The Limits and Possibilities of Urban School Improvement: Lessons from the Inner City Robert F. and...

download The Limits and Possibilities of Urban School Improvement: Lessons from the Inner City Robert F. and Augusta Finkelstein Memorial Lecture October 20, 2009.

If you can't read please download the document

Transcript of The Limits and Possibilities of Urban School Improvement: Lessons from the Inner City Robert F. and...

  • Slide 1
  • The Limits and Possibilities of Urban School Improvement: Lessons from the Inner City Robert F. and Augusta Finkelstein Memorial Lecture October 20, 2009 Alan R. Sadovnik Rutgers University-Newark
  • Slide 2
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Agenda Introduction Data on Achievement Gaps: Social Class, Race and Gender Data on U.S. Cities Data on Newark and New Jersey Data on Long Island Sociological Explanations for the Achievement Gap Reform Approaches School level Societal and Community levels Types of Reforms and Effects Governance Reforms School Finance Accountability under NCLB School Choice Progressive v. Traditional Approaches Community-Based Limits and Possibilities of Reform Conclusion
  • Slide 3
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Achievement GapMaking Progress by Race 1996 NAEP 4 th Grade Math2007 NAEP 4 th Grade Math NAEP Long-Term Trends, NCES (2004)
  • Slide 4
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Achievement GapMaking Progress SES
  • Slide 5
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach High School Gap has widened 17 Year Olds--NAEP Reading 17 Year Olds--NAEP Math NAEP Long-Term Trends, NCES (2004)
  • Slide 6
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach African American, Latino & Native American high school graduates are less likely to have been enrolled in a full college prep track percent in college prep Source: Jay P. Greene, Public High School Graduation and College Readiness Rates in the United States, Manhattan Institute, September 2003. Table 8. 2001 high school graduates with college-prep curriculum. Full College Prep track is defined as at least: 4 years of English, 3 years of math, 2 years of natural science, 2 years of social science and 2 years of foreign language
  • Slide 7
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach African American and Latino 17 Year-Olds Do Math at Same Levels As White 13 Year-Olds Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP
  • Slide 8
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach African American and Latino 17 Year-Olds Read at Same Levels As White 13 Year- Olds Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP
  • Slide 9
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Best available estimates of national four-year graduation rates Class of 2006 Source: Ed Trust analysis of enrollment data from the National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data using the Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR) methodology. For more information on the AFGR methodology, see National Center for Education Statistics, Users Guide to Computing High School Graduation Rates, Volume 2, August 2006.
  • Slide 10
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Differences in Graduation Rate by Race
  • Slide 11
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Reading Achievement Gap Males v. Females Age 17
  • Slide 12
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Math Achievement Gap Males v. Females Age 17
  • Slide 13
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Low-Income African American Scale Scores Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
  • Slide 14
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Low-Income Latino Scale Scores Note: Latino scores are not available for Atlanta. Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
  • Slide 15
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Low-Income African American Scale Scores Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
  • Slide 16
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Low-Income Latino Scale Scores Note: Latino scores are not available for Atlanta. Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
  • Slide 17
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Demographic DifferencesNewark vs. NJ
  • Slide 18
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Average Property Value Per Student by District Grouping 1998-2003
  • Slide 19
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Comparing Demographics of Students in New Jersey
  • Slide 20
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Child and Youth Well-Being Indicators: Newark and New Jersey, 1997-2002
  • Slide 21
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Grade 11 (HSPA) Language Arts Literacy 2001-02 to 2002-03
  • Slide 22
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Grade 11 (HSPA) Math 2001-02 to 2002-03
  • Slide 23
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Cumulative Promotion Index by District Grouping Graduation by Traditional Grade 11 Exam by District Grouping 1994-95 to 2002-03
  • Slide 24
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Categories of School Districts According to Demographic Stability and Change Nassau and Suffolk County, Long Island 1998-2007 (Wells, 2009) Table 1. Categories of School Districts According to Demographic Stability and Change Nassau and Suffolk County, Long Island 19982007 Category Stability/ Change over time Race SES (Free Lunch) Change over 8 Years Number of LI Districts by Category 1 Stable, Predominantly Black and Latino with Concentrated Poverty > 88% Black or Latino > 30% receiving free lunch < 10% change in Black and Latino Nassau: 5 Suffolk: 3 Total LI: 8 2 Stable, Predominantly White and/or Asian with Low Poverty and thus Concentrated Privilege > 75% White and/or Asian < 8% receiving free lunch < 10% change in White and/or Asian Nassau: 34 Suffolk: 49 Total LI: 83 3 Stable, Racially and Socioeconomically Diverse 10% change in White Nassau: 13 Suffolk: 12 Total LI: 25
  • Slide 25
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Inequalities on Long Island: Contiguous Districts
  • Slide 26
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Inequalities on Long Island: North Shore vs. Urban Type Suburban Districts
  • Slide 27
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Sociological Explanations for the Gap Functionalism: Meritocracy and Reduction of Inequalities Conflict Theory: Reproduction of Inequalities Within School Factors: Funding Curriculum and Pedagogy Teacher and Principal Quality Tracking Outside School Factors: Effects of Poverty (i.e. Health, Housing) Culture Family Peer Groups Neighborhood
  • Slide 28
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach School Based Reforms: Education Equality Project Advocacy group focused on closing the achievement gap through grass-roots organizing efforts Mission is to: Ensure an effective teacher in every classroom Empower parents Create accountability Make decisions around what is best for students Encourage parents and students to demand more from schools, as well as from themselves Advocate against those that have preserved inequity Joel Klein & Al Sharpton
  • Slide 29
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Societal and Community Based Reforms Addressing the Effects of Poverty A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education 1) Continue to focus on school improvement efforts 2) Increase and improve quality of early childhood programs 3) Increase investment in health services 4) Understand how students spend their time outside of school From: http://www.boldapproach.org/statement.html Jean Anyon & Richard Rothstein Pedro Noguera & Helen Ladd
  • Slide 30
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Types of Reform and Effects Governance Reform School Finance Accountability School Choice Progressive vs. Traditional Approaches Community-based Reforms
  • Slide 31
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Types of Reform and EffectsGovernance Reform State Takeovers 29 states have legislative power NCLB gave states authority to takeover school districts that failed to meet state standards Improve education systems by increasing level of local accountability (see Anderson & Lewis, 1997; Bushweller, 1998) Mayoral Control Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Hartford, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C. Detroit Mixed results on success (see Wong, et al., 2007; Viteritti, 2009; Kirst, 2002; Chambers, 2006)
  • Slide 32
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Types of Reform and EffectsSchool Finance NEW JERSEY Thorough and Efficient Education Robinson v. Cahill (1970- 1976) Abbott v. Burke (1979- 2009) Bacon v. Davy (2003) Abbott v. Burke XX, (SFRA) (2009) NEW YORK Sound and Basic Education Campaign for Fiscal Equity v. NY State (1993-2006)
  • Slide 33
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach National Inequities in State and Local Revenue Per Student Gap High Poverty vs. Low Poverty Districts $773 per student High Minority vs. Low Minority Districts $1,122 per student Education Trust analyses based on U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Census Bureau data for the 2005-06 school year.
  • Slide 34
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach
  • Slide 35
  • Types of Reform and Effects Accountability under NCLB SCHOOL QUALITY NCLB neglects the concentrations of poverty in American schools From: Can Separate Be Equal? The Overlooked Flaw at the Center of No Child Left Behind Richard D. Kahlenberg, The Century Foundation, 4/23/2004Can Separate Be Equal? The Overlooked Flaw at the Center of No Child Left Behind
  • Slide 36
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach TEACHER QUALITY Students at High-Minority Schools More Likely to Be Taught by Novice Teachers Analysis of 2003-2004 Schools and Staffing Survey data by Richard Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania (2007) Note: Novice teachers are those with three years or fewer experience.. High-minority 75% students non-white. Low-minority 10% students non-white.
  • Slide 37
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Poor and Minority Students Get More Inexperienced* Teachers Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Monitoring Quality: An Indicators Report, December 2000. *Teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience. High poverty Low poverty High minority Low minority Note: High poverty refers to the top quartile of schools with students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low poverty- bottom quartile of schools with students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. High minority-top quartile; those schools with the highest concentrations of minority students. Low minority-bottom quartile of schools with the lowest concentrations of minority students
  • Slide 38
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Components of NCLB Require states and districts to report school-by-school data on student test performance, broken out by whether the student is African-American, Hispanic, Native-American, Asian American, White non-Hispanic, Special Education, Limited English Proficiency (LEP), and/or Low Income. States must set adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for each school. In order to meet AYP, not only must each subgroup make progress in each year in each grade in each subject but there must be 95% participation of each subgroup as well. The increments in AYP should be arranged so that 100% of students reach proficiency by 2014.
  • Slide 39
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Components of NCLB (cont.) Annual testing of students in Grades 3-8 in reading and math plus at least one test in Grades 10-12; Science testing to follow. Graduation rates are used as a secondary indicator for high schools. Schools that dont meet AYP for two years are labeled In Need of Improvement (INOI). Initially, this means that schools must offer students the option to go to another public school and/or to receive federally funded tutoring. Monies would also be made available for teacher professional development. In the absence of meeting future AYP targets, schools would be subject to restructuring (firing teachers and principal; state takeover; private company takeover; etc.).
  • Slide 40
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Components of NCLB (cont) Schools must have highly qualified teachers for the core academic subjects (English, reading or language arts, math, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history and geography) by 2005-6.
  • Slide 41
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Debate: Supporters Positions Advocates, including progressive organizations such as the Education Trust, argue that its annual testing and disaggregation requirements will force states to ensure that low-income students who continue to lag far behind higher income students will meet the same standards, and thus reduce the achievement gap by 2014. Conservative groups argue that the emphasis on testing will require schools to improve teaching and learning or face eventual closure or restructuring. Continuation of standards movement necessary to improve international competitiveness of U.S. schools.
  • Slide 42
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Debate: Critics Positions The law does not provide sufficient funds to improve failing schools and, more importantly, is heavy on punishment and light on building school capacity. Fails to acknowledge the social and economic foundation of unequal schooling and is a backdoor to the implementation of publicly funded school vouchers and the dismantling of public education in the U.S. Unfair to students with disabilities and Second Language Learners.
  • Slide 43
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach The Debate: Critics Positions (cont.) No uniform national measure of proficiency: state comparisons impossible; states can hide low standards. Evaluates schools rather than students: schools with high mobility rates are punished for such a high turnover. Assessments are based on a zero-sum definition of proficiency rather than a value added one: schools whose students show significant progress but are still below proficiency are labeled as failures rather than rewarded for their progress.
  • Slide 44
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Positive Effects of the Law Has put spotlight on the inequalities of educational achievement like no other law, due to diasaggregation of results. Resulted in attention to persistently failing schools. Attention is being paid to teacher quality in a more systematic manner.
  • Slide 45
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Negative Effects of the Law Over-emphasis on standardized tests, resulting in teaching to the test. Use of mean proficiency adversely affects schools with low-income and minority students. Punishes schools for problems outside of their control, such as poverty, health problems, etc. Over-emphasis on literacy and mathematics, has resulted in ignoring other subjects such as science, social studies, music and art. Outcomes based view of education has resulted in ignoring the social and developmental functions of schooling.
  • Slide 46
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Types of Reform and Effects -- School Choice Charter Schools Charter school performance mirrors public schools in Newark (Barr, Sadovnik, et al., 2006) NYC charter school students have increased achievement over students who were not accepted into charter school (Hoxby, et al., 2009) Vouchers Cleveland voucher program legalized by US Supreme Court in 2002 18 school choice programs in 10 states and D.C.
  • Slide 47
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Types of Reform and Effects Progressive Approaches (Based on John Dewey) Central Park East Secondary School (CPESS) (New York, NY) Under Deborah Meier: Progressive small school, 90% Black/Latino; 80% Free/Reduced Lunch; Graduation Rate 95+% College attendance Rate: 95+% Closed and reorganized in 2002; Non-progressive Graduation rate: 40%
  • Slide 48
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Traditional Approaches (Based on Delpit, 1995) Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) 82 college-preparatory schools in 19 states and D.C. College matriculation rate above 80%; student population 90% Black/Latino; more than 80% Free/Reduced lunch North Star Academy (Newark, NJ): Uncommon Schools Charter school serves over 900 students in grades K-2 and 5-12 11month, extended day schedule 95% College matriculation; 100% Black/Latino; 90% Free/Reduced Lunch
  • Slide 49
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Types of Reform and Effects Community-Based Reforms Full service and community schools Dryfoos (1994) Harlem Childrens Zone Project Newark Broader Bolder Approach
  • Slide 50
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Possibilities: Effective School and District Level Reform Put all childrennot just somein a demanding high school core curriculum. Teachers mattermake sure they are high quality and supported. Focus on improving low-performing schools. Motivate more students and prepare more students for higher education. Principals matterfocus on effective leadership. Focus on instructional time. Source: www.edtrust.orgwww.edtrust.org
  • Slide 51
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Osmond A. Church School New York, New York
  • Slide 52
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Osmond A. Church School, P.S./M.S. 124 Queens, NY 924 students in grades PK-7* 40% African American 33% Asian 23% Latino 97% Low-Income Source: New York Department of Education, https://www.nystart.gov/publicweb/ * In 2005-06
  • Slide 53
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Source: New York Department of Education, https://www.nystart.gov/publicweb/ Osmond A. Church School Osmond A. Church School High Achievement for All Grade 3 ELA (2006)
  • Slide 54
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Source: New York Department of Education, https://www.nystart.gov/publicweb/ Osmond A. Church School Osmond A. Church School High Achievement for All Grade 6 Math (2006)
  • Slide 55
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High Elmont, New York 1,945 students in grades 7-12 77% African American 27% Low-Income Source: NY Department of Education
  • Slide 56
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Elmont: Out-Performing the State Secondary-Level English (2006) Source: New York Department of Education, https://www.nystart.gov/publicweb/
  • Slide 57
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Improvement and High Performance at Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High Source: NY Department of Education
  • Slide 58
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach More Students Graduate at Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High Source: NY Department of Education
  • Slide 59
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Limits of Urban School Reform Problems associated with replication and scaling up for both district and charter schools Failure to address outside school factors (community, peer group, health and environmental factors) Failure to address economic factors (labor force and wage issues) Often perpetuates a simplistic No Excuses ideology of school improvement
  • Slide 60
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Based upon the evidence, successful urban school improvement will require Systemic reform aimed at both the school, student, community, economic and societal levels, which includes: At the school level: Equity school finance reform Equitable distribution of high quality teachers and principals School level reforms based on research based findings on effective schools and comprehensive school reform District level reform best on research based best practices of successful urban districts (i.e Charlotte and Austin)
  • Slide 61
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach At the student, community, economic and societal levels Address student and family health, environmental, and social- psychological needs Implement research based best practices family involvement programs (i.e. Comer; Epstein) Implement research based best practices gang prevention programs Link school reform to urban community and economic development Develop urban revitalization programs Promote school level economic integration through affordable housing programs and magnet school choice programs Address pernicious effects of poverty through urban social and economic policies
  • Slide 62
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Conclusion More sociological research is needed to inform urban educational policy. The focus on reducing the achievement gap in NCLB should not be eliminated. Emphasis on equal opportunities to learn need to be included in all reforms. Emphasis on building capacity of schools and districts in need of improvement must be included in all reforms. Emphasis on factors outside schools, including poverty, community and neighborhood variables, need to be included in all reforms. Sadovnik, A.R., ODay, J; Borhnstedt, G., & Borman, K. (eds.) (2008). No Child Left Behind and the Reduction of the Achievement Gap: Sociological Perspectives on Federal Educational Policy. New York: Routledge.
  • Slide 63
  • Jersey Roots, Global Reach Alan R.Sadovnik, Professor of Education, Sociology and Public Affairs Co-director, Institute on Education Law and Policy and Newark Schools Research Collaborative Rutgers University-Newark [email protected]