Tag Archive for ‘NAEP’ at The Core Knowledge Blog

Tag Archive for 'NAEP'

A Nation at Risk at 25

Published by E. D. Hirsch, Jr. on April 22, 2008 in Educational Policy. 0 Comments

The following commentary appears in the current issue of Education Week.

In American educational history, A Nation at Risk is significant as a very dramatic official recognition in the 1980s that our schools were declining in effectiveness not only in relation to schools of other nations, but also in relation to our own results in earlier decades. In the 25 years since the report was issued, energetic reform efforts have been put forth, to small overall effect. The best single gauge of overall national school effectiveness—the National Assessment of Educational Progress reading test of 12th graders—has remained flat, and has even declined slightly. This persistent lack of significant improvement is owing to the unwavering persistence of the very ideas that caused the decline in the first place—the repudiation of a definite academic curriculum in the early grades by the child-centered movement of the early 20th century. Given the continued content vagueness of state standards in early grades, especially in language arts, that underlying condition has not much changed. There is still no definite, coherent academic curriculum in the early grades. That is the principal source of the low academic achievement of our high school students.

The elementary grades are much more important than is apparently credited by philanthropies like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which has recently been giving many millions to high school reform—with negligible results per dollar. For many years, the philanthropic and policy worlds have placed a lot of emphasis on the two ends of precollegiate education—high school and preschool. They are right about preschool—but not about high school. The general knowledge and vocabulary required for effective learning at the high school level are the fruits of a long process. The way to reform high school is to prepare students effectively in the elementary years to thrive there. If, in recent decades, high school has become a place where students are offered a smorgasbord of watered-down subjects, that is because watered-down subjects are all that our ill-educated students are now prepared to understand.

Philanthropies cannot be altogether blamed. In their emphasis on high school, they have followed the lead of A Nation at Risk,which was overwhelmingly concerned with high school. Its assumption was that the elementary years are foundational, and should be spent on the enabling skills of reading, writing, and reckoning. The authors therefore conceived the truly decisive arena for educational improvement to be grades 9-12, where there had been a severe decline in verbal and math scores. Indeed, for most of its length, A Nation at Risk ignored the first eight grades of schooling. Then, in its last pages, the report finally alluded to the early curriculum as follows:

The curriculum in the crucial eight grades leading to the high school years should be specifically designed to provide a sound base for study in those and later years in such areas as English language development and writing, computational and problem-solving skills, science, social studies, foreign language, and the arts. These years should foster an enthusiasm for learning and the development of the individual’s gifts and talents. (Page 72)

Continue reading ‘A Nation at Risk at 25′

Coming Attractions?

Published by Robert Pondiscio on April 10, 2008 in Education Leadership. 0 Comments

If you want a preview of an Obama presidency look to his friend, Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick, says the Weekly Standard. The magazine is a conservative organ, so it’s no surprise that authors Charles Chieppo and Jim Stergios of the Pioneer Institute, a Boston think tank, have the long knives out for Obama. Still their take on Patrick’s education moves are noteworthy.

In 2005 the Bay State was the first to place at the top of all four categories of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, attributable to the 1993 Massachusetts Education Reform Act and its hallmark standards, accountability and school choice provisions—and $40 billion dollars of incremental spending on education.

“But the teachers’ unions maintain a deep antipathy to the reforms and to anything that encourages charter schools,” write Chieppo and Stergios. “The unions pumped $3 million into Patrick’s campaign, and the governor called education his ’singular pursuit.’ What he is pursuing is the systematic dismantling of the successful 1993 reforms.” Joe Williams of Democrats for Education Reform said much the same in an op-ed in the Boston Globe in January; he rates an “I told you so” for the piece.

“His first budget eliminated the state’s independent education accountability office,” note the Standard. “Then he used his first two picks for the Board of Education to demolish standards and choice: choosing anti-testing zealot Ruth Kaplan and charter school opponent Paul Reville–whom he also made chairman of the nine-member board.”

The article is downright weak on connecting Obama to Patrick on education, noting merely that similiarities between the two “leave some to wonder” if Patrick is a preview of Obama. But its indictment of Patrick is plenty bad enough.

Get Me Rewrite!

Published by Robert Pondiscio on April 9, 2008 in School News. 0 Comments

Columnist Eugene Kane is upset by the performance of Wisconsin’s black 8th graders on the recently released NAEP Writing results. He’s just as upset with how his paper, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel played the story.

“State black 8th-graders rank worst in nation in writing,” the headline read.

“There’s always plenty of blame to go around when things get this dismal,” Kane writes. “I’m talking teachers, principals, politicians, business leaders, and of course, the parents of all those low-achieving students. But don’t worry about blaming the kids. They already got theirs in that screaming headline.”

“Any story about failing black kids always includes the usual comments from adults embarrassed by the situation who insist things can get better. The problem is too many people are already way too familiar with the below-par performance of black students in Milwaukee to believe anybody cares,” he concludes.

Kane’s kicker delivers a kick in the teeth:

“To be fair, the headline should probably be more inclusive next time, naming Wisconsin as the home of “the worst teachers and parents of black eighth-grade students in the nation. Doesn’t feel too good, does it?”

Bringing Up the Rear

Published by Robert Pondiscio on April 4, 2008 in Assessment and Testing. 0 Comments

Improvements shown in the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) writing assessment, the first time eighth- and 12th-graders were tested in the subject since 2002.

The overall percentage of kids rated as “proficient” didn’t change, but both 8th and 12th graders saw upward movement on the percentage scoring at the lower “basic” level. “Large achievement gaps still persist, though,” notes the Christian Science Monitor “between white and minority students, higher-income and low-income students, and, far more than in other subjects, between girls and boys.”

“The overall improvement in 12th grade is the first good news out of high schools, and that’s great,” Ed Trust’s Amy tells the paper. “But our excitement about that is seriously tempered by the lack of national gap closing.”

In 2002, the average score for 12th-graders was 148; it’s up to 153 as of 2007. The percentage of students scoring at the basic level went from 74 percent to 82 percent. “The biggest gains among eighth-graders were also among low performers, with more students reaching the basic level. It’s a trend that has also emerged in NAEP tests on other subjects: the lowest performers are getting better, with little change at the middle or top,” reports the Monitor.

More coverage of the NAEP:

Los Angeles Times

California still lags in student writing skills

Denver Post

Students’ writing skills don’t change

Boston Globe

State’s 8th-graders score well in writing test, despite gender gap

New York Sun

Writing Mastery Eludes Majority In Eighth Grade

Detroit News

Writing scores edge upward

Wall Street Journal

Write Stuff Shown by More in Grades 8, 12

The New York Times

In Test, Few Students Are Proficient Writers

Diane Ravitch on Data, NCLB, Testing and More

Published by Robert Pondiscio on March 20, 2008 in Assessment and Testing and Educational Policy. 0 Comments

“What now is called ‘data-driven instruction’ seems to be just a euphemism for ‘get those scores up, by any means necessary,” says Diane Ravitch in a thoughtful and wide-ranging intervew on ednews.org this morning. She continues to press the need for “a far more coherent curriculum than we now have in most schools,” and also makes a connection too few have made between a coherent curriculum and teacher training. “If teachers knew what they were expected to teach,” notes Ravitch, “we might also have far better teacher preparation.”

Ravitch confesses to becoming increasingly critical of No Child Left Behind. “Its relentless focus on basic skills in reading and math has not contributed to better education,” she notes. “It seems, in fact, to have led to dumbing down, since it does not challenge students who have leapt over its low bar. When I look at NAEP data, it is clear that national scores are virtually stagnant since the passage of NCLB and that the increases were greater before NCLB

On testing, Ravitch notes, “I have never been a critic of testing, NCLB has turned me into one. Today, many (if not most) districts are obsessed with raising scores on standardized tests, and they seem to confuse means and ends. Indeed, they seem to have lost sight of ends altogether. With the track we are now on, we might see scores go up while levels of knowledge (and education) collapse under the weight of basic skills testing and test-prep.”

NAEP = Not An Entire Picture?

Published by Robert Pondiscio on February 21, 2008 in Assessment and Testing. 1 Comment

The National Assessment of Educational Progress test of students’ progress in elementary and secondary schools offers “a distorted picture of achievement” and fails to fully examine how well schools prepare students for adult life, according to a paper summarized in the Chronicle of Higher Education. The report commissioned by the Campaign for Educational Equity at Teachers College of Columbia University argues that the NAEP focuses too narrowly on basic academic and critical thinking skills in measuring how well students are being educated.

“Moreover,” the report says, “the federal benchmarking test fails to gauge the long-term impact of education because it does not look at whether adults who were educated at elementary and secondary schools do things such as vote, read independently, or stay in shape physically.”

Those expecting disagreement will not be disappointed. The Chronicle’s report is followed by a reader comment: “I don’t give a flip whether students in question (or you for that matter) vote, read independently, or stay in shape. However I do care very much whether students can read, write, and do basic math.”

The Knowledge Connection

Published by E. D. Hirsch, Jr. on February 16, 2008 in Core Knowledge and Educational Policy. 0 Comments

Why has the No Child Left Behind law left so many children behind? According to the latest scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the reading achievement of eighth-graders has declined since the law was passed in 2001, and the large reading gap between advantaged and disadvantaged children — “the achievement gap” — has stayed where it was. Today’s eighth-graders had recorded gains in fourth grade, but these have not led to improvements in later grades — when reading scores actually count for a student’s future.

Those in Congress in charge of crafting revisions should understand that the law’s disappointing results owe less to defects in the law than to the methods and ideas schools use in their attempts to fulfill the “adequate yearly progress” mandate for all groups of students; this causes schools, as many complain, to teach to reading tests rather than educate children. But intensive test preparation by schools has resulted in lower reading test scores in later grades. “Teaching to the test” does not effectively teach to the test after all.

Studies of reading comprehension show that knowing something of the topic you’re reading about is the most important variable in comprehension. After a child learns to sound out words, comprehension is mostly knowledge. Many technical studies support the assertion that after students can fluently sound out words, relevant knowledge is the crucial difference between students who are good or poor readers. In light of the relevant science, an analysis of the textbooks and methods used to teach reading and language arts — for three hours a day in many places — indicates some of the reasons for the disappointing later results. These test-prep materials are constructed on the mistaken view that reading comprehension is a skill that can be perfected by practice, as typing can be. This how-to conception of reading has caused schools to spend a lot of unproductive time on trivial content and on drills such as “finding the main idea” and less time on history, science and the arts.

Continue reading ‘The Knowledge Connection’

Why I Resigned From Education Next

Published by Diane Ravitch on February 13, 2008 in Assessment and Testing and Curriculum. 0 Comments

The New York Sun (Feb 13) reported that I resigned from the editorial board of Education Next because that magazine has just published an article implicitly endorsing Mayor Michael Bloomberg for President. That is not entirely right. I was not thrilled about the endorsement, inasmuch as the editorial board had not been consulted. But my reason for resigning was that the article was a puff piece for reforms that thus far are not working.

NYC is hardly a paragon of education reform. Annual spending has increased from $12.5 billion to nearly $20 billion under Mayor Bloomberg. Yet NAEP scores showed no gains in 4th grade reading, 8th grade reading, or 8th grade mathematics.

The school system devotes inordinate resources to testing and preparing for tests, to constant measurement and evaluation, while paying negligible attention to curriculum and instruction. This strategy has not worked, has not even produced impressive test score gains. Saddest of all, even if it did produce large test score gains, the students would still not be getting a good education.

Update: You read it here first, but Diane Ravitch has more to say in an op-ed in this morning’s (Feb 15) NY Sun –rp.

Narrowing the Two Achievement Gaps

Published by E. D. Hirsch, Jr. on November 9, 2007 in Essay and Research and Reports. 2 Comments

A presentation at the 18th Education Trust National Conference, Nov. 9, 2007, Washington, D.C., by E. D. Hirsch, Jr.

I am grateful to the Education Trust for inviting me to give this talk. It’s an honor and a kind of homecoming. We at Core Knowledge feel great affinity with The Education Trust with its focus on narrowing the unfair achievement gap between groups. That injustice was my reason for leaving academic pursuits and entering education reform in the 1970s.

I won’t distract you with the intricate details of my experiments on literacy some 35 years ago beyond observing that they were first done at U VA, and then at a mainly African-American college in Richmond. I described the results in two technical publications that are virtually unknown. But they have colored all of my subsequent work. Anyone who bothers to read those reports might be surprised to discover that it was empirical science and not ideology that originated Cultural Literacy and the Core Knowledge movement. The ideological controversies surrounding Cultural Literacy during the 1980s and ’90s were gripping but, to my dazed mind, essentially off point. For, the key educational issues we faced urgently both then and now are less connected with ideology than with empirical reality.

I’ll very briefly describe the discovery that shocked me into education reform. The African-American students at the Richmond college (It was the Sargeant Reynolds Community College.) could read just as well as UVA students when the topic was roommates or car traffic, but they could not read passages about Lee’s surrender to Grant. Their performance on that particular text shook me up the most. For they had graduated from the schools of Richmond, the erstwhile capital of the Confederacy, but were ignorant of the most elementary facts about the Civil War and other basic information that is normally taken for granted in writing. They had not been taught the various things that they needed to know to understand ordinary texts addressed to a general audience. The results were shocking. (What had the schools been doing???). I decided to devote myself to helping right the wrong that is being done to such students.

Let me explain my title: “Narrowing the Two Achievement Gaps.” The sort of gap usually meant by the phrase “achievement gap” is the one between whites and African Americans or whites and Hispanics, or more generally between high- and low- income students. Let’s call this “the fairness gap.” But there is an equally fateful achievement gap between our students and those in other developed nations. Let’s call this “the quality gap.” My first theme in this talk is that these are not separate problems. The solution to the fairness gap is also the solution to the quality gap, and vice versa.

I will focus on the verbal achievement gap, which is critical to academic performance, later income, and general competence. I want to show that if we raise the average verbal achievement for all groups of students we will, by that very deed, also narrow the fairness gap, killing two birds with one stone.

Continue reading ‘Narrowing the Two Achievement Gaps’

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Education Sector: Explaining NCLB policy issues

Published by CKF on November 1, 2007 in Assessment and Testing, Educational Policy and Research and Reports. 0 Comments

From an Education Sector newsletter:

Education Sector’s Explainer series unpacks key school accountability issues!

Current education news and debates all seem to revolve around the federal No Child Left Behind Act and school accountability. Education Sector’s Explainer Series will help you make sense of these confusing education policy issues.

Education Sector’s Explainer series gives lay readers insights into important aspects of education policymaking. Explainers are designed to bring clarity to key, but complex, concepts and terms within the education landscape that often are misunderstood by the public. They are straightforward, cut-through-the-jargon guides that can be used alone, or as a reference when reading education news stories or research on related topics.

Recent Explainers have focused on deciphering some of NCLB’s fundamental features including how states set “cut scores” on their tests, what it means for states to make “adequate yearly progress” under the federal law, and how the controversial National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) works.

Read, reference, and share these Education Sector Explainers:

Making the Cut: How States Set Passing Scores on Standardized Tests

Passing or “cut” scores are a key factor in determining the rigor of state tests, which matter more than ever before under the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Yet, when states and the media report student results on exams, they rarely include information on passing scores or the process by which they are determined. This Explainer describes how states set cut scores and why they matter.

States’ Evidence: What It Means to Make ‘Adequate Yearly Progress’ Under NCLB

Under NCLB, states must set performance targets for schools to meet, known as “adequate yearly progress,” or “AYP.” And those schools that do not meet these goals or “make” AYP face considerable consequences. But what does it really mean for a school to make AYP? This Explainer describes how NCLB’s complex accountability system works overall and in different states and discusses the basics of “making” AYP and the multiple routes schools can take to get there.

Understanding NAEP: Inside the Nation’s Education Report Card

The National Assessment of Educational Progress is one of the most trusted resources for comparing student achievement across states and demographic groups. But it is also one of the most complex tests in existence, leading to difficulty in interpreting and reporting its results. This Explainer is a guide to understanding NAEP’s complex features and the challenges ahead for the test in an era of increased accountability.

Education Sector
1201 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 850
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202.552.2840 - Fax: 202.775.5877
www.educationsector.org

The Core Knowledge Blog