Tag Archive for ‘achievement gap’ at The Core Knowledge Blog

Tag Archive for 'achievement gap'

Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad…

Published by Robert Pondiscio on September 30, 2008 in Assessment and Testing and Education Theory. 2 Comments

In a two-week trial of a cash incentive program for students at a Washington middle school attendance and punctuality have improved. Grades have not. The Washington Post’s Bill Turque takes a look inside a school that is aggressively implementing the controversial concept.

The Northwest Washington school’s 307 students are among the roughly 3,000 middle-schoolers eligible to earn as much as $100 every two weeks — to a maximum of $1,500 for the academic year — for showing up on time, not disrupting class and getting high grades. Students have been buzzing about the pilot program, called Capital Gains, since they learned in late August that their school had been selected.

The program, as you might have guessed, is the brainchild of incentives guru Roland Fryer. Every two weeks, students are evaluated on 10-point scales according to a series of performance indicators. “All schools in the program are required to review behavior and attendance, which means showing up on time for every class,” the Post reports. “Individual schools can choose other criteria, including grades, homework, class participation and adherence to the dress code. Each point is worth $2.”

For the first two pay periods, beginning Oct. 17, checks will be distributed by school staff. Later, they will be deposited directly into student-owned savings accounts at SunTrust Bank. Students will be able to access the money with or without their parents, and no one can withdraw money without the child, officials said.

Last week, it was announced the Fryer will lead a new education research center at Harvard University, which will monitor efforts to close achievement gaps. Incentive programs, not surprisingly, will be the first idea under Fryer’s shiny new $44 million microscope.

Update: I’m still agnostic on incentives, but a reader at Eduwonkette nicely summarizes the ick factor that many educators feel about it. “The soul-crushing aspect of Fryer’s theoretical framework is that it lets the curriculum and the teacher and the school entirely off the hook,” observes Citizen X. ”It’s a much more cynical view on students living in poverty. They don’t care, they are only motivated by material objects that they don’t have, they have to be bribed into “learning” (or at least learning to get a better score on a bubble sheet).”

A Made Up Mind

Published by Robert Pondiscio on September 29, 2008 in Education Theory. 2 Comments

Say this about Charles Murray: he’s very clear about where he stands. Writing in the Times of London — and echoing the themes of his most recent book, Real Education: Four Simple Truths for Bringing America’s Schools Back to Reality — Murray rejects the idea that all children can succeed on the academic track if schools do their job. “There are both genetic and moral reasons that children of the professional classes come out on top,” he says. Having limited academic talent is no more remarkable than being limited in art, music or sports, writes Murray, who describes the belief that every child can learn at a high level as nothing more than “educational romanticism.”

And yet to say such things in public is to invite shock and ridicule. The educational romantics will pummel you with four objections: 1) when children are below average we can raise their ability; 2) the schools are so bad that children at all levels of ability can learn much more than they are learning now; 3) the rising test scores of the past decade prove that big improvements are possible; and 4) there’s no reason why the high educational achievement of children of the professional classes cannot be achieved by all classes.

“The bottom line: at best, we can move children from far below average intellectually to somewhat less below average,” Murray concludes emphatically. “No one claims that any project anywhere has proved anything more than that.”

Karin Chenoweth had her way with Murray a few weeks ago on the Britannica Blog, noting that “Murray is ignoring the fact that good instruction makes a huge difference in what kids can and do learn.”

Winning Hearts and Minds

Published by Robert Pondiscio on September 17, 2008 in Educational Policy and Parents. 1 Comment

If you’re over 40 years old and grew up in the U.S., you probably vividly remember a tsunami of roadside litter along American highways. It was fairly common as recently as 30 or 40 years ago for people to simply pitch trash from moving cars. There was little societal pressure to do otherwise. Then along came this guy:

The “Crying Indian“ did as much as anyone to change Americans’ attitudes about littering, and their behavior. Some have even credited this public service campaign from Keep America Beautiful, which debuted on Earth Day in 1971, with launching the modern environmental movement.

I thought of the Crying Indian while reading this op-ed in the Washington Times. Childrens’ book author Jennifer Bryan reminds us yet again of the benefit of reading to young children. “In an era of high-stakes testing and education reforms and revolutions, research has repeatedly proved that one simple parenting technique is among the most effective,” she writes. “Children who are read aloud to by parents get a head start in language and literacy skills and go to school better prepared.”

Right. We know this. But how many low-income Americans–the group least likely to read to their children–are going to hear about it in earnest op-eds? If I’m Obama or McCain, I put a massive public service campaign touting the benefits of reading to young children at the top of my education “to do” list. Done well, it might be the single most effective thing we can do right now, today, to close the achievement gap.

Effective public service messages have a long history of changing behavior, and burning the ideas behind them into the public mind. Buckle Up. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Just say no. Give a hoot, don’t pollute. Only you can prevent forest fires. This is your brain on drugs. Any questions?

Aim it at parents, air it where they’re most likely to see it, and plaster it on inner city billboards. Make it direct and hard-hitting, not warm and fuzzy.

“It’s ten o’clock. Have you read to your child today?”

Detroit Closes Achievement Gap!

Published by Robert Pondiscio on July 29, 2008 in Research and Reports. 1 Comment

Michigan has the nation’s lowest graduation rate for black male students, while Detroit has the second-lowest rate for big-city school districts, according to a report from the Schott Foundation for Public Education. Other findings:

The state of New York has 3 of the 10 districts (NYC, Rochester and Buffalo) with the lowest graduation rates for Black males.
Indianapolis ranks dead last, graduating only 19% of its black male students.
The one million black male students enrolled in the New York, Florida, and Georgia public schools are twice as likely not to graduate with their class.
Illinois and Wisconsin have nearly 40-point gaps between “how effectively they educate their Black and White non-Hispanic male students.”

While Detroit graduates a mere 20% of its black male students, that’s actually higher than the 17% of white male students who graduate.

“Carlos Is Asian At Heart”

Published by Robert Pondiscio on July 18, 2008 in Education News. 0 Comments

Friends of Carlos Garcia, a Latino student at with a knack for math at Lincoln High School tell him, ‘You’re more Asian than Hispanic.’” An Asian student, Julie Loc concurs. “I think Carlos is Asian at heart,” she says. And what do students at this Los Angeles high school say about their Asian peers who struggle in school? “I had an Asian friend, but he didn’t necessarily get that great a grades. We used to say, ‘He’s Mexican at heart.’”

The Los Angeles Times convened this frank discussion about race and achievement for a front page story.

Both the neighborhood and student body are about 15% Asian. And yet Asians make up 50% of students taking Advanced Placement classes. Staffers can’t remember the last time a Latino was valedictorian….According to a study of census data, 84% of the Asian and Latino families in the neighborhoods around Lincoln High have median annual household incomes below $50,000. And yet the Science Bowl team is 90% Asian, as is the Academic Decathlon team.

Asian parents are more likely to pressure their children to excel academically, the students agreed. The students talked not just about parental expectations, notes the Times, but also about those of peers. One girl drew laughter when she said of other students, “They expect me to be smart. Even if, like, I do everything wrong on purpose, they still copy off of me — as if I’m right just because I’m Asian.”

Teachers at Lincoln, meanwhile, detect a self-defeating attitude among Hispanic students. “I think the thing I always hear from the Latino kids is, ‘Oh, well, Miss, he’s Asian, she’s Asian. Of course they do well,’ ” said Alli Lauer, who teaches English. “It’s frustrating to hear them do it to each other.”

You Say “Achievement Gap” Like It’s a Bad Thing

Published by Robert Pondiscio on July 15, 2008 in Educational Policy. 2 Comments

We all have our pet causes and issues in education that get us carbonated. At the top of my list is the fate of potentially high-achieving kids, low-income kids who are left to languish in lowest common denominator schools. Thus I’m happy to see the estimable Jay Mathews devote his Wash Post column to the recent Fordham report, High-Achieving Students in the Era of No Child Left Behind. I’ll think twice, however, about casually tossing around the phrase “achievement gap” in the future, thanks to Uncle Jay.

Why don’t I like talking about the achievement gap? Because we use the term in a way that suggests narrowing the gap is always a good thing, when that is not so. Here are some ways the gap could narrow: Low-income scores improve but high-incomes scores don’t; low-income scores don’t change but high-income scores drop; low-income scores drop but high-income scores drop even more. In each of those cases of gap-narrowing, something bad is happening.

Mathews posits that concerns about the income gap have crept into the way we talk about academic achievement. “I can understand distaste for people who build 50-room mansions with gold bathroom fixtures. But can anyone learn too much?” he asks. “Wisdom tends to help everyone who comes in contact with it. Ski chalets in Aspen are less useful to those of us who can’t afford them.”

Labels, of course, tend to stick once they’ve taken root, and it’s unlikely “achievement gap” will disappear. Low-income underachievement, perhaps?

Toch Finds the Sensible Center

Published by Robert Pondiscio on June 18, 2008 in Educational Policy. 1 Comment

The winner for the best, most reasonable take on the reform vs. “status quo” contretemps goes to Thomas Toch of Education Sector, who sees both right and wrong in the “Bigger, Bolder” camp as well as the Klein-Sharpton, “Education Equity” group:

Yes, we should find ways to reduce the effects of poverty on students. Doing so will allow them to achieve at higher levels. But no, we shouldn’t assume that schools can’t make a difference on their own. Yes, we need to hold schools and teachers accountable for their performance. Too many of them simply haven’t embraced high expectations on their own. But no, we shouldn’t pretend that poverty has no impact on students. No accountability system can work unless it is credible, and NCLB, as currently crafted, is not.

I struggled to find the same middle ground as Toch, but he said it far better than I did. And attention should be paid to his wise lead, noting “extremes in school-reform debates always seem to conspire against the middle, making change a lot tougher to achieve. ”

If Toch turns this into a compromise manifesto, I’d happily sign it.

Five Great Teachers

Published by Robert Pondiscio on June 16, 2008 in Research and Reports and Teaching. 0 Comments

Give a struggling student five great teachers in a row, and they’ll close the achievement gap all by themselves, right? The conventional wisdom says yes. A new study says maybe not. Eduwonkette has the goods.

It’s Gettin’ Hot in Here

Published by Robert Pondiscio on June 13, 2008 in Educational Policy. 0 Comments

Eduwonkette accepts David Brooks’ apology on behalf of Julian Bond, T. Berry Brazelton, Debbie Meier, Ted Sizer and a host of other “who have dedicated their lives to improving the lives of poor and minority children” and counts herself among (in Brooks’ unfortunate phrase) the status quo–those who signed on with the Economic Policy Institute’s “Broader, Bolder Approach to Education”

I really do hate my permanent residence in the reality-based community, but at least half of the achievement gap that exists between black and white students - the fact that the average black 12th grader performs at about the 16th percentile of the white distribution (a gap of about 1 standard deviation)- cannot possibly be attributed to the K-12 schools.

Eduwonkette finds an unlikely ally at Flypaper, where Checker Finn is naming names, asking “what the likes of Joel Klein, Arne Duncan, Michelle Rhee, Kati Haycock, Joe Williams, and Andy Rotherham think they’re doing” by affiliating themselves with Al Sharpton, even while he agrees with many of principles espoused by the “National Education Reform Coalition.” Alexander Russo, spoiling for a fight as always, wonders why the education blogs “have spent so much time debating two ultimately unimportant documents put out by different education coalitions.”

Sorry, A-Rus, but this matters a lot. Sane, executable policy can only spring from a pragmatic consensus on expectations and accountability. Personally, I’m not ready to stand with either side because while I think the “Broader, Bolder” camp has nothing to apologize for in terms of accountability (making closing the achievement gap your life’s work is a funny preoccupation for the accountability-averse, no?) there would be value in a clear, unambiguous statement that accountability matters. Likewise the Klein-Sharpton gang are certainly right when they say that schools to “are doing what we have designed them to do over time” by protecting the interests of adults over children. But it’s simply wrong to suggest that if a child fails in school, someone in the school has dropped the ball.

One piece of the EEP statement of principles particularly irritates me. On the one hand, there’s a call to “create accountability for educational success at every level – at the system and school level, for teachers and principals, and for central office administrators.” A few lines later comes the “call on parents and students to demand more from their schools, but also to demand more from themselves.”

Aye, there’s the rub. I and others have spent years making exactly that call to parents and students. Sometimes the call is answered. Often it is not. Sometimes it can’t be. Want to call me unaccountable?

Them’s fightin’ words.

Don’t miss: Teacher John Thompson, who frequently graces this blog with his thoughtful, eloquent comments, has a great one on Eduwonk. Click here and scroll down.

A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education

Published by Robert Pondiscio on June 10, 2008 in Education Practice, Education Theory and Opinion. 1 Comment

The Edusphere goes for a We Are The World moment, with full page ads in the New York Times and Washington Post today in support of an initiative called A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education. Led by Helen F. Ladd of Duke University, NYU’s Pedro Noguera, and Tom Payzant of Harvard, and with signatories from Diane Ravitch to Richard Rothstein, the ads argue that schools can’t go it alone in closing the achievement gap, and call for:

Continued school improvement efforts.
Developmentally appropriate and high-quality early childhood, pre-school and kindergarten care and education.
Routine pediatric, dental, hearing and vision care for all infants, toddlers and schoolchildren.
Improving the quality of students’ out-of-school time.

Blogosphere reaction breaks along expected lines. Eduwonk Andy Rotherham takes issue with “the conspicuous soft-pedaling of a focus on results and the explicit rejection that perhaps schools are even a substantial part of the educational problem. At Fordham, Mike Petrilli says “amen” to the homilies but likewise complains “it’s REALLY squishy on school accountability.” Fellow Fordhamite Liam Julian, having none of it, wonders why there’s no call to provide “housing for every family and daisies for all schoolchildren.” Eduwonkette, on the other hand offers “big props” and provides a link for others to sign the statement. Joanne Jacobs plays it down the middle, but wants to see a “privately funded campaign that promotes good parenting: how to help your child develop language and reading skills and how to teach good behavior, for example.”

I’m going to avoid the Blogging 101 temptation to cop an attitude, quip and move on. This is an interesting discussion — it’s the discussion — and I’ll do my small part to encourage a low-temperature, thoughtful discussion, not knee-jerk reactions. The plain truth is, I could argue much of this round or flat, especially the accountability piece, the umbrella which covers everything else.

Continue reading ‘A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education’