at their request, about NAEP, talking about its role and even the kinds of test questions it includes.

NAEP is a test that produces results across subjects that are independent of individual states' tests. In that capacity, researchers and policymakers rely on it as an objective yardstick for judging student progress. It also presents valuable information on student course-taking patterns and other data.

Smith will serve as vice president and head of the Washington office of ACT. The testing service is seeking to expand its D.C. operations, he said. After serving two three-year terms with the governing board, he said the idea of helping another organization build its operations appealed to him. The ACT job "seemed tailor-made" for his interests, he said.

A native of Sparta, Tenn., Smith had served as commissioner of education in his home state, and as chancellor of the Tennessee board of regents, before joining the governing board. In addition to working with the 26-member independent board, he has overseen a staff of 13 employees and an annual budget of $6 million.

The governing board meets in Washington late next week, July 31 through Aug. 2, at which time it is expected to begin discussions of hiring a successor to Smith.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:55 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Math and science "academies" have grown more popular around the country in recent years. But the movement apparently has stalled in Gary, Ind., as Ball State University has withdrawn its sponsorship of a new school there.

The school was scheduled to open on Aug. 20 in the city the Jackson Five made famous. But according to the Associated Press, university officials found that the school had not secured an adequate building, enrolled students, or hired teachers.

The school was to be known as the Indiana Math and Science Academy, a charter school. A university official is quoted as saying it made the decision now in the hope of giving families enough time to find another school.

Math and science academies have taken hold in communities across the country. Twenty years ago, there were only 15 such academies nationwide, according to an estimate from an association that works with them. Today, there are more than 100, serving about 37,000 students. Many academies target high-achieving students, though they also include magnet schools and those serving traditional and disadvantaged student populations.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:33 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

This is my second and last entry blog based on a recent interview with Francis M. "Skip" Fennell, who completed his two-year run as president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, earlier this year.

The first entry focused mostly on Fennell's work in crafting and promoting "Curriculum Focal Points,". But Fennell also had another prominent task while serving as NCTM president: He was named to a seat on the National Math Advisory Panel, a White House-created group tasked with identifying the best ways to prepare kids to take and succeed in algebra.

Pretty much from the get-go, the math panel was viewed with suspicion in some quarters, including among some of NCTM's 100,000 members, who feared it would favor an overly rote, drill-oriented approach to math instruction. And when the panel released its final report this year, to no one's surprise, it drew criticism from those who said it presented a narrow view of how math should be taught.

Adding to that, panelists included people who had bashed NCTM's positions on math instruction in the past.

It would seem like these factors would put Fennell in an awkward spot.

The public meetings of the panel that I attended were collegial, though there were periodic quarrels that seemed to grow more intense as its members moved toward hammering out their final report (For a taste of those discussions, see the transcripts of the open sessions, which are available online.)

Despite the prominent names on the panel, Fennell said he felt like he was able to contribute and advocate the views of math teachers—who some said were not adequately represented.

Even so, Fennell heard criticism from those who said he did not push hard enough for NCTM's views, a jab he regards as off-base.

"I have people who think I may have given in to certain things. I don't quite get or understand that," he said. It's easy to criticize the panel's findings on any given point, he added, "when you have no idea what went into that discussion" of various math topics.

Fennell said he had longtime members of NCTM, who he respects, question why he was on the panel and ask him to quit. "I got some of that," he said.

But he said he was convinced that not having NCTM represented on the panel—and in other, major math discussions in the future—would seriously diminish the organization's power in shaping instruction and education policy.

"You're telling me that one of the largest organizations for math in the country was not [going to be] at the table?" he said of the panel. "Are you kidding me?"

It should be noted that some of the language in the panel's report clearly reflects NCTM's point of view. For instance, when the document lists the resources used in describing the "critical foundations" students need in algebra, it mentions not only the curricula in high-performing countries like Japan and Korea, but also NCTM's Curriculum Focal Points. Other passages in the document strike a conciliatory tone, describing the conflicts that have marked the "math wars" as overblown. Fennell often conveys a similiar message.

"There's this tremendous need for collaboration" on math issues, Fennell said. Neither NCTM nor its critics "should be excluded from the discussion. I think that's how some of the misconceptions about the math wars come up."

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 7:16 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

The Education Commission of the States has launched a pair of online resources, which seek to provide a nationwide view of state efforts in science, math, and career and technical education (the subject formerly known as vocational education).

The first resource, at http://www.ecs.org/hsdb-stem, provides a 50-state database on state programs and efforts in STEM education. These include state policies in the recruitment of science and math teachers, after-school programs in those subjects, graduation requirements, state mentoring and internship programs, and so on.

The second online site is a database on career and technical education, at http://www.ecs.org/hsdb-cte. It includes information on the quality of state CTE programs, how they are funded, and states' use of tools to gauge students' value to employers.

CTE programs probably don't get as much attention in the media as they should. This is despite that fact that they're among the most popular programs in many districts. As recently as a few years ago, it was estimated that the federal vocational education program, funded at more than $1 billion per year, was the largest single high school program in the country.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:41 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Earlier this year, Francis M. "Skip" Fennell's two-year term as president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics officially ended. Debates over the most effective strategies for teaching math—sometimes called the "math wars"—have been playing out for years in school districts around the country. And it's safe to say that Fennell has had a unique vantage point in observing, and to some degree, attempting to mediate those disputes.

In 2006, NCTM released "Curriculum Focal Points." The document that seeks to spell out the core math skills students need in grades pre-K-8 drew praise from combatants on various sides of the math wars. Fennell has taken a major role in promoting that document to the media, the public, and to policymakers at all levels.

And more recently, he served on the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, a White House-commissioned group charged with identifying the most effective ways to prepare students for introductory algebra. As a member of that group, Fennell shared a dais with some panelists who have been sharply critical of NCTM's approach to teaching math; yet he also caught flak from some of NCTM's 100,000 members, who complained that the panel was pushing an overly narrow approach to math instruction, focused far too heavily on arithmetic.

I recently spoke with Fennell, who's now returning to a more active teaching role at McDaniel College in Maryland, to get his thoughts on his varied experiences as NCTM president. He had just returned from a trip to a math conference in Monterrey, Mexico, where he spoke about the math panel's work. His official title now is NCTM past-president, and he was president-elect for another year before his two-year term officially began.

"Some say it's a four-year sentence," joked Fennell, calling the NCTM presidency "commanding and demanding."

Fennell, who helped write Focal Points, has traveled the country over the past few years, along with others who worked on the document. His goal has been to explain its goals and persuade state officials to consider using the document as they revise their state academic standards in math. (State standards are in many ways where the action is in math curricula; standards determine the content of state tests, as well as the material that teachers cover in class, and the content of math textbooks).

"That was a very important project for NCTM," Fennell said. "The issue of focus and coherence is a big one. I'd like to say that we were at the forefront of that." The organization was not trying to say "you teach less, but you have to streamline the math curriculum," he added. "People get that. ... No 4th grade teacher should be having to cover 100 different points in the curriculum. NCTM has gotten that message out."

The former president said that he and NCTM's executive director, Jim Rubillo, have joked that they should be charging people for the document, which can be accessed for free from NCTM's Web site. Focal Points and its supporting materials have been downloaded more than a million times, the organization estimates.

Fennell credits his predecessor as NCTM president, Cathy Seeley, for laying the groundwork for Focal Points. The organization is currently working on a similiar document for high school math, which it hopes to release next year. The release of that work will be overseen by current President Henry (Hank) Kepner.

Fennell said he regarded part of his role as president as an attempt to narrow some of the divides that separate his organization from his critics. He believes Focal Points will help.

"People in the past who were critical of NCTM, I've tried hard to work with those folks," he said. That doesn't mean he's asking NCTM members to accept all the views of mathematicians or cognitive psychologists about how students should be taught math, he said. But NCTM is ultimately better off working directly with its critics than ignoring or dismissing them out of hand, Fennell argued.

"Having NCTM engaged in a lot of things is a benefit," he said. "When people have these discussions [about math] today, NCTM and Focal Points come up in the discussion, and I feel good about that."

Not that bringing the two sides together is easy, he added.

"I've had mathematicians who think I'm crazy, and I've had people in my own crowd who think I made wrong decisions," he said. "I'm not looking back."

As elected officials and business leaders have called for higher standards in math and science, saying it is vital to future U.S. "competitiveness," Fennell said he has also tried to convey the message that policymakers also need to be promoting equity in the classroom. Not all students learn at the same pace, and more resources need to be put into helping struggling and disadvantaged students."We want to be competitive internationally, [but] meanwhile, we want all kids to have access" to good math instruction, he said. In the years ahead, he expects to encourage policymakers to look at the idea of hiring math "specialists" at the elementary level as a potential way to increase the quality of math teaching.

Next week, I'll post some of Fennell's thoughts about the work of the National Math Panel and his role in its discussions.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 12:20 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

What would happen if instead of silencing or confiscating cell phones in the classroom, teachers encouraged students to use them? Hall Davidson, the director of the Discovery Educator Network, wants teachers to realize the potential power cell phones hold for enlivening lessons and engaging students in the content they are learning.

Most cell phones, Davidson points out, now have a number of technological features that schools used to pay thousands of dollars for as separate devices—camera, video recorder, GPS, text messaging, music player—and many students, even in low-income areas, own one.

At a weeklong workshop for a corps of teachers who’ve become leaders in using instructional technology, Davidson gave a glimpse of what might be coming to a classroom near you.

“Are we going to ignore a device that does all this stuff?” he asked the group of about 60 teachers, shown here at the workshop held at the Discovery Communications headquarters in Silver Spring, Md.

Students, for example, can do first-person interviews with a cell phone, with audio and/or video that can be posted to school wikis and Web sites, to enhance their reports and projects. Students can receive class assignments and start their research using Web features on their cell phones. They can record themselves practicing their instruments, or practicing a foreign language, and send the recordings to their teachers.

While many of the potential applications are not quite ready for prime time, Davidson thinks that within a year or so they will be, but only if educators see their potential and figure out how to integrate the technology well.

The participants in the DEN workshops are already on the bandwagon.

Do you think that schools in general will embrace the idea?

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 1:15 PM | Permalink | 19 Comments | TrackBacks (0)

A couple years ago, a bunch of leading business organizations set an ambitious goal: "Double the number of U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graduates with bachelor's degrees by 2015."

But as those leaders frankly acknowledged this week, the nation has barely moved toward hitting that mark so far.

The United States produced 223,255 such grads in 2005, and that number had only risen to 225,660 by 2007, reported the members of Tapping America's Potential, the business coalition. That's light years removed from their goal of reaching 400,000 by 2015. Several members of TAP, as they call themselves, assembled at the Washington offices of the Business Roundtable on Tuesday, where they released a report that summed up the situation this way: "Gaining Momentum, Losing Ground."

The nation's overall progress in addressing STEM issues, of keen interest to businesses, is mixed, attendees said. On the one hand, individual STEM initiatives, undertaken by state and local governments, philanthropies, and other organizations, are taking hold across the country. The event this week highlighted a few of them. One such program is the National Math and Science Initiative, a corporate-backed effort to replicate 1) the "U Teach" math and science teacher-training program, and 2) Advanced Placement "incentive" programs, which reward students and teachers for participating in AP. Another discussed was the Ohio STEM Learning Network, backed by the Battelle and Gates foundations, a statewide effort to create STEM-themed schools and raise the skills of the state's workforce.

On the negative side of the ledger, the assembled business leaders pointed to the fact that Congress has not provided funding for many of the STEM-themed programs in the America Competes Act, a bipartisan bill President Bush signed into law last year. It supports the creation and expansion of several teacher-training and -recruitment programs. They were also unhappy that Congress has not backed legislation allowing more skilled immigrants to remain in the United States on H1B visas, a step some corporations regard as crucial to filling high-tech jobs.

Attempts to change that visa policy have been crippled in recent years by rancorous congressional debates over immigration legislation. Attendees at this week's session were not optimistic about their prospects on the H1B issue in the near-term.

"The environment is so toxic," John Castellani, the president of the Business Roundtable, told the group, "it cannot be addressed until after the election."

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 5:10 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Anyone interested in how schools, particularly those in rural communities, are recruiting and retaining math and science teachers and attempting to improve instruction in those subjects, might sit in on a forum taking place on Capitol Hill tomorrow (Wednesday, July 16.)

Edvantia, an organization that researches rural school issues, is hosting an event that will highlight the work of the National Science Foundation in promoting math and science education in rural areas. Those communities often struggle to lure and keep capable math and science teachers, already in short supply in schools nationwide.

The forum, which begins at 9 a.m. and runs until 3 p.m., will include presentations from researchers and others who've been involved in professional development of rural teachers and administrators in states across the country. Representatives from a number of federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Education, the Department of Energy, NASA and NSF are scheduled to attend.

For those interested, it's being held at the Rayburn House Office Building, Room 2325.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:39 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Quote of the day from Nicholas Krisof's opinion piece in yesterday's New York Times, which touts the efforts of Greg Mortenson and his book, "Three Cups of Tea," about building schools in Pakistan:

“I am convinced that the long-term solution to terrorism in general, and Afghanistan specifically, is education,” Lt. Col. Christopher Kolenda, who works on the Afghan front lines, said in an e-mail in which he raved about Mr. Mortenson’s work. “The conflict here will not be won with bombs but with books. ... The thirst for education here is palpable.”

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 4:19 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

The debate rages on over Reading First, with supporters trying to make their case for preserving the federal program, which they say is proving itself in higher test results, improved teacher knowledge, and support among educators. The critics are picking through the data and arguing that, at best, there is little evidence that it is effective, and, at worst, is promoting a low-level form of literacy in its skills-based approach.

Over at USAToday.com there are about 60 comments! to this story by Greg Toppo, arguing for and against and otherwise. And the debate continues among researchers like Reid Lyon and Stephen Krashen here andhere.

Patrick Riccards, a.k.a. Eduflack, who helped promote the work of the National Reading Panel and is a longtime fan of Reading First, continues to defend the program and scold some of its harsher critics here.

His posts on Reading First often conclude with: We know it works.

Well, I keep wondering how we know?

Riccards says its effectiveness is “evidenced by the growing number of statements from educators and from recent studies—such as those released last month by CEP—that demonstrate improvement. And RF offices in states from Idaho to Ohio to Alabama have added their voice to save the necessary program.”

I don’t think there is evidence that Reading First is ineffective, despite what some opponents say. If anything, there is a kind of “it can’t hurt” message in the data. Certainly teachers and administrators I’ve spoken with and visited over the last six years provide enthusiastic endorsement of an intensive and organized effort to improve reading instruction and monitor the results. And they feel more prepared than ever to implement just that.

I’m no researcher, and I admit that I could use a bit of tutoring, or more coffee, to absorb the findings of many of the research studies I read, but I haven’t really seen any rigorous evidence that Reading First is working overall. At least not the kind of evidence that I think would have satisfied the powers that be at the Ed Dept. and the NICHD when they were talking tough about the law’s requirements six years ago.

Sure, there are schools that have seen phenomenal results and serve as the poster children of the program. Those stories are pretty compelling and inspiring, but are they representative?

Most of the claims that I’ve seen are based on improved DIBELS scores, on self-reported state data that average results, and, of course, the folks who’ve told Margaret Spellings in her travels around the country how wonderful the program is.

In between his Reading First posts, Eduflack chastises Spellings for pointing to parent surveys in her defense of the D.C. voucher program.

“The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) found that parents of scholarship children express confidence that they will be better educated and even safer in their new schools,” Spellings said.

Eduflack finds that statement “downright funny, and quite a bit concerning.”

“In all of the discussions about scientifically based research, high-quality research, the medical model, double-blind studies, control groups, and the like,” he continues, “I don’t remember public opinion surveys meeting the IES standard for high-quality research. Parents feel better about their children because of vouchers? That’s a reason to direct millions in federal funding to the program?"

But that’s exactly the kind of evidence many of Reading First’s supporters are using to bolster their arguments. Teachers and administrators love it, they say.

All well and good, but hardly the kind of definitive results officials and lawmakers had called for.

Many observers thought the interim impact study released by IES would have provided deeper insights into what has and has not worked in the program. For the money that is being spent, perhaps a special trial study under NAEP, similar to the urban district assessments, would have been useful, or better analyses and comparisons of state data.

I wonder if more and better data would have mattered when push came to shove in the appropriations committees, which have led the death march for the program.

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 4:13 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | TrackBacks (0)

On occasion, you hear about systematic cheating, academic fraud, or gamesmanship in U.S. classrooms. Sometimes it gets blamed on the pressure school administrators face to boost students' test scores, or simply on an educator's or coach's desire to single out a student for special treatment. But if you want a look at educational impropriety on an entirely different scale, check out this story in today's Washington Post, which touches on the apparently endemic corruption in Russia's schools.

The article focuses on the scope and impact of bribery in Russia today—and on President Dmitri Medvedev's vow to stamp it out.

The article opens with an account of Russian university students paying off a professor to let them out of having to complete necessary coursework before taking a final exam—with more cash buying a better grade on the test—and goes from there, offering myriad other examples of everyday graft.

Here's the truly stunning passage from the story, from an education standpoint:

"In the Russian education system alone, about $1 billion is paid each year in bribes to secure entry and pass exams, according to Mark Levin, a professor at Moscow's Higher School of Economics who has studied the phenomenon. Levin estimated that unqualified students, depending on the reputation of the school, pay between $500 and $20,000 for admission to a university. Most of those students, he said, continue to pay bribes to pass exams and to emerge with diplomas."

The article makes the point that bribery has a deep impact on society, weakening the public's confidence in law enforcement, civil service, even the medical profession. It seems only natural that corruption has worked its way into Russia's schools.

A couple years ago, I wrote about how the children of immigrants—specifically, the sons and daughters of those who had arrived in the United States on H1B visas—were among the top performers in American math and science academic competitions. The author of a study on that phenomenon said that many of those families were driven to succeed in the U.S. system partly because they regarded it favorably, as a meriotocracy, where students are judged on their ability and work ethic. That contrasted with the situation in some of their home countries, where political connections, societal status, or other factors often determined whether a student gets into a school or college.

I'd be curious to hear opinions on whether the corruption described in this story is having a similarly corrosive effect on the ambitions of Russian students, and on how they perceive the benefits of education in their country.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 3:21 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Any way you slice it, California's decision to require that students take Algebra 1, and be tested in it, in 8th grade is a major undertaking for the state.

Supporters of the action, including the state's board of education and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, believe the state needs to be setting more demanding standards in math. They've also argued that without the requirement, the state is essentially promoting a two-tier system, in which some students are challenged with algebra in 8th grade and others take more generic math courses.

Opposing the requirement was California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, who said the measure would "severely impact students and schools," given students' serious shortcomings in algebra to date.

"Just putting all students in algebra, regardless of what the data tell us, is not a responsible course of action," O'Connell said in a statement. "Clearly, different strategies need to be put in place if we expect all students to succeed in 8th grade algebra."

In many ways, this is a debate that plays out across academic subjects, but it is especially acute in math. In one camp, you have advocates demanding higher standards and more challenging math material, earlier in school. Some of them see this as a matter of equity; all students deserve to be challenged in math, they reason, because if you don't, early on, you're denying them the opportunity to take more demanding math later on, and thus, denying them academic opportunity.

Others agree that increasing standards is important, and so is equity. But raising standards makes little sense, they say, if students, and entire school systems, are unprepared to meet the challenges of courses such as Algebra 1. O'Connell is making a similiar case, pointing to the low numbers of California students, especially minorities, reaching the "proficient" mark in algebra today.

To date, California's standards recommend that students take Algebra 1 in 8th grade, and it has increased the numbers of students who are doing so in recent years. And the state's students already had to take Algebra 1 in order to graduate with a regular diploma.

But no mistake, the new 8th grade algebra step is big. Just how big?

Only 23 percent of California middle and high school students reached the proficient mark in algebra on the most recent state test last year. By comparison, 49 percent met that mark on the 5th grade state math test, and 40 percent reached that standard as 7th graders.

Last year, I wrote a story about students' struggles in introductory algebra. Those problems persist, even as states and schools across the country move to teach that subject earlier in school. That story, which also looked at why mathematicians and others believe algebra is important, at all, focuses mostly on California.

In an attempt to help students across the state, California officials last year approved 11 separate "algebra readiness" programs for use in the state's schools, which were aimed at helping students catch up to grade level in that math subject. And as I saw, many of these students were in clear need of help.

In a number of classrooms using the algebra-readiness materials, individual teachers were trying to rebuild students' math knowledge from 2nd through 7th grades over the course of a single calendar year, while also introducing them to enough algebra so they'd be ready for a full Algebra 1 class the following year. These were not, in other words, simply the typical "pre-algebra" courses that you might have taken in 7th or 8th grade. These were remedial programs, designed to build students' skills quickly.

Most of the classes I saw were for students in 8th or 9th grade. Some had already flunked Algebra 1 once; others had been identified as being at risking of failing it the following year, so their schools decided to give them extra help, up front. The "readiness" program I saw being developed by the MIND Research Institute relied heavily on visual representations of math to help struggling students.

I expect we'll see more states and districts grappling with the question of how much algebra to require of students, and when, in the years ahead. And they're likely to be seeking out "readiness" and remedial programs for the students who are struggling to keep up.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 2:17 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday, I wrote about a new study that purports to show a link between high-stakes tests in reading and math and gains in student achievement in science. The study examines test results in Florida, and it gets at a crucial question in education these days: Is science being pushed out of the curriculum to make way for reading and math? The authors suggest the answer is no.

In the spirit of bringing some outside scrutiny to that work, I called David N. Figlio, a professor of economics at the University of Florida who has studied the effects of testing and accountability systems on academic performance across subjects.

Figlio told me he approved of the study's general methodology (in fact, he's used similiar methodology, which is cited by the authors). But he found the study's overall conclusion about a link between high-stakes reading and math tests and improved science performance "less compelling" and "a stretch."

The authors suggest that the pressures brought about by schools having received an F in reading and math could have sparked overall academic changes that led to improved science education. But Figlio said other factors could just as easily be at work. While science was a "low stakes" test in Florida at the time of the study, meaning schools faced no penalties for poor performance in that subject, those scores were still publicly reported, he pointed out. The public pressure to do something about weak science scores—rather than the penalties brought about by reading and math scores—may, on its own, have been enough to compel Florida schools to do better. Also, schools' low test scores in reading and math may have simply prompted them to focus more on test-prep across all subjects, he said, rather than on making substantive academic improvements.

Despite those concerns, Figlio said the overall message conveyed by the report is "significant." While you could debate the precise effect of reading and math testing on science, the study suggests that, at the very least, high-stakes testing has not undermined science instruction to the extent some people had feared.

The fact that you don't see science scores falling in Florida, he said, suggests that schools are not "sacrificing low-stakes subjects" to meet the demands of reading and math instruction.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:46 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | TrackBacks (0)

I missed this entry at Edbizbuzz while I was on vacation, but it's worth backtracking for a good discussion on plagiarism by guest blogger Dorothy Mikuska.

Mikuska, a veteran English teacher who developed a software program for helping students organize and manage their work for school research papers, describes four reasons students plagiarize: "disengaged learning; poor reading skills; lack of organizational and metacognitive skills; and careless documentation."

In the computer age, she adds, students "no longer take notes, but merely copy/paste from online sources without reflecting, analyzing, synthesizing, or evaluating their information. Research has become as mechanical as the computer. If students genuinely understood their information, plagiarism would be eliminated."

She says students need to be taught directly what plagiarism is. There are a number of adults who could benefit from such a lesson. Mikuska points out some recent news coverage of a high school principal who plagiarized his graduation-day speech, and I've come across a number of blogs by educators that present complete news articles and other copyrighted information without any attribution.

There's a plug for her program, which I have not seen in action, but it is a relatively low-cost resource for teachers and students. Does anyone know whether these kinds of programs—including those that screen students' written work for evidence of plagiarism—are instructive for students or have any positive effect on their work?

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 2:35 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Since the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, science education advocates have worried that the law's emphasis on reading and math has resulted in their favorite subject getting pushed out of the curriculum—presumably, with students learning less about it.

A study released today, however, argues that is not necessarily happening. At least not in Florida.

The research, published by the Manhattan Institute, examines the impact of high-stakes testing in reading and math in Florida on students' performance in science. At the time of the study, science was a "low stakes" subject there, meaning poor test scores did not result in penalties for schools, though it now figures in school grade calculations in the state.

The study found that schools that received an F in the prior year, based on their reading and math scores under Florida's A+ program, made greater gains on the state's science exam than they would have if they had not received that failing grade.

The gains in science were "modest- to medium-sized," author Marcus Winters explained. The increases were similar to those the Florida schools studied had made in reading, and appeared to be smaller than their increases in math.

The authors speculate that the previous year's outcome on high-stakes testing in reading and math could have led schools to make changes that improved achievement across subjects, including science. Students' improved math and reading skills also could have boosted their skills in science, they say.

Unlike some previous analyses, the new study seeks to examine the relative health of science education not by class time spent on that subject, but by students' actual achievement, as measured by how well they scored on tests.

The findings "suggest that the incentives of Florida's high-stakes testing program have not led to significant crowding out of student knowledge in the low-stakes subject of science," the study says.

Students in Florida are tested in grade 5, 8, and 11 in science. Students in other parts of the country today, under the No Child Left Behind Act, are also tested annually in elementary, middle, and high school. The law does not, however, assign penalties for schools for low performance in science, as it does in reading and math, unless states decide to take that step.

The study focused on students' performance in 5th grade, partly because there was less variation in Florida schools' A-F grades at higher grade levels, said Winters, a senior fellow at the institute. He wrote the report with Jay P. Greene, also of the institute, and Julie R. Trivitt, of Arkansas Tech University.

The study suggests that No Child Left Behind's focus on math and reading will not necessarily weaken science instruction, as some claim, Winters says.

Whether the science-teaching community accepts the study's conclusions remains to be seen.

One point I've heard those folks make is that placing a heavy emphasis on math, and especially reading, at early grades will improve students' science performance simply because those pupils will be more adept at reading basic-science texts, test questions, and so on. Heavy doses of math and reading at upper grades, they say, are not as likely to produce the same positive effect in science. Those grades were not considered in this study. Winters says addressing that question is a likely next step in the research—his, or someone else's.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:57 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

I would be the first to jump on any plan to impose three-day weekends for Ed Week reporters! I would gladly promise to check my e-mail at least once on Mondays and read all my favorite blogs and news sites if that would help the editors approve a four-day work week. But I don't think most of the 700 students in the Maccray, Minn., district will be thinking about school each Monday, now that the state has approved the district's cost-saving alternative schedule. The measure shortens the school week by a day, but lengthens the school day Tuesdays through Fridays.

The move is intended to save money on transportation and utilities costs, according to this article in the Star Tribune. A number of small, rural districts around the country have proposed similar adjustments to the school year, which usually requires state-level approval. In the age of accountability when schools are trying to meet student-achievement targets set under No Child Left Behind, many education experts have been calling for more, not less, time in school for students.

But more school days mean more money, a commodity that is becoming more scarce amid tight state budgets. Georgia is experiencing that problem firsthand with the cost of its summer school programs, described here.

Judging by the comments on the Star Tribune article, most readers approve of Maccray's innovative solution, but lament the lack of sufficient resources for education and the potential negative impact the changes could have on student learning.

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 2:21 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Teachers, parents, and researchers will probably be interested in a new book that focuses on why so many students seem to dislike math and what can be done about it. At the very least, I give it points for its catchy title.

What's Math Got to Do With It? Helping Children Learn to Love Their Favorite Subject—and Why It's Important for America, is the work of Jo Boaler, a professor of math education at the University of Sussex, in England.

Boaler has spent years studying middle and high school students and the impact of different teaching methods. I interviewed her a while ago for a story I did on efforts to incorporate better math lessons into career-and-technical education (formerly voc-ed) classes.

In her book, published by Viking, she offers classroom approaches and strategies for parents that she believes can boost students' math skills and reduce their fear of that subject.

She also looks at testing policies she says can improve learning in math, and how girls are discouraged from taking math and science seriously. (Chapter Title: "Paying the Price for Sugar and Spice: How Girls and Women Are Kept Out of Math and Science.") Another chapter examines the effect of American schools' grouping students by ability.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:45 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

With the collapse of the subprime-mortgage market—and the crisis it has created for the economy—there have been calls for schools to take on yet another task: financial literacy. Many are, apparently, if you consider that more 20,000 high school students in 20 states took the Financial Literacy Certification Test this year, according to WISE, or Working in Support of Education, a nonprofit that promotes financial and business education.

About three-fourths of the students who've taken the test since it was introduced in 2003 have passed, a statistic that may help improve the bottom line:

"A national survey of 12th graders found that over 68% failed to understand the basics of personal finance," according to the Financial Literacy Coalition in New York. "The largest group filing personal bankruptcy is young people ages 20 to 25."

After reading this series in The Washington Post about the housing bubble, it seems that many of the people who received loans that were well beyond their means either weren't equipped to understand the commitment they were making or were completely in denial of their own fiscal reality. Too many put undue faith in their loan officers, who too often gave their clients an overly optimistic view of their debt thresholds.

A bunch of groups are now trying to build the foundations of financial literacy early, as I described in this story from a few months back.

Are schools finding time for these kinds of courses, lessons? Anyone know if states are requiring financial education? Should they in light of the current economic picture?

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 11:50 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | TrackBacks (0)

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has quietly signed into law Senate Bill 733, which allows local education agencies to use supplemental classroom materials that will help students "analyze, critique, and review" scientific theories, including evolution.

The governor's action was described in a list of 75 bills that he announced he had approved on June 26, with a one-sentence statement that makes no mention of evolution.

The measure, which was sponsored by state Sen. Ben Nevers, a Democrat, and drew overwhelming support from Louisiana's legislature, specifically states that it is not meant to promote any religious doctrine or belief.

But several scientific organizations believe the law will do just that. One of the leading
scientific societies in the world, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, had urged Jindal to veto the bill, citing the vast amount of scientific evidence backing up evolution and its centrality to students' understanding of science.

"There is virtually no controversy about evolution among researchers, many of whom like you, are deeply religious," AAAS President Alan I. Leshner wrote in a letter to the governor. "Rather than step backward," he added, Louisiana should "look to the future by seeking to provide Louisiana students with a firm understanding of evolution and other essential concepts so they can compete for high-skill jobs in an increasingly high-tech world economy."

Jindal, a first-term Republican, has seen his national profile rise in recent months, having been mentioned as a potential vice presidential pick of presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain.

The new law, titled the Louisiana Science Education Act, says that the state board of education shall "allow and assist" teachers and administrators who want to promote critical thinking of scientific theories "including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." The legislation goes on to state that while teachers are expected to teach the material presented in standard textbooks supplied by their school systems, they can supplement those materials with resources that help students "understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner" unless otherwise prohibited by the state.

As I've written, global warming has gradually received more attention in science standards and classroom materials as teachers have sought more resources to talk about the subject. See my previous post on Florida's inclusion of the topic in its standards.

The impact of the Louisiana law would seem to depend on the actions taken by school districts and individual teachers. Opponents of the law have predicted that it could prompt a wave of lawsuits, if schools or educators seek to denigrate evolution in favor of religious-based views of life's development, such as creationism, or if they attempt to promote "intelligent design."

A federal judge in Pennsylvania, in a landmark decision, ruled in 2005 that intelligent design was a religious concept, not a scientific one, and that the Dover, Pa., school district's attempt to require that students be introduced to it was unconstitutional. One of the judge's conclusions was that the Dover policy was singling out evolution for special scrutiny or criticism, when the theory is, in fact, one of the foundational principles in all of science.

Louisiana was the setting for a major battle over evolution more than two decades ago. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1987 struck down a state law that required public schools to balance the teaching of evolution with creationism. The court found that the law violated the First Amendment's prohibition on government establishment of religion.

In the time since the more recent Dover court fight, bills have emerged in several states that have sought to present critiques of evolution as a matter of "academic freedom." So far those bills have not gathered the support necessary to make it into law, and they have drawn opposition from scientists, who see them as a backdoor way of promoting attacks on evolution in public school science classes.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:38 AM | Permalink | 6 Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Teachers College, Columbia University, is launching an effort to improve instruction in math- and science-related subjects in its backyard, with the help of a corporate gift.

The GE Foundation has given Teachers College $5 million to boost teacher training and classroom work that is tied to relevant academic standards at 10 schools in Harlem. Teachers College will work with the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science, also at Columbia, and the Morningside Area Alliance, a neighborhood organization.

Corporations and their philanthropic branches have taken a major interest in "STEM" topics in recent years, supporting teachers' academies, the hiring of new teaching staff, the purchase of science lab equipment in schools, and student contests and competitions. That support makes sense, given those businesses' calls for improved students skill in math and science.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:45 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

The first lady plans to host her second international literacy meeting in September, two years after the first, which my colleague Mary Ann Zehr covered here. The next one, however, will include discussions summarizing six regional meetings on literacy held around the world by UNESCO over the past year, and strategies for further action.

While some longtime UNESCO staffers have seen Mrs. Bush's participation in the organization's literacy program as a political distraction, international development experts have seen it as a sure-fire strategy for raising the profile of the program and awareness of the education crisis in poor nations. See this Ed Week article.

UNESCO has been promoting Education for All around the world, in the hopes of getting more than 70 million out of school primary-age children into school. The literacy meeting will focus on devising a plan for the second half of the United Nations Literacy Decade, based on discussions in the regional meetings—in Qatar, China, Mali, India, Azerbaijan, and Mexico.

Mrs. Bush was at the International Conference in Support of Afghanistan in Paris this month when she discussed new money from USAID, some $40 million, for the National Literacy Center in the strife-ridden nation to support teacher training and other education programs, particularly for women.

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 11:30 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | TrackBacks (0)