(Re)Focusing on What Matters

Last week I spoke at a meeting of the Lumina Foundation’s Achieving the Dream Initiative, a meeting of policymakers from 15 states all working to improve the effectiveness of community colleges. At one point, a data working group shared results of its efforts to create new ways to measure college outputs. This was basically a new kind of report card, one capable of reporting results for different subgroups of students, and enabling comparisons of outcomes across colleges. Something like it might someday replace the data collection currently part of the IPEDS.

While it's always gratifying to see state policymakers engaging with data and thinking about how to use it in meaningful ways, I couldn’t help but feel that even this seemingly forward-thinking group was tending toward the status quo. The way we measure and report college outputs right now consistently reinforces a particular way of thinking-- a framework that focuses squarely on colleges and their successes or failures.

What’s the matter with that, you’re probably wondering? After all, aren’t schools the ones we need to hold accountable for outcomes and improved performance? Well, perhaps. But what we’re purportedly really interested in—or what we should be interested in—is students, and their successes or failures. If that's the case, then students, rather than colleges, need to be at the very center of our thinking and policymaking. Right now this isn't the case.

Let’s play this out a bit more. Current efforts are afoot to find ways to measure college outcomes that make more colleges comfortable with measurement and accountability--and thus help bring them onboard. That typically means using measures that allow even the lowest-achieving colleges at least a viable opportunity for success, and using measures colleges feels are meaningful, related to what they think they’re supposed to be doing. An example: the 3-year associates degree completion rates of full-time community college entrant deemed “college ready” by a standardized test. We can measure this for different schools and report the results. Where does that get us? We can then see which colleges have higher rates, and which have lower ones.

But then what? Can we then conclude some colleges are doing a better job than others? Frankly, no. It’s quite possible that higher rates at some colleges are attributable to student characteristics or contextual characteristics outside an individual college (e.g. proximity to other colleges, local labor market, region, etc) that explain the differences. But that’s hard to get people to focus on when what’s simplest to see are differences between colleges.

It's not clear that this approach actually helps students. What if, instead, states reported outcomes for specified groups of students without disaggregating by college? How might the policy conversation change? Well, for example, a state could see a glaring statewide gap in college completion among majority and minority students. It would then (hopefully) move to the next step of looking for sources of the problem—likely trying to identify the areas with the greatest influence, and the areas with the most policy-amenable areas of influence. This might lead analysts back to the colleges in the state to look for poor or weak performers, but it might instead lead them to aspects of k-12 preparation, state financial aid policy, the organizational structure of the higher education system, etc. The point is that in order to help students, states would need to do more than simply point to colleges and work to inspire them to change. They’d be forced to try and pinpoint the source(s) of the problems and then work on them. I expect the approaches would need to vary by state.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to absolve any college of responsibility for educating its students. What I’m suggesting is that we think hard about why the emphasis right now rests so heavily on relative college performance—an approach that embraces and even creates more insitutional competition—rather than on finding efficient and effective ways to increase the success of our students. Are we over-utilizing approaches, often adopted without much critical thought, that reify and perpetuate our past mistakes? I think so.

Image Credit: www.openjarmedia.com

Where's That Dutch Kid?

Gotham Schools reports that some in New York State don't believe that the state's law that restricts student assessment data from being used in teacher tenure decisions will hamper the state from securing Race To The Top funding. Is this just wishful thinking or is this whole issue being oversimplified by proposed federal RTTT regulations?

New York State’s tenure law, passed last year under pressure from teachers unions, says student test score data can’t be the sole determinant of whether a teacher gets tenure. But three top officials — teachers union president Randi Weingarten, Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch, and incoming State Education Commissioner David Steiner — are arguing that the law will not disqualify New York from the fund.

“It is our firm belief that the language of Race to the Top funding does not preclude New York,” Steiner said today. “New York has a law on the books that relates strictly to tenure.”

Weingarten noted that a second section of the same law explicitly requires teachers’ annual evaluations, which take place even after they receive tenure, to be based in part on how they use test score data to improve their instruction.

“The way in which teachers use data in their classroom instruction is specifically included in the definition of what confers tenure onto a classroom teacher,” she said. ”How teachers use data is one of the criteria for getting tenure. Just not the data in and of itself.”

NY UPDATE: Charlie Barone says BS.

Likewise, in Wisconsin -- another state singled out by Education Secretary Arne Duncan for having a "ridiculous" law that restricts the use of student assessment data in teacher evaluations -- the Governor's office says that the law only applies to data from the state assessment. Assumedly, other assessment data could be used instead, although that creates costs and logistical hurdles for school districts, some very small. From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

According to Chapter 118.30(2)(c) of the Wisconsin State Statutes, "the results of examinations to pupils enrolled in public schools, including charter schools, may not be used to evaluate teacher performance, to discharge, suspend or formally discipline a teacher, or as the reason for the nonrenewal of a teacher's contract."

By Friday afternoon, state Sen. Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) and Rep. Brett Davis (R-Oregon) had announced plans to introduce legislation that would change Chapter 118.30(2)(c) to eliminate the prohibition on using state testing in teacher evaluations.

But according to Gov. Jim Doyle's office, the Wisconsin statute is not at odds with the state's Race to the Top eligibility.

"Our reading of the current law is that it only prohibits the use of the WKCE (Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination) in evaluating teachers, and that other student assessments may be used to evaluate teachers," said Lee Sensenbrenner, a spokesman for Doyle's office.

Sensenbrenner said the governor will be putting together a comprehensive application for the Race to the Top competition that puts the state in a position to succeed.

As part of that, he said, the state would "review the existing law to see if any changes need to be made to strengthen our competitive position."

UPDATE: On Teacher Beat, Stephen Sawchuk has a pithy update on this issue -- and the pleadings of California, New York and Wisconsin about how this really isn't a problem. Really, it isn't!

New Teacher Center Annual Symposium

If you are an educational practitioner, policymaker, or researcher with an interest in the needs of new teachers, you may want to consider presenting at the New Teacher Center's annual Symposium on Teacher Induction in San Jose, California in February 7-9, 2010.

In addition to new teacher development and support, the NTC also seeks submissions that address school leadership development, teacher compensation, teacher evaluation, working conditions, and related themes. Submissions should exemplify best practices and current research and present new issues or topics, innovative ways of viewing traditional issues, and/or research that substantiates, promotes, and advances the work of teacher development and induction.

The NTC has released an online call for proposals. For your information, here is an overview of the sessions featured at the 2009 meeting.

Obama's Firewall

Michele McNeil at Education Week's Politics K-12 blog reports that President Obama himself approved the Race To The Top provision that restricts these competitive grants for going to states that restrict the use of student achievement data in teacher evaluations. Short of statutory or regulatory changes made by these 3 states, should we be saying au revoir to the Golden, Empire and Badger states?

Only two things can render a state ineligible for Race to the Top grants.

And only one of them is a biggie: the student-teacher data firewall issue.

This effectively means New York, California, and Wisconsin, at the very least, are ineligible for Race to the Top—or will at least have some explaining to do. They have laws on the book that essentially bar the use of student-achievement data in some teacher-evaluation decisions.

Erin Richards at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel picks up the story, too.

Background here and here.

Student Learning and Teacher Performance

Corrected

President Obama and Education Secretary Duncan have drawn a clear line in the sand with regard to evaluating teacher performance: States with laws that restrict the use of student achievement data in employment evaluations -- including California, New York and Wisconsin -- may be rendered all-but-ineligible for competitive grants, such as Race To The Top funding, in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Read more in John Dillon's New York Times story ("Administration Takes Aim At State Laws on Teachers").

In a speech last month, Secretary Duncan named Wisconsin as a state with such restrictions in place. Wisconsin law -- 121.02(1)(q) -- requires schools boards to "evaluate, in writing, the performance of all certified school personnel at the end of their first year and at least every 3rd year thereafter." Further, 118.30 2(b)4.(c) restricts the results of student assessments from being "used to evaluate teacher performance, to discharge, suspend or formally discipline a teacher or as the reason for the nonrenewal of a teacher's contract." [Kudos to Chris Thorn at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research for rooting out the offending statute in question! I won't quit my day job.]

Between this restrictive law and the state's distinction as having the largest black-white achievement gap in reading in the nation, it seems that the state's chances in the Race To The Top competition are very poor. In a recent post, I gave Wisconsin 30-1 odds. Let's make it 50-1.

The U.S. Department of Education today has released draft rules that will govern the competition for and allocation of competitive ARRA dollars. This information is available at www.ed.gov/recovery. (For great early analysis, go to Teacher Beat.)

Who's In Charge Here?

North Carolina's educational governance structure is a bit clearer after a lawsuit and a resulting retirement. The lawsuit determined that the state's elected superintendent of public instruction indeed is in charge of public education in the Tar Heel State.

The News & Observer in Raleigh-Durham reports:

A judge's ruling Friday intended to settle a long-running debate about who is in charge of running North Carolina's public schools may instead set the stage for even more players to enter the fray.

In the meantime, though, the ruling allows June Atkinson to reclaim the authority she thought she had when voters elected her the state's superintendent of public instruction in 2004 and again in 2008.

And Gov. Beverly Perdue, whose attempt to consolidate education authority under her office led to Friday's ruling, will have to share that power for now.

----------------

After only six months as state schools CEO, William Harrison said Wednesday afternoon that he will retire from the job of running the education agency on Aug. 31.

Harrison will relinquish his $265,000 salary but will continue to guide policy as the unpaid chairman of the State Board of Education.

His announcement comes days after elected schools Superintendent June Atkinson won a lawsuit giving her authority to run the Department of Public Instruction, the state agency that oversees testing, curriculum and policy for 115 local districts in North Carolina. Atkinson suggested in an interview earlier this week that Harrison should leave his CEO job as she takes charge of the department and its staff of about 780.

Harrison's decision to step aside is a setback for Gov. Beverly Perdue, who had handpicked him to be her point man on education. Perdue, whose key platform has been improving education, lost her gamble to control the agency by creating her own czar in Harrison.

Frank McCourt (1930-2009)

We are saddened by the passing of Frank McCourt -- Irishman, educator, and novelist. From humble upbringings in the Irish working-class city of Limerick, McCourt went on to teach thousands of American children and to make a huge splash with his books, including Angela's Ashes, 'Tis, and Teacher Man.

Read this New York Times article about his life and this editorial as memorial in The Irish Times.

Limerick, you're a lady
Your Shannon waters tears of joy that flow
The beauty that surrounds you
I'll take it with me love where e'er I go.

While waking in the arms of distant waters
A new day finds me far away from home
And Limerick you're my lady
The one true love that I have ever known.

As children you and I spent endless days of fun
In winter's snow or summer's golden sun
We fished in silver streams, the fabric of my dreams
Was fashioned by your loveliness and so I have to say.

Limerick you're a lady
Your Shannon waters tears of joy that flow
The beauty that surrounds you
I'll take it with me love where e'er I go.

Image Credit: Simon & Schuster