July 2009 Archives

There’s been a lot of focus over the years on high school students’ inability to make a successful transition from high school to college math and science work. The Chicago school district is attempting to tackle that problem, by focusing on teaching at the 12th grade level.

The 407,000-student school system is creating a new program that will offer graduate-level college workshops and coursework to 160 high school math and science teachers, classes that will focus on helping those educators prepare students for the leap into postsecondary work. The hope is that participating teachers will not only improve their math and science skills, but, as is common in such programs, return to their schools and become “team leaders,” who can help fellow educators and administrators from their own schools improve.

The effort, known as the Chicago Transformation Teacher Institutes, is being supported through a $5 million grant from National Science Foundation.

Those directing the effort have set a number of tangible goals: They want to see at least 10 percent annual improvement in standardized test and Advanced Placement scores; the development of new AP or “capstone courses” for Chicago students, and an increase in the number of freshman college students who score grades of “B” or better in college math and science courses. Five Chicago-area universities are partnering with the district on the project: DePaul University, the Illinois Institute of Technology, Loyola University of Chicago, Northwestern University, and the University of Illinois at Chicago. University faculty will collaborate to develop and teach courses to help high school teachers.

The program will “help ensure that 12th grade courses in our schools make a strong bridge between high school and college,” said Michael Lach, officer of teaching and learning for Chicago’s school system, and a co-principal investigator on the NSF grant. The partnership between the universities and the school district, he added, is a “testament to the power of the whole city working together to advance mathematics and science education.”

So here’s your chance: If you were asked to help design a course for high school teachers seeking to help students bridge the divide between K-12 and college math and science, where would you start?

Photo of Chicago skyline, above, right

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:43 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Students who commit to studying science, technology, engineering and math—the so called "STEM" topics—tend to be a fairly persistent lot.

Those who focus on STEM fields have a higher rate of completing a bachelor's degree program, 35 percent, compared to the overall student population, at 29 percent, according to a new report released by the National Center for Education Statistics. The science-and-math crowd also was less likely to leave college without completing any degree, the report says. And among students who were focused on STEM fields entering college between the 1995-1996 school year and 2001, 53 percent of them either completed a degree or were still enrolled in studies in those areas.

Those numbers might not strike people who worry about the science and math skills of U.S. students as especially encouraging. Yet they also seem to suggest a certain academic-stick-to-it-ness among students who are keen on those subjects. At least, compared to their peers.

The study is based on longitudinal data, collected from 12,000 first-time college students, who were interviewed at various points between 1995 and 2001. A few other tidbits from the study:

—The percentage of men, 33 percent, entering STEM studies was much higher than it was for women, 14 percent, particularly in engineering and computer and information sciences;

—Asian-Americans were by far the most likely to choose STEM studies, at 47 percent, followed by Hispanics, 23 percent, whites, 21.5 percent, and blacks, at 21 percent;

—A higher percentage of students identified as foreign, or resident aliens, at 34 percent, entered STEM studies, compared with U.S. natives, at 22 percent. Similarly, among those STEM-focused college entrants, 34 percent reported speaking a language other than English as a child, compared with 21.5 who spoke English.

There are many other figures and facts, which explain the connection between college persistence and high school course-taking, family income, parents' education, and other factors. Have a look and let me know what strikes you the most.

Photo of students in the University of Texas at Austin's "UTeach" program by Alicia Wagner Calzada for Education Week

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:23 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

A curriculum has been created that has a goal of helping Native Americans prevent diabetes in their communities, according to an article published this month by the Associated Press. It was developed through a collaboration of government agencies and tribal colleges and is intended for children in grades K-12 in tribal schools or schools with a high number of Native American students. For grades 5-8, for instance, the curriculum provides direction for teachers to teach students through a social studies lesson about dietary practices, physical activity levels, and choices that make up a healthy lifestyle. Through a science lesson, teachers may help students to understand that the disease develops slowly over time and that it's a disease in which a person's body can't use glucose properly.

The curriculum, called Health Is Life in Balance, is free and available through the Diabetes Education in Tribal Schools project. Find an overview here.

Diabetes is three times more common among American Indian and Alaska Native people than in the general population, according to FAQs at the Web site of the Diabetes Education in Tribal Schools project. Once thought to occur only in adults, type 2 diabetes is increasingly diagnosed in children, including many Native American children, the Web site says.

Information from the American Society on Aging says that "medical and lifestyle factors", such as a tendency toward obesity, are thought to contribute to the prevalence of diabetes among Native Americans.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 4:11 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

A team of researchers commissioned by the Wallace Foundation set out to find out how arts educators define high-quality arts programs for children in grades K-12. In a report on their findings, "The Qualities of Quality: Understanding Excellence in Arts Education," based on a literature review and on-site interviews with arts educators nationwide, they write the following statement in the executive summary: "...a hallmark sign of high quality arts learning in any program is that the learning experiences are rich and complex for all learners, engaging them on many levels and helping them learn and grow in a variety of ways."

If you ask me, this statement doesn't tell us much. The value of this qualitative report on the quality of arts programs both inside and outside of schools in this country is in the details of the 121-page report, not the executive summary.

For example, I got more information about what might constitute a high-quality arts program from a set of goals that arts educators said they were striving to achieve (on page 17 of the report). Among them are to teach artistic skills, develop aesthetic awareness, provide a path for students to express themselves, and to help students develop as individuals.

Also, the report contains a list of considerations that arts educators should make when designing programs, which include staffing, program evaluation, who the students should be, and allocation of resources.

Overall the report provides a guide on what constitutes a high-quality arts program, according to those who have been active in the field. I learned some new concepts, such as the importance of physical space and the quality of materials for arts educators. Here's an excerpt on this issue from the report's authors:

Everyone wanted to create at least some of the aspects of an authentic work space for their young artists. This may be accomplished with various means, sometimes comprehensive (fully professional dance studios with mirrors, sprung floors, and ballet barres, for example, or high-tech photo studios with up-to-date software on high-end hardware and professional-level printers) and sometimes more minimalist (authentic and beautiful African drums, for example,) but always with something that linked it closely to professional practice.

The report caused me to reflect on my own arts education, which included private piano lessons with a retired music professor from a local college and a painting class in my public high school. In both cases, I think the high-quality of the artistic skills of my teachers added the most to the quality of my experience.

The researchers for the report are from Project Zero at Harvard Graduate School of Education. "At Project Zero," the researchers write in the report, "we believe that an education without the arts is an incomplete education that fails to develop the full potential of individuals, communities, and societies."

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 3:45 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The United States isn't the only place to host contentious debates over what belongs in science standards.

A proposed rewrite of Britain's academic guidelines for primary school teaching in that subject, the first such revision in England in more than 20 years, has drawn objections from some of the country's leading scientists, including renowned evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins and other scientists, in a letter to Britain's children's secretary, voice concerns that the draft does not address the theory of evolution, the scientific method, or give students an overall sense of why science is important in society, the Guardian reports. The standards are being revised in an effort to give British primary schools more freedom to choose curriculum, by creating a "slimmed down" version of the document, according to the article. (Sort of a British spin on the "fewer, clearer, and higher" standards talk being kicked around over here.)

The desire to improve not only students' grasp of scientific facts, but also their overall "scientific literacy," is a theme that has gained strength in recent years in this country. It sounds like the scientific voices in England share this concern, and an interest in seeing crucial concepts, like evolution, taught well in early grades.

Andrew Copson, another British scientist quoted in the story who objects to the new standards, says: "The wealth of colorful and engaging resources that explain evolution and natural selection to under 11-year-olds demonstrates how easily children of this age can be introduced to these important scientific concepts...the curriculum currently being drafted will apply for years to come so it is vital that this long-standing omission of evolution is corrected now."

The goal of British officials is to have new standards completed by this fall.

(Photo of Richard Dawkins by Akira Suemori/AP)

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:28 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The National Board of Professional Teaching Standards, which provides a national certification for teachers whom the organization considers to be exceptional, is seeking public comment on its revised standards for what accomplished teachers of history and social studies must know and be able to do. The comment period started today and ends August 9. Find the standards document here and the invitation to comment here.

The document reflects some changes since the national board published its first standards document for teachers of social studies and history in 1997, according to information from the national board's Web site. For example, in some cases, several standards have been collapsed into a single standard. In general, the new standards have less detail than the previous ones.

According to the new standards document, an accomplished history and social studies teacher knows his or her students as individuals and also as members of families and communities, recognizes the importance of student diversity, facilitates students' development as participants in civil public discourse, and is well grounded in content knowledge. The standards are intended for teachers of students ages 11 to 18 or older.

The document elaborates on each of these general standards. For instance, the document contains 14 pages of information spelling out what a teacher who is well grounded in content knowledge should know and be able to do. He or she should have in-depth knowledge of economics, U.S. history, world history, and geography, among other topics, according to the document.

Also this summer, the national board released revised standards for teachers of students who are English-language learners; the comment period for that document closed yesterday.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 4:10 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

In our rush to prepare students for the "knowledge" economy, are we ignoring the tangible and intangible benefits of providing them with basic, manual skills? That question is at the heart of a new book by Matt Crawford, "Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into the Value of Work," which has appeared on the bestseller list. The author is the subject of a good profile in the Washington Post.

Crawford, 43, is the former executive director of the George C. Marshall Institute, and he holds a doctorate in political philosophy from the University of Chicago. Today, in addition to writing, he runs a garage in Richmond. He sees a general turn away from the cultivation of manual skills in American society, and in our schools, as embodied by the replacement of shop classes with computer labs and the general de-emphasis on hands-on know-how, the article explains.

"There's this false dichotomy out there between intellectual work and manual work," he tells the Post. Students and adults today want to be "knowledge workers," Crawford says. As the article notes, Crawford is not in any way calling for an abandonment these knowledge-based pursuits, but simply arguing for preserving a society in which people can perform basic tasks under the hood, as well as at the computer terminal.

Crawford's book seems to be resonating among at least one segment of the American population, judging by book sales. Do his arguments have any relevance for schools and the career-and-technical education classes found in U.S. high schools?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:20 AM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

The folks drafting common academic standards have pledged that the process will be shaped by research, and a quest for evidence of what works in English and math instruction. What qualifies as high-quality research, of course, is often a matter of opinion. But the early, leaked version of the document offers some insights on the authors' thinking, as it pertains to math.

The math section of the draft document explains that the authors have built on "a generation of standards efforts" let by states and national organizations. Evidence from many sources, they say, indicates that math standards should be focused on "deeper, more thorough understanding" of crucial math ideas. In reaching this conclusion, they cite 1) international examples from high-performing countries; 2) surveys of college faculty; 3) and data on student performance. (Check out the language yourself, on page 23-24 of the math portion.)

Yet the authors also say standards can't be crafted simplistically, based on any one source of evidence. "It's more accurate to say that we used evidence to inform our decisions," they explain. In one math example, the authors say that while their review showed that the topic of linear equations is a fixture in state standards, students perform surprisingly poorly when assessed in that area on the ACT. The group determined that linear equations have high value, mathematically: High-performing nations emphasize it. College faculty value it. So the panel included it.

The draft also makes an interesting point about the discrepancy between academic standards and what students actually get out of instruction:

"The evidence tells us that in high performing countries like Singapore, the gap between what is taught and what is learned is relatively smaller than in Malaysia or the U.S. states. Malaysia’s standards are higher than Singapore’s, but their performance is much lower. One could interpret the narrower gap in Singapore as evidence that they actually use their standards to manage instruction; that is, Singapore’s standards were set within the reach of hard work for their system and their population. Singapore’s Ministry of Education flags its Web page with the motto, “Teach Less, Learn More.” We accepted the challenge of writing standards that could work that way for U.S. teachers and students: By providing focus and coherence, we could enable more learning to take place at all levels."

I've culled just a couple examples of how the authors appear to be broaching questions of evidence. There's much more to see in the document itself. Once you've read over that section, give me your review.

And for language arts, there's a footnote on the first page of that section, which links to the evidence and background documents cited by the authors to develop core standards in reading. Similar pages for for writing, and for speaking and listening will come later, the document says.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 3:18 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

By guest blogger Erik Robelen:

As the Washington education policy community was abuzz yesterday over the leaked first draft of common standards being developed through an effort led by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association, the CCSSO’s executive director discussed the enterprise—its promise and challenges—during a forum at the National Press Club.

“The jury is still out on whether the United States of America can come together around common standards,” Gene Wilhoit said at the event hosted by the Educational Testing Service. ETS has just released a report to help inform the common-standards push, which I wrote about yesterday. At the same time, Mr. Wilhoit argued that despite previous failed attempts, “we have a much stronger readiness for reform than we’ve ever had, a much stronger incentive for states to move ahead, and an intolerant environment for continuing the way we’ve always operated. Those are pretty strong drivers.”

All that said, he noted that there’s a long way to go, even after the development of the new standards is complete, which is expected by December.

“It’s one thing for states to sign up for a commitment to help us develop these standards,” he said. The real key, he added, is what happens after that.

“One is developing the political will to pass these standards in the states,” he said. Other critical steps, he said, include having states "adjust their learning programs to support" the standards, redesigning state assessment systems to align with the standards, and ensuring educators are prepared to help students meet the standards. “All of those things are going to be important in the months and years that follow,” he said.

Mr. Wilhoit indicated that the list of states participating in the event is about to grow. Currently, 46 states plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have signed on to the process. The holdouts are Alaska, Missouri, South Carolina, and Texas. While not naming names, he said two more will soon join.

Also speaking at the event, Bethany Little, the chief education counsel for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who chairs the Senate education committee, signalled that her boss and many other members of Congress are supportive of the effort.

“Congress is very aware of what’s going on, very interested,” she said, “and a lot of people are very excited.”

And yet, she cautioned that “it’s important to be realistic about what common standards will do, and what they won’t do. They’re not going to answer all questions … provide all solutions.”

“Most important,” she said, “what I think common standards won’t do is fix low-performing schools.”

In her remarks, Ms. Little also emphasized that common standards need not be a recipe for uniformity across states. “We shouldn’t pretend that having some set of standards requires all teachers in the country to teach the same way and for the curriculum to be standardized as well. There are lots of ways to teach the standards.”

For his part, Paul Barton, a senior associate at ETS who wrote the report that was the starting point for yesterday’s discussion, reiterated a number of points from the paper, including the challenges the initiative to develop national standards faces. These range from confronting the wide variations that exist across current state standards to coping with the extra attention and pressure from interest groups, as the effort inevitably fans the flames of controversy around such longstanding and heated debates as how best to teach reading and math, and how to handle evolution in science class, he said.

“When we try to settle [big] differences at the national level," he said, "we elevate the stakes, and we open the door for national-level organizations to bring pressure and counterpressures to bear."

UPDATE: From Sean Cavanagh:

Staying on the common standards theme, Wilhoit this morning touched on the effort to focus on “fewer, clearer, and higher” standards—and the pressure that comes to include this or that additional topic or concept—at a panel discussion on Capitol Hill this morning.

The state chiefs’ official said the committees drafting the standards were intent on keeping the document as focused as possible, and grounded in research on the skills necessary for college and the workforce.

Yet Wilhoit also acknowledged to the audience that “it will be hard to hold on to these attributes, because people are pushing to have more and more” included. The forum was hosted by the Campaign for High School Equity, a coalition of groups that seek improved education for minority students. The group staged the forum to discuss the implications of the standards movement for minority students, and how advocates for them can become more involved.

Keeping a manageable, focused set of standards is crucial, or the document could morph into a version of state standards, which in some cases are “overwhelming” and indecipherable for teachers, as well as parents, Wilhoit told the audience. Too many of those state documents are jammed with information, and “not by a slight margin,” Wilhoit added, calling those standards “not even in the ballpark.”

The Common Core, which is now focused on crafting college and career ready standards for math and language arts, has not delved into specific grade-by-grade guidelines, a process that is expected to begin later this year. Wilhoit said the group could look at either grade-specific standards, or “learning progressions,” which generally refer to expectations for how students' skills and knowledge should increase over time. (Learning progressions have received an increased amount of attention from academic scholars in recent years, as we’ve reported.) In many cases, it’s probably desirable to limit the number of major concepts in one grade to between four and six, Wilhoit argued.

Wilhoit was joined at the event by U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, a New Mexico Democrat, who said there was backing on the Hill for the Common Core work. “We don’t need to lead this effort,” Bingaman said of federal lawmakers, “but we need to support this effort.”

Other panelists included Michael Wotorson, the executive director of the Campaign for High School Equity; Brent A. Wilkes, the national executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens; Denise Forte, the director of education policy for the House Committee on Education and Labor; and David Beaulieu, the director of the Center for Indian Education at Arizona State University.

Wotorson said the Common Core effort could have a major impact on minority students’ achievement, though he hoped that the various organizations that represent them can have a voice in the process. “Too often, the students being held to these lower standards tend to be students of color,” he said, and it was “absolutely critical” that the views of advocates for minority students be included.

Some of the panelists seemed to share Wilhoit’s desire for relative simplicity in the document. Wilkes said many state standards were lengthy and confusing to teachers, and especially for parents. The goal should be to have academic standards that could be “posted on the refrigerator door” the way you might a football schedule now, he said.

Posted by at 11:45 AM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

By guest blogger Erik Robelen:

With political momentum building to develop common standards across the nation, the Educational Testing Service today is releasing a new report to help inform the effort, from providing a brief history of previous attempts and examining the wide variations in current standards to outlining key challenges and risks that lie ahead. Officials from ETS and elsewhere will discuss the report at 2 p.m. at the National Press Club in Washington.

The report argues that, assuming any national standards would be voluntary, it’s critical to ensure a process that will promote widespread buy-in among states.

“Since voluntary standards by definition will be unenforceable, sign-on and eventual adoption is dependent on the respectability, integrity, competence, and stature of the individuals involved in the process; and on the perceived soundness of the operating arrangement to plan and create related products,” writes Paul E. Barton, the report’s author and a senior associate at ETS’ Policy Information Center.

The report comes as the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers are leading an effort to develop common standards. Just yesterday, in fact, my colleague Sean Cavanagh reported here that draft standards from that process were posted on a blog hosted by Core Knowledge, an advocacy group, which had some not-too-kind comments on the work so far.

Which brings us back to the ETS report. It notes that the recent history of efforts to create national standards may not be encouraging.

“The nation’s inability to implement a program of national standards over the past two decades suggests that efforts are hard to sustain and that reaching consensus is difficult,” the report says.

There are plenty of challenges along the way. For one, Barton writes: “People’s ideas and concepts about national standards differ widely.”

He says it’s “unclear how much advocates want to strive for standardizing what schools teach across the United States as opposed to raising rigor in general—which is more in keeping with the nation’s history of leaving judgments about education to localities and states.”

In addition, he says it won’t be easy “settling issues over pedagogical approaches to teach subjects such as mathematics and reading, and controversial topics like evolution.”

Overall, Barton emphasizes that the ETS report is not meant to advocate any particular approach to national standards, or even to advocate for or against creating them.

At the event this afternoon, ETS officials will be joined by Gene Wilhoit, the executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Bethany Little, the chief education counsel to Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.

Posted by at 4:23 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

While Core Knowledge appears to have been first out the gate with a (negative) reaction to the draft of multistate academic standards, I've since touched base with several others, who have very different takes.

A much more positive review came from Karen Wixson, a University of Michigan professor of education who’s helped states craft their own language arts standards. While Core Knowledge officials argued that the standards were not content-specific enough, Wixson disagreed.

“They’ve done a pretty good job picking an appropriate grain size, which is always an issue,” Wixson told me. The standards documents cites a relatively small number of English language texts as illustrating the kinds of reading and interpretive skills that students need to master to be ready for college. For instance, it includes the Declaration of Independence as a sample text, as well as a passage from a Katherine Mansfield short story, and a science passage written by Sylvia Mader.

Ms. Wixson said those drafting the standards were wise keep the examples of English language texts short and to the point. “They have a nice little range,” she said. And adding a lot of examples of reading materials to the draft, or moving to “name names,” as Wixson put it, would almost certainly bring a flood of complaints about why one text or another didn’t make the list. In addition, state and local school officials would presumably want to right to be flexible in spelling out specific examples of additional texts, to meet the general standards of the Common Core document, she added.

“If all you do is list a bunch of books you’re supposed to read, you’re implying that all you have to do is read all of these different texts, and you’ll somehow acquire all of these different skills,” Wixson told me. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

As the draft document stands now, “I like the level of specificity,” she said. “I think it does provide direction…not that a state or school district would not want to flesh [it] out.” She also said that the core English language standards spelled out in the draft gave good, reasonable examples of the skills that define a good reader.

Core Knowledge’s critique emphasizes content at the expense of acquiring reading skills, Wixson contends. “You need both content and process,” she said.

In addition to helping states draft their standards, Wixson worked on the development of reading frameworks for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 2:17 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

We're getting a peek at the draft academic standards that a work group is putting together.

Core Knowledge, an advocacy group that calls for giving students deep grounding in content across subjects, has posted a draft copy of the common, multistate standards on its Web site—and it argues that the document completely misses the mark.

"Voluntary National Standards Dead on Arrival" reads the headline on the Core Knowledge blog.

The draft document represents the first step in an effort being led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers to create common academic standards across states. Achieve, the ACT, and the College Board are also working on the project. The first set of standards, which the organizations have said they hoped to have completed by the end of this month, focuses on the standards for college and career readiness in language arts and math. Copies of the draft document had been circulating among some organizations for review, Robert Pondiscio, the communications director at Core Knowledge, wrote on the blog entry. His group decided to post them, because they saw no restrictions on doing so, he said.

The organization's view of the draft document is highly negative. Here's a piece from the online blog entry:

"The draft insists that the voluntary standards be 'coherent' but defines coherence to mean they 'should convey a unified vision of the big ideas and supporting concepts within a discipline and reflect a progression of learning that is meaningful and appropriate.' Framed as a series of benchmarks students must reach 'to be college and career ready,' the draft enumerates standards such as the ability to 'determine what text says explicitly and use evidence within text to infer what is implied by or follows logically from the text.'

"To put this as blandly as possible, this is neither a revelatory insight nor a meaningful standard. Educators hoping for guidance on what particular texts are expected to be taught, or how to get students to reach the bland and obvious standards will be disappointed."

Obviously, Core Knowledge has its own view of what should go into academic standards, and others reviewing the document will have their own. After you've had a look, give me your opinion.

UPDATE from guest blogger Catherine Gewertz: Gene Wilhoit of the CCSSO and Dane Linn of the NGA said it's too early to draw conclusions about the draft, since it lacks the feedback from working groups tasked to review it, and from governors and state chiefs. Once all that feedback is in, a revised draft—with evidence supporting each standard—will be available online, in mid-August, for further public comment. Wilhoit and Linn's overall message? That this draft represents just the first step in a much longer process.

UPDATE (2): Lynne Munson, the president and executive director of Common Core, in Washington, which also advocates for giving students a strong grounding across disciplines, calls the Core Knowledge group’s pronouncement “premature,” though she shares some of their concerns. In a blog entry, Munson says that the common standards effort is “is too coordinated, too strategically smart, and has too much momentum to be dismissed out of hand.”

Munson says that the standards draft risks repeating what she says are the mistakes of the the No Child Left Behind era, in which reading was approached “purely as a skill” and “overlooks the key role that substantial content plays in teaching students to read.” Yet she also says that the effort is “still in its nascent stages” and so “condemnations are premature.”

Read our full story on reactions to the standards here.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 2:13 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Tom Luce, a former top education official in the Bush administration, argues in an online essay that the recent “cyber attacks” on Web sites in the United States and South Korea provide another reason for this country to recommit to math and science education.

Luce, who is now the CEO of the National Math and Science Initiative, cited several examples of cyber-hacking that, if they don’t keep you up at night, will probably make you a bit uneasy. Cyber-spies, possibly working out of China and Russia, recently penetrated the U.S. utility grid and left behind computer programs that would allow them to disrupt service; a member of the U.S. Senate’s intelligence committee said his office computers have been hacked three times recently; and Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently said that hackers had stolen electronic specifications for the Pentagon’s new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter project and infiltrated the Air Force's air-traffic-control system.

Gates has said plans are under way for the United States to increase the number of cyber-experts it can train. But Luce worries that finding people with those skills won’t be easy. He points to the middling U.S. results on international tests of math and science, but perhaps more to the point, he cites the results of the recent Top Coder Open, an international competition supported by the U.S.'s own super-secret National Security Agency, as a way of identifying top programming talent. The most skilled competitors were from China and Russia, says Luce, pictured at right. “They dominated in every category from writing algorithms to designing software components,” he writes in the essay, published in the Huffington Post, an online site. “How many of the 70 finalists were from the U.S.? Only two.”

“Out of 4,200 contestants, China entered 894, India 704, and Russia 380. The U.S. trailed with 234 contestants, just above Poland, which had 214 entrants. Egypt had 145 contestants and the Ukraine 128. The winner was an 18-year-old from China.”

It might seem hard to fathom that U.S. teenagers and young adults can’t keep up with the technological wizardry of their peers in other countries. I mean, if you’re over the age of 30, the tech skills of students moving through the pipeline can seem pretty dazzling. But Luce seems to be describing a very elite set of computer and math and science abilities, and a concern that the United States is falling short. What do you make of his argument?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:04 AM | Permalink | 4 Comments | Recommend

Not all the students could claim to be above average, as they are in Lake Wobegon, but many of Minnesota's schools saw their test scores rise on the state's science tests, across districts of all sizes, and across ages and ethnic groups.

What’s worth noting is that the results on the state’s science exams could actually be seen as fairly modest, compared to the Minnesota's recent showing on an international test, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS. Defying recent American tradition, Minnesota’s 4th graders outperformed almost all foreign nations on that international test in science, and the state’s 8th graders also fared very well, too. As one math-and-science advocate quoted in the above-linked story in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune says, while the test scores show improvement, only a minority of students are reaching “proficiency” in many categories. Overall, the results reveal the state’s commitment to setting high standards on its exams, he suggests.

One characteristic of Minnesota’s science-testing program also caught my eye: the state’s exams in that subject are being given entirely online, rather than by paper and pencil, according to the story, and they ask students to simulate experiments. It’s a feature that many science advocates say is important, in order to encourage more in-depth teaching in of science in classrooms, rather than simple memorization. But I’ve heard of few states actually taking this step. I also notice that despite the broad progress in science on the test, you don’t hear a lot of crowing from Minnesota officials about improved scores, at least not in the story. For the most part, you hear them talking about how far they have to go.

Maybe that's the way it's done in high-performing states.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:25 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Frank McCourt, who died over the weekend at the age of 78, is known to many Americans as the author of the memoir Angela’s Ashes, which has sold 4 million copies, been been translated into 27 languages and was made into a Hollywood film. Yet the Irish-American author was also known to many a class of New York public school students as a teacher of creative writing. Like many aspects of McCourt’s life, his experiences in the classroom were largely defined by the sweep of colorful narrative that brought him there.

McCourt was born to Irish parents in Brooklyn, N.Y., but his family moved back to their homeland during the Depression in search of work. They found little to comfort them back in Limerick, where they lived in extreme poverty, as McCourt described in his memoir. He quit school at age 13 and worked odd jobs, and at age 19, moved back to New York. After serving in the U.S. military, McCourt was determined to put together a career of something more than odd jobs. He talked his way into New York University (which he attended with the help of the GI Bill), and eventually was hired by the city's public schools as a creative writing teacher—without even having a high school degree. He worked in the schools for 27 years, writing both Angela’s Ashes, and another book, 'Tis, after his retirement from the system.

In interviews after he became well known, McCourt described his myriad challenges as a new teacher. One hurdle was his having been taught in the strict and stodgy Irish education system of the day, in which, to hear him tell it, students were told to keep their mouths shut, memorize material for the test, and never question anything. Students in New York were more assertive in McCourt's presence, to say the least. Yet his charges also seemed puzzled and intrigued by his accent and Irish background, and the fact that he hadn’t gone to high school, enough so some of them cut him a break. He later wrote a memoir about his time in the classroom, Teacher Man. (For more information, check out Teacher Magazine’s Web Watch on McCourt.)

Is there a place for people with McCourt’s background in today’s education system? Should there be? In public schools, hirings like his seem entirely doubtful nowadays. Private schools would of course have much more leeway in hiring a writer with an unconventional background, though how far down that road they’d be willing to go, I don’t know.

Photo: Author Frank McCourt gestures during an interview at his apartment in New York, Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2005. In his latest memoir, "Teacher Man," McCourt shares his memories of being a public school teacher in New York for 30 years. (Mary Altaffer/AP

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 1:20 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

I heard a radio interview yesterday with Craig Nelson, the author of Rocket Men: The Epic Story of the First Men on the Moon, who was talking about the anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. Nelson had a lot of thoughts about the United States’ history of space exploration, and where the country might go from here, and some of his points have obvious relevance to education.

To paraphrase him, Nelson was asked about the wisdom and feasibility of putting together future American missions to the moon, or even more ambitious destinations, like Mars, and why space exploration isn’t regarded as being as urgent a national need as in the past. One clear reason is that the nation has a long list of domestic (or terrestrial?) priorities, which make discussions of flight through the heavens seem a lot less urgent. More specifically, he noted that the nation’s perspective in the Apollo 11 era was shaped very directly by the Cold War, and our determination to outperform, out-engineer, out-spend, out-everything the former Soviet Union. (Look at the galvanizing effect that Sputnik had on American education and technology, for instance.) The United States’ policy priorities tend to be guided by competition, Nelson suggested, and any resurgence in interest in space flight is likely to be sparked in part by the prospect of a foreign nation doing something daring in space, or even by a private-sector effort to rocket into orbit or sub-orbit for commercial reasons.

Similar motivations appear to be driving policy changes in math and science. Talk about foreign economic competition, from China, India, and high-performing foreign nations, has driven discussions about everything from the need to improve math and science teaching in the America COMPETES Act to the desire to improve and bring more consistency to the nation’s academic standards through the "Common Core" effort. Many science and technology companies, who face foreign competition for workers, presumably have a particular interest in and knowledge of the math and science skills that students need to fill jobs in that field. Skeptics, on the other hand, will tell you we don’t actually know that much about how well India’s and China’s students perform, compared to American students, since their results haven’t been reported on international tests. They caution against reading too much into the results of nation-by-nation exams like the PISA and TIMSS. And they'll also note that many of the programs in the COMPETES Act have yet to be funded. Even so, global competition seems, at the very least, to be a powerful rhetorical tool in math and science education discussions.

The question of course, is whether U.S. policymakers are thinking about these issues in the right way. Many people quoted in EdWeek and elsewhere say these discussions need to become a lot more refined—that we should become much more knowledgeable about the features of high-performing foreign education models, but then bore in on what policies can be adapted to the U.S. systems, while regarding others much more cautiously. How can and should foreign competition guide the thinking of U.S. policymakers about improvements to math and science education?

Photo: Astronaut Edwin E. Aldrin Jr., lunar module pilot, walks near the lunar module during the Apollo 11 extravehicular activity on July 20, 1969. NASA/AP

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 12:06 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The academic talents of South Korea's students are well-documented. But a recent story by NPR takes a look at the some of the nation's super-elite teenagers, at the Daewon Foreign Language High School. So lofty are the school's reputation and academic standards that it's sending students to elite American colleges, including Ivy League campuses. The story notes that in South Korea, it's not uncommon for students to move to the United States, attend prep school for a while, and then seek admission at American schools. Daewon allows them to skip one step, apparently.

In the course of reporting past stories on South Korean education, I've also heard of parents in that country moving to the United States to allow a son or daughter to attend high school, on the path to a U.S. college (space is limited in top South Korean universities.) I would guess that many countries have schools that are the equivalent of Daewon, or at least aspire to be that. They push students very hard, and market themselves to parents as preparing their sons and daughters for entry into the American higher education system (though maybe not into the Ivys). Can you think of any other schools outside U.S. borders that fit this model?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:13 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The National Institute on Drug Abuse has created a new blog aimed at giving teens science-based information about narcotics and their effects on the body. The site houses health facts and detailed science information, which could prove valuable in health and biology classrooms and other settings.

Called the Sara Bellum Blog (and yes, the institute folks confirm, it's a play on cerebellum, the coordinating center for muscle movement in the brain) entries are put together by a team of NIDA scientists, science writers, and public-health analysts of all ages. It delves into the science of drug abuse and addiction, explaining the latest scientific research and news, with the goal of helping teenagers make “healthy, smart decisions.” The site also includes a glossary, facts about drugs, and real stories from teens who became abusers substances such as anabolic steroids and ecstasy. There are numerous videos with scientists talking about the impact of drugs on the body, and information available to download. “Sometimes it can be hard to know where to go for the truth about drugs,” the site explains. “Here at NIDA, we learn from science—not from rumors or gossip.”

One recent entry on the blog is called “Steroids: More than Meets the Eye,” and it gives a synopsis of muscle-building drugs’ impact on the body: They can cause acne, make your hair fall out, “damage your heart and change your hormone levels so that girls might grow facial hair, and boys could develop breasts,” the site says, adding, “seriously.” There’s also a link to a video in which NIDA scientists make detailed presentations on steroids. Another blog post discusses speculation about what impact, if any, Michael Jackson’s prescription-drug use may have had on his death.

The NIDA, a part of the National Institutes of Health, calls itself the "federal focal point" for research on drug abuse and addiction. The institute puts out a lot of resources for students, which can be accessed through the blog link above. Once you've had a look, tell me how the blog compares with other health and health-science educational resources you’ve seen. How much use would this have for teachers—and for teens?

Photo image from the Sara Bellum Blog

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:56 AM | Permalink | 4 Comments | Recommend

In our latest issue, I explore Singapore's efforts—successful, by many accounts—to transform its career-and-technical education programs.

When American educators think of Singapore, they usually focus on the tiny nation's domination of international tests in math and science. Government officials in the Asian country had to overcome many parents' stereotypes of voc-ed. programs as repositories for low-performing students who were heading into dead-end jobs. When the education officials revamped the programs, forged stronger ties between schools and industries, and took other steps, the parents came around.

What can voc-ed. programs in the United States learn from Singapore's approach, if anything?

Photo by Kris LeBoutillier for Education Week

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:15 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The writer Chris Mooney has come out with a new book on a topic that will probably be of interest to many readers of this blog: scientific illiteracy.

Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future, examines “how religious ideologues, a weak education system, science-phobic politicians, and the corporate media” are contributing to Americans' misunderstandings about science, and looks at how “hyperspecialized scientists have thus far failed to counter" that trend.

A few years ago Mooney authored The Republican War on Science, so his ideological views may be a couple clicks removed from your own. But a perusal of his latest book, co-authored with Sheril Kirshenbaum, a marine scientist, shows him touching on some provocative issues, and girding his arguments with some startling (and for scientists) disheartening facts, such as 46 percent of Americans believing the Earth is less than 10,000 years old (as opposed to roughly 4 billion). Mooney and Kirshenbaum address, among other issues, the decline of journalism and science journalism as contributing to American illiteracy on these topics. And no, he says, blogging just can’t make up the slack: Given its emphasis on speed and volume, they write, science blogging “can rarely serve as a real substitute for in-depth, considered, professional science journalism of the sort that is now in demonstrable decline—the kind of time-consuming writing that canvasses researchers, peruses the literature, and truly penetrates into where science is headed and why it matters.”

And moreover:

“The single biggest blogging negative, however, is the grouping together of people who already agree about everything, and who then proceed to square and cube their agreements, becoming increasingly self-assured and intolerant of other viewpoints. Thus, blogging about science has brought out, in some cases, the loud, angry, nasty, and profanity-strewing minority of the science world that denounces the rest of America for its ignorance and superstition.”

Scientists need to be far more active in the public sphere and in the political arena, Mooney and Kirshenbaum argue, because after all, they know their subjects best and why it matters. (I've touched on this topic a bit in the past.) They discuss what they see as a disconnect between business and education advocates' interest in improving math and science, as evidenced in reports such as Rising Above the Gathering Storm, and the relative apathy shown toward bridging the "science-society" gap. Too much science teaching, particularly in physics and chemistry, is uninspired, they say, at one point quoting from the National Academies’ study, America’s Lab Report.

Teachers at all grades have been struggling to improve the quality of labs and science lessons for years, of course. Whether Unscientific America will lead policymakers and educators to think about that challenge in different ways remains to be seen.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:03 AM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Reaction to the recent report on the black-white achievement gap has rolled in from across the country, and it’s predictably varied, based on how well or poorly individual states fared. In some ways, I suppose this reflects the power of the publicly reported state-by-state results on NAEP, though you could make the argument that states have become pretty adept at ignoring test scores when the results don’t suit them. Kati Haycock of the Education Trust made a similar point to me in the story I wrote about the results.

Still, I think this report, put together by the National Center for Education Statistics, will have legs, and we’ll keep hearing state and local education officials referring back to it when they’re touting one particular education policy or another. The state-by-state and state-to-nation comparisons are simply too compelling a storyline. You could write the press release from any number of state commissioners of education right now: “According to a study released this year, the gap between African-American students and white students in [insert state here] is larger than the national average in 4th grade reading and has actually widened over time. ...” Followed by the announcement of a new literacy program, early-childhood initiative, or similar proposal. I'd compare reaction to this study with what I remember as a pretty strong wave of coverage that followed another NCES study released a few years ago, which examined where the states were setting their “proficiency” bar on state tests, which was of course all over the map.

A couple responses from the states worth noting:

—The results were “outrageous and ought to be an immediate call to action,” a former state schools chief in Illinois tells the Chicago Sun-Times, referencing his state’s achievement gaps.

—From Wisconsin, where the black-white achievement gap exceeded national averages in all four reading and math categories: "Somebody needs to ask questions about why other states are making more progress and Wisconsin isn't," Haycock told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "How is it that Wisconsin has lower performance among African-American kids than Mississippi or Alabama? How does that happen?"

—For Florida, one of only a couple states to narrow the gap significantly in 4th grade math and reading, the results represent “tremendous progress,” said state education Commissioner Eric J. Smith, but the state has “much more work to do.”

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:30 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Last week, President Obama nominated Francis Collins, a scientist renowned for his work in mapping the human genome, as the new director for the National Institutes of Health. The NIH, headquartered in Bethesda, conducts and supports a vast amount of medical research, much of it groundbreaking. In the coverage of Collins’ nomination, many stories have made note of his past declarations of his Christian religious beliefs, and his conviction that faith is compatible with science, a view shared by many. In the Washington Post today, columnist Michael Gerson discusses the relevance of Collins’ potential move to NIH, and what it means for science, and for evangelical Christianity.

Gerson, a former speechwriter for George W. Bush, describes Collins' view that religious faith and science are separate “ways of knowing," which can co-exist. Scientific knowledge is developed through hypotheses, tests, the collection of evidence and so on. Religious knowledge is “a realm of morality and metaphysics that involves not physical proof but probability based on evidence,” Gerson writes. “For Collins, modern science and Christianity are not competing answers to the same question; they are ways of thinking about two very different sets of questions, both of which should be taken seriously.” Collins in the author of a book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.

Gerson argues that Collins has the potential to bridge some of the religious and ideological divides that pit scientists against people of faith, unnecessarily.

These questions arise continually in the K-12 sphere, of course, most directly in relation to the teaching of evolution. Some religious conservatives see evolutionary theory as incompatible with their faith, and want to see more discussion of its alleged “weaknesses” in public school science classes. The vast majority of scientists say supposed shortcomings in Darwin's theory are exaggerated, particularly given the enormous weight of evidence supporting evolution. Collins has called evidence for evolution “absolutely incontrovertible." His background as a geneticist gives him some credibility in that department, to say the least.

Assuming that he’s confirmed to lead the NIH, how might Collins, in this new public role, shape the public’s thinking—and that of teachers, parents, and students—on the relationship between faith and science?

Top photo by Douglas C. Pizac/AP. The bottom photo appeared this spring in the magazine GQ, which named Collins one of the magazine's "Rock Stars of Science," as part of a campaign to bring celebrity to science.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:12 AM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

The Obama administration is expected to unveil a proposal to channel more money&mdash$12 billion—into the nation's community college, to pay for everything from construction to the development of online courses, according to the Washington Post.

We're a K-12 publication, and this is at least partly a K-12 story. Supporters of community colleges have always touted them as a bargain, compared to four-year schools, and they say that their role is especially crucial in this dire economy. It can be tough to graduate from four-year universities for reasons that have nothing to do with academic achievement; students often struggle to gain access to the classes they want, for instance. Community colleges allow students to pick up credits and skills and transfer when they're ready. They're also a major entry point for many students with a strong interest in career-and-technical education.

Obama seems intent on elevating the role of these two-year institutions. What impact do you see these initiatives having on high school students?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:01 AM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

This morning, the top statistical wing of the U.S. Department of Education is releasing a study on the achievement gap between white and black students. There are more details in EdWeek’s story on the subject, which describe the mixed bag of results. A couple points worth special attention:

—Much of the progress in closing the achievement gap, at least in individual states, appears to be occurring at the 4th, rather than 8th grade level. Fourteen states, plus the District of Columbia, narrowed the gap in math from the 1990s to today. They are: California, Connecticut, Delaware, D.C., Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. But among 8th graders, only four states narrowed the gap in math: Arkansas, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Texas. There was a similar drop-off, though not as pronounced, from 4th to 8th grade in reading.

Should be interesting to see how states spin these scores. Some of them may choose to focus on having a more narrow overall gap between white and black students than the national average—while ignoring the fact that the disparity in their states hasn't lessened since the 1990s. Look to state and local coverage for a breakdown over the next 24 hours.

The mediocrity of older, American students in math has received a lot of attention in recent years. While younger students have made steady progress in math on the NAEP in recent years, scores among 17-year-olds have basically been a flat-line for decades. This report seems likely to prompt a re-examination of why this stagnation is occurring. Meanwhile, Congressman George Miller sees the continued achievement gap among 13-year-olds in reading as a factor contributing to students dropping out of high school.

—As with any study of NAEP scores, this one will almost surely yield discussions about No Child Left Behind’s impact, particularly since a major goal of the law was improving the performance of low-achievers. But a review of these results shows that finding a clear NCLB-related theme is difficult. Since 1999, the achievement gap among 9- and 13-year-olds closed, but not significantly; in reading, it narrowed significantly for students in both age groups. Among 4th graders, the gap has remained stagnant since 2003, but it narrowed in reading by a three-point, significant margin. The 8th grader achievement gap has closed significantly since 2003, but it’s been unchanged in reading since then.

So tell me: Can you detect a clear breakdown from the NCLB era in all that?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:19 AM | Permalink | 6 Comments | Recommend

A recent survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press offers a glimpse into how the public regards the work of scientists, and how scientists themselves see their work.

The survey finds that a strong majority of Americans believe science has had a positive effect on society and makes life easier for most people. Yet when asked to rank scientific advances among the United States’ great achievements, the public appears to be less impressed than it was a decade ago. Just 27 percent of Americans rank scientific breakthroughs in that category, compared to 47 percent in 1999, according to the survey, which was conducted in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

The survey sheds light on some of the well-documented gaps in the public’s thinking about scientific topics, compared with the views of scientists. Eighty-four percent of scientists think the earth is getting warmer because of human activity (and there's considerable evidence to back up that claim), but only 49 percent of the public shares that view. Eighty-seven percent of scientists say humans and other things have evolved, whereas just 32 percent of the public believes that. These divides help explain the controversies that break out over the teaching of evolution and climate change in many public school classrooms, despite scientists’ views of those issues' importance.

The survey also suggests, that many scientists are pained by these public misconceptions. Asked about the United States’ greatest scientific failure over the last 20 years, 37 percent of scientists polled cited lack of progress on specific issues (alternative energy, stem cells, the Super Collider and so on) while the second-largest total, 21 percent, cited the failure to communicate with and educate the American public about science.

I should note that many scientists say we ink-stained wretches aren’t helping as much as we might: 76 percent of scientists polled say news reports fail to distinguish between findings that are well-supported by evidence and consensus and those that aren’t. How can scientists better convey information about what they do every day to teachers, parents, and students, and the press? And could their efforts really have an impact on improved science education?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 1:13 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The United States is by no means the only country where battles erupt over how rigidly schools should adhere to the teaching of native languages in the classroom. In Malaysia, the government has decided that from now on, math and science classes will be taught in Malay—with English getting pushed out the classroom door.

The change apparently represents one of a number of reversals of a language policy in Malaysia, a former British Colony. After the nation's independence in 1957, Malaysian officials originally moved to have math, science, and other courses taught in Malay, according to this story in the Associated Press. But in 2003, the government changed course, and decided to teach math and science in English. One reason they did so back then: They were worried about their students keeping up with students from a nearby academic power, Singapore. (Most other subjects in Malaysia continued to be taught in Malay, according to the article.) In Singapore, by the way, the official language is Malay, though English is "the key language of communication," and many residents speak and write a second language—typically Mandarin, Tamil or Malay, according to the government.

The new decision to revert to Malay came about after protests from linguists and residents, including those in rural parts of the country, where the use of English is less common. They argued that students' scores on national tests were suffering because of their lack of familiarity with English. According to the story, ethnic Chinese and Indians in Malaysia also wanted to have math and science taught in their native tongues.

This is one of the first instances I've seen in which language policy in math and science is being treated separately from studies in other subjects. It's probably a reflection of how much attention those subjects are now receiving in the international sphere, and how nations are struggling to balance their desire to gird students for the global job market against issues of national pride and the desire to preserve and promote the use of a native language.

UPDATE: Education officials in nearby Indonesia say they aren't inclined to follow suit and stop using English as the language of instruction in math and science classes. "No way we will drop it," one of them is quoted as telling the Jakarta Globe. A major difference between the two countries appears to be that while Indonesia has moved since 2006 to have more students take classes in English, only a minority do so in math and science, according to the story. So it appears that the use of English in that country will continue to grow.

The official language in Indonesia, you ask? Bahasa Indonesia (a modified form of Malay), with English, Dutch, and local dialects, including Javanese, also spoken.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 10:13 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Advocates struggled for years to get greater coverage of influential minority figures in the school curriculum. Their efforts are evident in schools across the country, where most K-12 students learn about the contributions of Sacajawea, Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King Jr., and Rosa Parks.

But some panel members convened by the Texas state school board think schools have gone too far in placing historical figures of color next to the Founding Fathers in the curriculum and textbooks. Some critics of the voluntary national U.S. history standards voiced similar complaints about that document more than a decade ago.

The Dallas Morning News reports on some of the panelist's recommendations here, quoting one, evangelical minister Peter Marshall, as saying: "To have César Chávez listed next to Ben Franklin" – as in the current standards – "is ludicrous." Marshall also questioned whether Thurgood Marshall, the nation's first African-American to be appointed to the Supreme Court after a legal career in which he successfully fought against school desegregation, was a strong enough figure to be featured in school textbooks.

The state board, the News reports, asked six "experts" to review the state's current standards, adopted in 1998. Three of the panel members were appointed by conservative Republicans on the board, while the others were selected by the remaining board members, both Republicans and Democrats.

A committee of educators and community representatives are slated to write the state's new social studies standards, which are influential in the development of school textbooks for much of the nation. The new document, which will guide instruction in the state over the next decade, will replace the ones adopted by the board in 1998.

The Texas board had been embroiled in controversy over its science standards, largely because of language relating to evolution.

(Photo of Thurgood Marshall courtesy of The National Archives.)

Posted by at 4:30 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

How does public opinion in the United States about the theory of evolution compare with attitudes and beliefs in foreign countries? A recent survey by the British Council, which describes itself as an international body that promotes cultural relations, offers some insights.

The survey, which polled 10,000 adults across 10 countries, found that overall, a strong majority of respondents, 70 percent, have heard of Charles Darwin and know a little about evolution, the theory he pioneered. The United States ranked among the highest, with 71 percent of adults having that knowledge, as did Great Britain. Adults in other countries showed varying levels of knowledge: 68 percent of Mexicans knew those basic facts, while 54 percent in China did. Sixty-two percent of Egyptian adults did not know of Darwin and his theory, and 73 percent of South Africans did not.

Another survey question focused on whether it was possible to believe in God and also believe that humans and other living things have evolved through natural selection. Adults in India were the most inclined of those surveyed in any country (85 percent) to hold that view; 65 percent of Mexican adults held that view, as did 54 percent of British adults, and 53 percent of Americans, while just 39 percent of Chinese adults agreed.

On the question of whether enough scientific evidence exists to support the theory of evolution (among those who had heard of it), majorities of adults in India, China, and Britain, among other nations, agreed, while only 41 percent of U.S. residents did. The international average on that question was 56 percent, according to the council.

I originally saw the survey on the Web site of the National Center for Science Education, which supports the teaching of evolution in schools. The above figures are from a summary by the council, which can provide more in-depth results for those interested. How do you interpret the survey results? What cultural and religious factors in the various countries might account for them?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:28 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

For readers in the Washington area, biotechnology and science advocates are staging an event on Tuesday on the future of science education. It will look at how to strengthen science instruction in the nation's classrooms and at what role bioscience education can and should play. I've written a bit about efforts to integrate biotechnology into classrooms, as well as nanotechnology, which appears to be a growing area of interest among science educators.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 4:20 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

State and federal policymakers, academic researchers and others have spent a lot of time thinking about how to increase the pool of U.S. students with interest and talent in math and science who study those subjects in college, and choose careers in related fields.

Today, a coalition of business and education advocates have unveiled a computerized "simulation and modeling" tool aimed at providing insight on that topic. The modeling device will allow policymakers, researchers, and pretty much anybody with sufficient time and computer know-how to crunch data on students, teachers, and workforce trends in STEM to evaluate various education policies. The "U.S. STEM Education Model" uses complex algorithms and allows users to adjust for more than 200 individual variables—everything from class size to teacher pay. You can try out the site at http://www.stemnetwork.org. IT requires simulation software, which the Raytheon officials have told me you can download for free.

UPDATE: This afternoon I attended an event where the STEM simulation model was unveiled and put through a series of test-runs. Two of Raytheon’s top engineers who designed it, Brian Wells and Alex Sanchez, talked about a few of the questions they’ve sought to answer about K-12 and college STEM efforts, through early experiments with the system. Some of their simulations produced intriguing results:

—The first year of college, rather than any stop along the way in K-12, is the “greatest leverage point” for determining whether students with math and science talent graduate with STEM degrees. A relatively small percentage of students who show an interest in STEM majors end up persevering and completing a degree in those majors, Raytheon officials said.

This finding, if borne out by other research, would seem to have big implications for education policy. What is it about the first year of college STEM classes that is scaring talented students away? Could it be that high schools are actually producing more and more capable STEM talent than many believe? Or is the K-12 system not preparing students for the rigors of a freshman-year math or science course?

In an interesting twist, one audience member asked the Raytheon speakers if, given all the attention that’s paid to the supposedly weak teacher corps in K-12, the model had any way of evaluating the skills of college STEM faculty. One of the presenters responded that the computer-modeling program had not yet established a definition of a STEM-capable college teacher.

—Keeping the best teachers in STEM classrooms is important, the model suggested, and “increasing the attrition” of less capable ones is also big.

—Efforts to reduce class size, such as what’s been attempted in California, are likely to be hindered by shortages of qualified teachers, the model showed. “We could have run that [model] and shown it in a matter of minutes,” one of the Raytheon officials said of California’s struggles to find enough teachers.

Also in attendance at the event: Rep. Bart Gordon, a Tennessee Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Science and Technology. Gordon has called for more coordination and evidence of effectiveness among the myriad STEM-related federal programs, and he’s proposed legislation designed to bring it about. Gordon suggested that the simulation model could help give lawmakers information about whether various math and science education programs in different federal agencies are “making a difference.”

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 1:24 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

To get a high school diploma, students should have to pass the same test that is required for people to become U.S. citizens, the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute is saying. The nonprofit organization made the recommendation after finding in a study that only 3.5 percent of public school students in Arizona could pass the citizenship test.

High school students were given 10 of the 100 test questions from a bank of test items for the U.S. citizenship exam, as is the practice for candidates for citizenship. To pass, test takers needed to get six questions correct. Typically, about 92.4 percent of applicants for U.S. citizenship pass by getting six out of 10 questions right on the first try, the institute says.

While 3.5 percent of public school students passed the test, which included questions such as "Who wrote the Declaration of Independence?" and "Who was the first president of the United States?", twice that percentage of charter school students in Arizona passed the test. Private school students passed the test at about four times the rate that public school students did.

The folks at the Goldwater Institute are not the only people concerned about what they perceive as a lack of civics education in schools. The actor Richard Dreyfuss is creating a civics curriculum and former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham, a Democrat from Florida, has written a book, America, the Owner's Manual: Making Government Work for You, urging high school and college students to get more involved in politics.

USA Today published an opinion piece this month that picked up on the Goldwater Institute's study, saying that the nation needs to find better ways to educate young people about history and civics. Blogger Joanne Jacobs also highlighted the lack of students' knowledge about civics by featuring the findings of the Goldwater survey.

I'm wondering if candidates for U.S. citizenship have a chance to study the test questions for the citizenship test beforehand. That might explain the difference in pass rates between them and high school students, if the students didn't study the questions beforehand.

When I took the written exam for my driver's license in the District of Columbia, I could read all of the questions from the test bank ahead of time in a test-preparation guide. I memorized them and aced the 15 test questions that were giving to me in an exam.

Readers, do you think that students should have to pass a civics exam to get a high school diploma?

Photo by Richard Drew/AP

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 4:18 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Two organizations that have taken an interest in improving teacher education—the National Council on Teacher Quality and the National Math & Science Initiative—have released a series of recommendations on that topic. It’s called “Tackling the STEM Crisis: Five Steps Your State Can Take to Improve the Quality and Quantity of Its K-12 Math and Science Teachers.” It’s not really limited to five categories, though.

While many of the ideas aren’t new, the authors aptly lay out several of the (often peculiar and counterintuitive) facts about how the United States trains its teachers and assigns them to classrooms, and suggest alternatives. Some of the strategies are already being tested by individual states, and the document, in a series of footnotes, cites those efforts.

A few of the document’s recommendations for states:

—Require aspiring teachers to pass basic-skills tests to get into education schools, or, if the state already does this, consider raising the passing requirements. In some states, applicants can be accepted after getting only 40 percent of the questions right, the authors say.

—Adopt a “3/1” set of course requirements for elementary math teachers. The three math courses shouldn’t be in any math course, but rather in areas specific to teaching, in topics such as algebra, geometry, and foundational math. The “1” in the 3/1 is a methods course for teaching math. Candidates should also be allowed to test out of math-content classes, if they have a strong background in the material, according to the authors.

—Create model science-course requirements for elementary science teachers. Most states have “scattershot” requirements for these teachers now, the document says, leaving it up to future teachers to choose a focus in their coursework. The NMSI/NCTQ document says elementary teachers should be forced to take relevant coursework across all primary science fields, meaning biology, chemistry, and physics.

—Put some “teeth” into elementary licensing tests, requiring content-specific knowledge, rather than generalist knowledge. See Massachusetts as an example of a state already moving in this direction.

—At the middle school level, states should close loopholes that allow math and science teacher-candidates to begin work with a K-8 generalist license. All future middle school teachers, the document says, whether teaching in grades K-8, 6-8, or 7-9, need to earn a middle school license or subject-area license for grades 7-12, it states.

—In hiring/recruitment, many states and school districts offer good pensions and health retirement plans for teachers who enter at the age of 50 and are willing to work 10 years. States need to aggressively tout these benefits in recruiting teachers, the authors argue.

—State superintendents in many states have the authority to issue "licensing waivers" for people wishing to enter the profession. They should do this, particularly to lure skilled part-timers into the classroom to teach courses in calculus, chemistry, and other subjects.

NMSI has trying to help states forge new strategies for bringing more, and better-qualified STEM teachers into the system, by promoting the national replication of the “UTeach” model at the University of Texas. I’ve offered just a few of this document's recommendations. After you’ve had a look, give me your thoughts. How feasible are these suggestions, and how far are states and districts from implementing them on a large scale?

Photo by Michael P. Farrell for Digital Directions

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:23 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Sixty-five percent of Americans cannot, according to a recent survey.

I don't see a comparable estimate of U.S. knowledge of famous male scientists, so hard to know if American ignorance in this area is gender-specific.The good news, if you're someone who wants to see more girls entering scientific fields, is that strong majorities of Americans believe females are underrepresented in such professions and would like to see the government invest more to lure them into those occupations. The survey, titled "Women, Science, and Success: The New Face of Innovation," was conducted by L'Oreal USA, the American subsidiary of the international cosmetics, perfume, and beauty corporation.

The first female scientist who came to mind for me, for whatever reason, was primatologist Jane Goodall (to the right). Who's yours?

Photo by Jean-Marc Bouju/AP-File

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 7:25 PM | Permalink | 7 Comments | Recommend

In a majority of the 26 states that enroll the most American Indian or Alaska Native students, the proportion of such students who score proficient in reading and math on state tests has increased since passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, according to a study released this month by the Institute of Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education.

What's more, the achievement gap between Native American students and other students in reading and math has narrowed in a majority of states that have three or four years of continuous data. (Or, in a majority of states where Native American students outperform other groups of students, the Native American students have increased their lead.)

While the study looked at 26 states, only 19 had continuous data for three or four years in reading and 18 had continuous data for several years in math. The study examined test scores of 8th graders, from the 2003-04 school year to 2006-07 school year.

The study of Native American students' proficiency rates on state tests was conducted at the request of the Council of the Chief State School Officers. That Washington-based organization has a Native Education Network of 22 state education agencies that has a goal of annually increasing the performance of Native American students until it is on par with all other students.

While the study just released indicates the achievement gap between Native American students and all other students is narrowing, another federal study, the "National Indian Education Study 2007," indicated that achievement gap is growing, when measured by students' performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

In the National Indian Education Study 2007, for instance, the average score in reading for Native Americans in 8th grade was 14 percentage points behind that of other students in 2005 and 18 percentage points behind in 2007, which represented an increase of 4 percentage points in the gap. The achievement gap in math for students of the same grade was 16 percentage points in 2005 and 19 percentage points in 2007, an increase in the gap of six points.

What's particularly interesting about the newly released report is that it contains a short description of how Native American students are faring on state tests in each state that was examined in the study. For example, in California, from the 2003-04 to 2006-07 school year, the proficiency rate in reading for Native Americans rose 9.8 percentage points and the achievement gap between those students and other students narrowed by 0.6 percentage point.

A decrease of less than a percentage point in the achievement gap seems rather small, but yet it's something.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 12:45 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

The U.S. Department of Education is hosting a gallery of prize-winning graphic arts posters by high school seniors that illustrate the theme, "Life is Better with Art in It." The posters on display through July 13 are the winning selections from a national competition sponsored by the Art Institutes, a system of 42 art institutes in North America, and Americans for the Arts, for students pursuing careers in the visual arts.

The selection of posters was first featured at an event on Capitol Hill on June 24 that Christopher Powers, the assistant director of photography for EdWeek, and I attended. Ciara Borchard, 18, who graduated this spring from Granite Hills High School in Apple Valley, Calif., was the grand-prize winner for a literally eye-popping poster of a camera lens embedded within the pupil of an eye. She received $25,000 to help pay for tuition to study graphic design at the Art Institute of California-San Diego.

In accepting her award money, Borchard gave tribute to Mike Smith, a digital graphic-design teacher at her high school. "I can't tell you how many hours I spent in his classroom working," she said, noting how important it is for schools to have arts programs to support students who "think outside the box." Her school offered a robust arts program, she said.

This year, 900 students participated in the art contest, and the 12 winners received a total of $100,000 in scholarships to pay toward tuition at one of the member art institutes.

I found it to be a nice change of pace in one of my work days to get a sense for the artistic talents of some of the nation's youths. So if you're in the neighborhood of 400 Maryland Ave. SW, you might want to stop by to see the students' posters on display.

Photo credit: Christopher Powers/Education Week

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

UPDATE: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has signed legislation creating a career-focused diploma for high school graduates. Critics says it will lower standards (see below), though Jindal, echoing the views of other supporters, argues that it will help students who would "otherwise slip through the cracks." Expect these tensions between advocates of higher standards and those who call for alternative graduation options to play out around the country.

ORIGINAL POST: As states raise course-taking and graduation requirements, Louisiana officials have gone in a different direction. Whether it's a better or worse direction for students is a matter of opinion.

The state appears set to approve a new curriculum, which emphasizes career skills, as an option for high school students. Currently, high school students in Louisiana who pursue a traditional college-prep route must take four units of math, English, science, and social studies/social sciences, according to this story in the Baton Rouge Advocate. There’s also a less-demanding option. Under the new measure, which was approved by an overwhelming margin in both chambers of the legislature, some students would be allowed to graduate earning four units of English, with more freedom as to which courses they take, and four math credits, a few of which could be tied to career-oriented tracks. They would also be required to take three science credits, two of them tied to career options; three social studies credits; and seven other career-oriented credits, the story says. One especially controversial piece of the legislation would lower the passing requirements on the state's 8th grade English and math test, in allowing some students to pursue the new curricular option. Here's a recent description by the state Department of Education:

"Under present standards, students must score Approaching Basic and Basic in English and math on the state’s 8th grade LEAP test in order to advance to the 9th grade. However, if [the bill] clears the Senate, students who are 15 years old, or who will turn 15 during the upcoming school year will be allowed to progress to 9th grade and pursue the career diploma if they score Approaching Basic or higher on either the English or mathematics portion of the LEAP test. In fact, all students will have the option of pursuing the career diploma."

The measure, which Gov. Bobby Jindal says he will sign, was opposed by a number of school officials who contend that it will lower standards in the state. The critics include state schools Superintendent Paul Pastorek and the Council for a Better Louisiana, a nonprofit business-advocacy organization. The state's education department, in explaining its opposition, notes that the Louisiana students can already pursue numerous career tracks through the college-prep diploma. But lawmakers see the new path as necessary to prevent dropouts and give students a greater range of course options that will keep them interested in school.

“They don’t see any relevance in reading Beowulf and Chaucer and trigonometry,” state Sen. Bob Kostelka, a Republican sponsor, said of those students.

“It is ludicrous to say we are dumbing down education,” Rep. Jim Fannin, a Democrat and bill sponsor, told the Advocate.

How does this mesh with Louisiana, just this month, agreeing to join the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, in which states agree to refashion their standards, tests, and professional development to blend tech literacy, communication, and entrepreneurship into classes covering core academic content? How might Louisiana’s decision shape the thinking of lawmakers in other states who are worried about students failing to keep up with rising academic expectations? Perhaps the biggest question is this: If states are going to allow career tracks to graduation, what's to prevent students from slipping into courses that don't challenge them or prepare them for a two- or four-year college, or a demanding job?

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:02 AM | Permalink | 9 Comments | Recommend

State legislators had hoped that the Texas state board of education could move past some of the rancor and controversy that has come to define it, when they decided not to reappoint Don McLeroy as the chairman earlier this year. But tensions are rising once again amid speculation that Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, is thinking of appointing current board member Cynthia Dunbar, a Republican who has drawn criticism for her strong views on evolution and other topics, as McLeroy's replacement, according to the San Antonio Express-News.

Earlier this year, the Texas board approved state science standards that disappointed scientists by seeming to encourage criticism of evolution and invite discussion of non-scientific ideas in science classes. During that battle, which loosed a flood of media attention upon Texas, Dunbar argued that the standards should be written in a way that allowed for students and teachers to challenge certain aspects of the foundational scientific theory. No one is expecting the issue to go away anytime soon. In the coming months, the board is expected to begin reviewing science textbooks for approval, based on those standards.

Critics of Dunbar cite, among other things, last year's publication of a book authored by her, One Nation Under God. According to the Express-News' story, Dunbar's book states that the country’s founding fathers created “an emphatically Christian government” and that government should be guided by a “biblical litmus test." The story also reports that the book calls public education a “subtly deceptive tool of perversion.” For a general summary of the book's main themes, see Dunbar's personal Web site.

Dunbar tells the Express-News that she wrote the book as a way of communicating her views openly with her constituents, and that she believes she is being "boldly transparent." She also says that, if named chair, she would lead the board in a fair and even-handed way. Others quoted in the story, however, are asking Perry to consider alternatives to Dunbar, such as current Republican board members Gail Lowe or Bob Craig.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:16 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

When American leaders publicly fret over the challenges posed by international economic and educational competition, few of the United States’ foreign rivals inspire as much consternation as China, with its burgeoning free-market system and, of course, its enormous population—1.3 billion-citizens strong. But in truth, the international community has relatively few hard facts about how China's students measure up, because the Asian power has not had its scores released on major, high-profile international assessments, like PISA and TIMSS, as other nations have, including the United States.

But soon, a fuller picture of China could emerge, albeit incrementally.

Officials who run PISA, or the Program for International Student Assessment, expect at least one major Chinese jurisdiction, Shanghai, population 18 million, to have its test scores on that exam released in December of 2010, the next time country-by-country results on the exam are unveiled, said Andreas Schleicher, a top official with the assessment. Schleicher is the head of the indicators and analysis division of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, in Paris, which oversees PISA.

That would mean Shanghai's scores would come out as nation-by-nation results in math, science, and reading are unveiled. Schleicher, however, said it was too early to know if the Chinese municipality's scores would be released in all subjects, or just some of them. I caught up with Schleicher at a forum for U.S. business and state leaders on international education, held in Washington, where he made a presentation about PISA trends. (Education officials from a pair of top-performing countries, Finland and Singapore, also delivered remarks, which I wrote about this week.)

In addition to Shanghai, a number of Chinese provinces have had students assessed on PISA, though they haven’t released scores. Three provinces in China have so far completed the PISA 2006 assessment; three provinces from middle China and three provinces from western China are currently undergoing the process, adhering to standard OECD procedures and technical requirements, Schleicher said in a follow-up e-mail. Hong Kong and Macau, special administrative regions of China, have taken part on PISA and released scores; Hong Kong also takes part in, and does very well on, TIMSS.

Schleicher told me he did not believe Chinese authorities' were reluctant to release PISA results because of concerns about low performance; instead, he attributed their stance to concerns about the exam detracting from the attention schools and students place on the nation's internal, high-stakes tests, which determine high school and college admission. In fact, Schleicher predicted that the scores from Shanghai, and, if they’re eventually put forward, Chinese provinces, could prove impressive. "We will all be surprised when the Chinese results are released, by their high performance," Schleicher told me.

Obviously, you could argue that Shanghai is no more representative of China's overall education system than some American behemoth, like New York or Los Angeles, is of the broader U.S. system. Even so, I'll bet many followers of international tests—educators, economists, and the like—will be keen on any insights the PISA results can provide.

Photo: Sevans/Education Week-File

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 3:52 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

The Minneapolis-based McKnight Foundation has decided to start a grant program to help children in the Twin Cities learn to read by the end of 3rd grade, according to the Philanthropy News Digest and a press release from the foundation.

Often with foundations, as they decide to fund a new area, they stop funding in another area. And this is the case with the McKnight Foundation. The foundation plans to discontinue grants for fatherhood development, parenting skills building, and family economic success.

I'm aware of a number of foundations that fund adolescent literacy; I haven't had an opportunity yet in reporting on the reading beat to learn about those that have a track record of funding literacy in the early grades.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 12:38 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Kichoon Yang begins work this week as the new executive director of the 100,000-member National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, which holds significant sway over the math strategies used in American classrooms. He replaces Jim Rubillo, who last year announced his intention to retire from the post.

Yang comes to NCTM having most recently served as provost and professor at Northwest Missouri State University, positions he has held since 2005. Before that, he was dean of the College of Natural Sciences and professor of mathematics at the University of Northern Iowa from 2001 through 2004. He was also a program director in the Division of Mathematical Sciences at the National Science Foundation for three years. Earlier, he served for 12 years on the mathematics faculty at Arkansas State University.

The new exec director, in a statement, said he was both thrilled and "humbled by the opportunity, knowing how important mathematics education is to the future of our nation."

NCTM, based in Reston, Va., publishes voluntary national standards that have shaped instruction and curriculum around the country. In 2006, the organization released "Curriculum Focal Points," a document that spells out priorities for teaching math in elementary and middle school. The organization is planning to release a similar document for upper grades later this year. NCTM had voiced concerns about not being included in ongoing discussions about creating common standards in reading and math, but the group's president, Hank Kepner, is one of several people who will serve on an advisory panel for the group, as this EdWeek story explains.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:40 AM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Joanne Jacobs raises a good question while highlighting a complaint from a parent that he can't access the full curriculum of Baltimore County Public Schools online.

"Do other school districts make it hard for parents to access the curriculum?" Joanne asks.

See the comments she's gotten so far. They're interesting.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 3:21 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The list of individuals who will be drafting the multi-state “Common Core” standards in reading and math was unveiled today. Reaction from the various education communities and factions is sure to follow.

Actually, there are separate categories of experts and insiders involved. First of all, there are two main “Work Groups,” which will write the standards in math and English; their members include several representatives of Achieve, the College Board, and the ACT, and for now, they’re focused on setting “college and career readiness” standards. You can read the list on the a Web site set up by the two organizations leading this process, the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, at www.corestandards.org. The goal is to have a set of college and career-readiness standards completed and ready for comment during in July. The effort will then shift to broader K-12 standards; more names will be added to the Work Groups at that point, with the goal of completing those standards by December.

Two separate groups of experts, known as “Feedback Groups,” have also been established to “provide information backed by research to inform the standards development process” and offer opinion on the draft documents. The NGA and CCSSO note that these groups’ role will be “advisory” and not a “decision-making” one.

I’ve only given the Work Group and Feedback Group lists a cursory glance so far. Regular readers of EdWeek will recognize plenty of the names, in both math and language arts. A couple inclusions worth noting: the list of Feedback Group members —the advisory panels—includes representative of two big organizations that had voiced worries about being shut out the process. Hank Kepner, the president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, is on the math Feedback Group; Carol Jago, the president-elect of the National Council of Teachers of English, is on the English-language arts Feedback panel. A couple other members of the math advisory panel: Hyman Bass, from the University of Michigan; Roger Howe of Yale U; Robert Linn, of the U of Colorado; Jim Milgram of Stanford; and William Schmidt of Michigan State, who many of you know for his work on international standards. In language arts, Checker Finn of the Fordham Institute; Michael Kamil of Stanford; and Tim Shanahan of the University of Illinois at Chicago are represented. Among many others.

Lots of references to "feedback" here. Here’s your chance to offer up your own, once you’ve given the names a look.

UPDATE: My esteemed colleague Michele McNeil offers a more complete look at The List and all that it entails.

UPDATE (2): I've corrected this post to say that Carol Jago is the president-elect of NCTE. Kylene Beers is the current president until November.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 11:28 AM | Permalink | 10 Comments | Recommend

EdWeek is publishing a potpourri of stories on reading, chosen by its staff. The collection is part of our "Spotlight" series, which covers various education topics. This one focuses on some of the major questions facing reading educators and experts today, including early literacy, the role of educational TV in reading instruction, the pitfalls of reading research, reading software and tips for engaging reluctant readers. It's six articles and two commentaries, in PDF form. Have a look.

Posted by Sean Cavanagh at 9:40 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend