You Got Rejected from Your First Choice College. So What?

The following is a guest post from Robert Kelchen, doctoral candidate in Educational Policy Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The Washington Post’s Campus Overload blog recently featured a guest post, “Getting Rejected from Your Dream School(s) isn’t a Bad Thing” by Eric Harris, a junior who attended the University of Maryland after being deferred by his first choice (Duke) and rejected by six of the other eight colleges to which he applied. (He was also accepted by Emory.) Eric’s story is hardly unique, as numerous blogs and websites feature stories of students who were rejected by their first choice college. Most of the popular media accounts of students rejected by their first choice college are from students like Eric—those who applied to a large number of highly selective (and very expensive) colleges and universities and still attended a prestigious institution.

The kinds of students who are typically featured in the media are very likely to enjoy college and graduate in a timely manner, no matter where they end up attending. But the students who should be prominently featured instead are those whose first choice colleges are very different than their other options (much less selective four-year colleges, community colleges, or no college at all). Just-released data from the Cooperative Institutional Research Program at UCLA shows that only 58 percent of students attending four-year universities were attending their first choice college in fall 2011; nearly one-fourth of students were rejected by their first choice. This suggests that a fair number of students fall into this category, but little is known about their college outcomes.

As a part of my dissertation, I am using data from the Wisconsin Scholars Longitudinal Study to examine the college experiences of students who attended their first choice college to those who attended another college—either because they were rejected by their first choice or because they were accepted by their first choice but did not attend. WSLS students all come from modest financial backgrounds and were Pell Grant recipients during their first year of college, so it is likely that the cost of college played a much larger role in their college choice process than for students like Eric.

It is important to note that students end up at their first choice college as the result of three decisions: applying to their first choice (not explored in my study), getting accepted, and then attending after being accepted. I model the acceptance and attendance decisions using available information on the students’ demographics and academic preparation, their high school of attendance, and their first choice college. This is an important step in establishing a causal relationship because WSLS students who attended their first choice college tend to come from different backgrounds (especially from more rural areas) than those who did not.

I use interview and survey data to explore whether students’ academic and social integration levels differed between students who attended their first choice and those who did not for either of the above reasons. The interviews suggest that most students reported being happy with their college of attendance, regardless of whether that was their first choice college. (Whether this is actually true or whether this is an example of self-affirmation bias, in which people try to portray a disappointing event in the best possible light, cannot be determined.) There are also few differences between students who attended their first choice and those who did not on survey measures of academic and social integration.

I also use academic outcomes from the University of Wisconsin System and the National Student Clearinghouse to estimate the effects of attending one’s first choice college. After modeling the selection process, I find no statistically significant differences on academic outcomes between students who attended their first choice and either group who did not. (This dissertation chapter is nearly complete, so stay tuned for the full results.)

It appears that being rejected from one’s first choice college is not the end of the world for most students. The psychic costs appear quite high in much of the popular media, but we don’t need to feel too sorry for students who are forced to attend a highly selective college that may have been their seventh choice instead of their first. I spent three years in college working in the admissions office at Truman State University, and I talked with plenty of students for whom Truman was not their first choice. After being rejected by elite, expensive universities, they came to Truman and turned out just fine. So don’t worry too much about getting rejected by your first choice college—especially if paying for college was never one of your concerns. Everything will be okay.

You have read this article college admissions / competition / daniel devise / elite / first choice / Washington Post / Wisconsin Scholars Longitudinal Study with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2012/01/you-got-rejected-from-your-first-choice.html. Thanks!

The Manifesto, Income Inequality & Credibility

On Friday, I wrote a blog item ('Misleading Manifesto') chiding a group of urban superintendents for misstating educational research in a 'manifesto' published in Sunday's Washington Post. Teacher quality *is* important -- but it does not matter MORE THAN family income and concentrated poverty.

I am convinced that too many educational reformers are happy to 'spin' the truth for rhetorical purposes. I think this is exactly what we saw in this manifesto. While this may help to simplify messaging, target solutions at a more narrowly construed problem, and focus in on what education leaders have direct control over, it carries an inherent policy danger along with it. That danger is two-fold: (1) teacher policy reforms may be set up for failure by overstating their potential impact; and (2) more comprehensive strategies desperately needed to combat rising income inequality and growing poverty in our nation may be discounted and ignored.

For me, this isn't an issue of setting low expectations for children from poverty. We must train and support our teachers to have high expectations and develop the potential in all children. But, from a policy perspective, which is the world in which I work, to not even discuss poverty and inequality -- even though the research evidence points to its preeminence -- is akin to taking it off the table as a policy priority.

Nor it is a lack of belief in the ameliorative benefits that sensible teacher reforms can have on student outcomes by expanding the recruitment pool of teacher candidates, improving initial training and on-going support of classroom teachers, improving teaching and learning conditions within schools, providing differential compensation to teachers for leadership roles, difficult assignments, shortage fields, and demonstrated effectiveness, and more....

For teacher quality specifically, as I argued in my previous post, playing fast and loose with the facts isn't necessary. There is a powerful argument to be made based on the fact that teachers are the most important school-based influence on student learning. That's exactly what my colleagues at the New Teacher Center have done. We've made careful and honest declarations about teacher quality being the most critical within-school variable, but haven't framed the issue in a way that would make us education-industry Pinocchios.

And this leads us directly to the question of credibility. While I am personally inclined to support elements of what the superintendents' manifesto calls for -- and inclined to support elements of broader education and teacher reform agendas -- I am disinclined to associate myself with a clarion call that is dishonest on its face and misserves the national need for a critical conversation and accompanying set of public policies to address issues of economic inequality. That need extends well beyond the education system and requires responses much broader than merely strengthening the teaching profession and overhauling human capital systems.

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich recently has been banging the drums challenging policymakers -- and Democrats, in particular -- to address our nation's historic levels of income inequality and rising levels of poverty. As reported by the Washington Post's Steven Pearlstein, since 1976 "virtually all of the benefits of economic growth have gone to households that, in today's terms, earn more than $110,000 a year." Further, UNICEF reports that the United States has the highest rate of childhood poverty among 24 OECD nations -- over 20% -- and the second-worst rate (barely ahead of bottom-dwelling Great Britain) of childhood well-being in the industralized world. Further, as Walt Gardner recently noted, a September 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report showed that the percentage of Americans below the poverty line in 2009 was the highest in 15 years. And the rise was steepest for children, with one in five affected. Think this has any bearing on U.S. students' relatively poor performance on international student assessments? Uh-huh.

So, let's talk about how to strengthen teaching and its central importance to student outcomes. But let's not fence ourselves in with self-serving rhetoric. Let's be honest in our communications and expansive in our thinking about policies needed to improve the lives of American children.

It's about education -- and a whole lot more.

You have read this article Education / Joel Klein / Michelle Rhee / reform / research / teacher quality / teaching / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2010/10/the-manifesto-income-inequality.html. Thanks!

Live By The Sword, Die By The Sword?

The problem with Jay Mathews' defense ("Measuring Progress At Shaw With More Than Numbers") of a Washington, DC school principal who did not demonstrate student learning gains at his school after one year is that the principal operates within an accountability system that demands such a result. In this case, both Mathews -- and DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, as described in Mathews' WP column -- are right not to have lowered the boom on Brian Betts, principal of the DC's Shaw Middle School at Garnet-Patterson, based on a single year's worth of test scores.

The state superintendent of education's Web site says Shaw dropped from 38.6 to 30.5 in the percentage of students scoring at least proficient in reading, and from 32.7 to 29.2 in math.

But those were not the numbers Rhee read to Betts over the phone.

Only 17 percent of Shaw's 2009 students had attended the school in 2008, distorting the official test score comparisons. Rhee instead recited the 2008 and 2009 scores of the 44 students who had been there both years. It didn't help much.

The students' decline in reading was somewhat smaller; it went from 34.5 to 29.7. Their math proficiency increased a bit, from 26.2 to 29.5. But Shaw is still short of the 30 percent mark, far below where Rhee and Betts want to be....

Despite the sniping at Rhee, the best teachers I know think that what happened at Shaw is a standard part of the upgrading process. I have watched Betts, his staff, students and parents for a year. The improvement of poor-performing schools has been the focus of my reporting for nearly three decades. The Shaw people are doing nearly everything that the most successful school turnaround artists have done.

They have raised expectations for students. They have recruited energetic teachers who believe in the potential of impoverished students. They have organized themselves into a team that compares notes on youngsters. They regularly review what has been learned, what some critics dismiss as "teaching to the test." They consider it an important part of their jobs.

That's how it's done, usually with a strong and engaging principal like Betts.

Mathews' take -- including consideration of contextual factors, such as the fact that only 17% of the school's students had attended the prior year and the contention that school turnaround requires more than a single year -- is how the education world should work. Embrace the complexity of learning and trying to measure it! To do so would disallow the use of single-year changes in test scores for making high-stakes decisions about schools and individual school personnel. It would also remove the unrealistic pressure on school turnarounds to bear fruit in a single year. Test scores would be used responsibly in combination with other data and evidence to paint a fuller picture about individual school contexts and inform judgments about school leadership and student success.

But Michelle Rhee and other education reform advocates have publicly argued that student performance as measured by test scores is basically the be all and end all. According to this Washington Post story ("Testing Tactics Helped Fuel D.C. School Gains"), Rhee supports strengthening No Child Left Behind to "emphasize year-to-year academic growth." Such a stance creates a problem for such reformers when they are leading a district and staking their leadership on uncomplicated test score gains. Others will assess their leadership and judge their success by this measure -- an ill-advised one in its simplest form.

I would argue that, in addition to doing the right thing (as happened in this instance), reform advocates and school leaders like Rhee also have a responsibility to say and advocate for the right thing. They have a responsibility to be honest about the complexity of student learning and the inability of student assessments to accurate capture all of the nuance going on within schools and classrooms. While the reformers' challenge of the adult-focused policies of the educational status quo is often warranted, some reforms -- accountability, chief among them -- have been taken too far. Student learning, school leadership and teaching cannot be measured and judged good or bad based on a single set of test scores. Test scores must be part of the consideration -- and supporting systems such as accountability, compensation and evaluation must be informed by such data -- but they should not single-handedly define success or failure.

The complexity as presented by Mathews in his article -- and, more importantly, by existing research (such as by Robert Linn, Aaron Pallas, Tim Sass, and embedded within Sunny Ladd's RttT comments) about year-to-year comparisons of both overall test scores and test score gains -- strongly suggests that educational accountability systems should be designed more thoughtfully than they have been to date, but unfortunately that does not seem to be the direction that policymaking is headed at either the federal or state levels. Part of being more thoughtful is moving away from NCLB-style adequate yearly progress and toward a value-added approach, but thoughtfulness also requires not making high-stakes decisions based exclusively on volatile student data. Do I hear "multiple measures"? Sure, but Sherman Dorn offers some provocative thoughts on this subject in a 2007 blog post.

With regard to educational accountability, policymakers first should do their homework -- and then they clearly have more work to do in creating a better system and undoing parts of the existing system that aren't evidence-based and accomplish only in simplifying a truly complex art: learning.

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

For those of you that have gotten this far, there's a related post on the New America Foundation's Ed Money Watch blog discussing a new GAO report that analyzes state spending on student assessment tests -- $640 million in 2007-08.

The increasing cost of developing and scoring assessments has also led many states to implement simpler and more cost-effective multiple choice tests instead of open response tests. In fact, although five states have changed their assessments to include more open response items in both reading and math since 2002, 11 and 13 states have removed open items from their reading and math tests, respectively over the same time period.... This reliance on multiple choice tests has forced states to limit the content and complexity of what they test. In fact, some states develop academic standards for testing separately from standards for instruction, which are often un-testable in a multiple choice system. As a result, state NCLB assessments tend to test and measure memorization of facts and basic skills rather than complex cognitive abilities.

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

And here's a new story hot off the presses from Education Week. It discusses serious questions raised about New York City's school grading system.

Eighty-four percent of the city’s 1,058 public elementary and middle schools received an A on the city’s report cards this year, compared with 38 percent in 2008, while 13 percent received a B, city officials announced this month.

“It tells us virtually nothing about the actual performance of schools,” Aaron M. Pallas, a professor of sociology and education at Teachers College, Columbia University, said of the city’s grades.

Diane Ravitch, an education historian at New York University, was even sharper: She declared the school grades “bogus” in a Sept. 9 opinion piece for the Daily News of New York, saying the city’s report card system “makes a mockery of accountability.”

But Andrew J. Jacob, a spokesman for the New York City Department of Education, defended the ratings, even as he said the district’s demands on schools would continue to rise next year....

The city employs a complex methodology to devise its overall letter grades, with the primary driver being results from statewide assessments in reading and mathematics, which have also encountered considerable skepticism lately.

The city’s grades are based on three categories: student progress on state tests from one year to the next, which accounts for 60 percent; student performance for the most recent school year, which accounts for 25 percent; and school environment, which makes up 15 percent.

Mr. Pallas of Teachers College argues that one key flaw with the city’s rating system is that it depends heavily on a what he deems a “wholly unreliable” measure of student growth on test scores from year to year that fails to account adequately for statistical error.

You have read this article Aaron Pallas / accountability / Assessment / Helen Ladd / Jay Mathews / Michelle Rhee / New York City / No Child Left Behind / reform / Robert Linn / Tim Sass / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/09/live-by-sword-die-by-sword.html. Thanks!

Obama Endorses Community College Reform

It's a very big day for the nation's community colleges. In today's Washington Post, our president praises them, and calls for additional funding to support their work. In particular, President Obama writes, "We can reallocate funding to help them modernize their facilities, increase the quality of online courses and ultimately meet the goal of graduating 5 million more Americans from community colleges by 2020."

On Friday I spent the morning speaking with staff from the U.S. House of Representatives Community College Caucus, and was impressed by the significant turnout and detailed questions they asked. Then, TIME magazine moved on a substantial piece noting the importance of the 2-year sector as well.

This thing has legs. It's a very exciting time.... Let's hope that the President's ability to connect community colleges not only to job training but to his goals for increasing degree attainment continues. An integrated agenda will pay off.

NOTE: On July 14, 2009 the President will announce a proposal for $12 billion in support for community colleges, to enable them to produce an additional 5 billion graduates over 10 years. This is a remarkable turn of events.

----------

RELATED ARTICLES:
New York Times, "A Boon To Two-Year Colleges, Affirming Their Value", July 14, 2009
NYT, "Obama Attacks On Economy and Seeks Billions For Community Colleges", July 15, 2009
Derrick Jackson, "Community Colleges' New Clout", Boston Globe, July 18, 2009
David Brooks, "No Size Fits All", New York Times, July 19, 2009
Cap Times, "UW-Madison profs help shape bold initiative for community colleges" July 20, 2009

You have read this article Barack Obama / community college / President / TIME magazine / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-endorses-community-college-reform.html. Thanks!

Will Darwin Take It On The Chin in Texas?

The Washington Post editorial page ('Strengths and Weaknesses') weighs in on the creationism debate in the Lone Star State.

Starting today, the state's board of education will consider whether the phrase "strengths and weaknesses" should remain deleted from the state's science standards. Debating strengths and weaknesses of various scientific theories might sound reasonable until you learn that those are supportive buzzwords for people who doubt evolution and want creationism taught in the classroom.

The force behind restoring the "strengths and weaknesses" language, which was stripped from the science standards in January after two decades, is Don McLeroy. He's the chairman of the State Board of Education. He is also a "young earth creationist" who believes the Earth was created by God no more than 10,000 years ago. Never mind plenty of scientific evidence that the planet has been around for a few billion years. The scary thing is that what's happening in Texas is by no means isolated.

So, in a state of 24 million people, this Mr. McLeroy is the best candidate that Republican Governor Rick Perry could find for the job of chair of the State Board of Education? Scary. Purposefully scary, I'll bet.

For more background, see here (6/3/08), here (7/21/08), here (1/22/09), and here (1/23/09).

You have read this article academic standards / creationism / evolution / governor / Rick Perry / science / Texas / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/03/will-darwin-take-it-on-chin-in-texas.html. Thanks!

Does This Stimulate Change?

The Washington Post is onto something here ("An Education Stimulus?")

EDUCATION is poised to win big under the economic stimulus plan hurtling through Congress. But it remains to be seen whether America's schoolchildren really will be helped by the huge investment of public funds that is being planned. After all, it seems that much of the billions of dollars of new federal spending is aimed at continuing programs and policies that largely have failed to improve student achievement. For the amount of money being spent, Congress should insist on real change, not simply more of the same.

Its editorial underscores what I was saying yesterday in this post ("Overstated"). More money by itself won't produce educational reform unless the way that money is spent locally changes. It doesn't appear that such requirements will be made part of the stimulus legislation. Thus, the federal role in education isn't poised to become more significant apart from covering a higher (albeit still small) portion of overall education costs.

You have read this article Education / federal / stimulus / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/01/does-this-stimulate-change.html. Thanks!

The Iceman Cometh

Amen! "Washington Post: "As To Ice, Chicago Still Obama's Kind Of Town".

"My children's school was canceled today," Obama said, speaking to reporters before a meeting with business leaders. "Because of what? Some ice? . . . We're going to have to apply some flinty Chicago toughness to this town."

In 2001, the first of three winters I lived in Washington, DC, I innocently walked into my local grocery store one evening on my return home from work. Before me stood dozens of Washingtonians scooping up batteries, bottled water and toilet paper, with checkout lines stretching halfway up the aisles. Why? Two-to-three inches of snow was forecast for the next day. A native New Englander, I rolled my eyes and walked out.

If we lived like that here in Wisconsin -- or in my former Vermont -- the entire state would shut down for half the year. Not gonna happen.

I think President Obama is onto something. Maybe as a condition to giving Washington DC statehood, the Prez should insist on more "Chicago toughness."

In Chicago, where the President's daughters previously attended school, the schools haven't closed for weather since a 1999 ice storm.

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

UPDATE: Just discovered that Huffington Post, Alexander Russo and Kevin Carey beat me to the punch on this one. Guess it takes longer for news to reach Wisconsin ... especially through all this ice and snow.

You have read this article Barack Obama / Chicago / school / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/01/the-iceman-cometh.html. Thanks!

Debate Redux: DC Vouchers

Republican presidential candidate John McCain made a point to declare school vouchers an education policy grounded in research at Wednesday's debate. "And I've got to tell you that vouchers, where they are requested and where they are agreed to, are a good and workable system," said McCain. "And it's been proven." Not so fast, Senator!

Today's Washington Post offers a fact check on the federal "Opportunity Scholarship Program" which, of course, was imposed upon Washington, DC by the Republican-controlled Congress and President Dubya.

A U.S. Department of Education study released in June showed that students in the program generally scored no higher on reading and math tests after two years than public school peers. The findings are consistent with previous studies of the voucher program.

Leslie Nabors Olah, senior researcher for the Consortium for Policy Research in Education, a coalition of five prominent universities, said that the D.C. voucher program hasn't shown immediate benefits and that more research needs to be done.

"We have no evidence that vouchers work," Nabors Olah said.

You have read this article 2008 election / John McCain / Opportunity Scholarship Program / presidential campaign / research / school choice / voucher / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/10/debate-redux-dc-vouchers.html. Thanks!

Washington Post Chastizes DC Teachers Union

Today the Washington Post editorial board weighs in on the on-going saga between DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee and the DC Teachers Union.

WITH CONTRACT talks apparently going nowhere, D.C. teachers ought to be asking whose interests their union leaders are tending to at the bargaining table. They certainly aren't defending those of the system's many dedicated and qualified teachers, who apparently won't even get the chance to consider a bold pay plan that would net many of them six-figure salaries.

The two-tier salary system proposed by Ms. Rhee would require teachers seeking the top pay levels to go on probation for a year; apparently union leaders found that unpalatable. Yet Ms. Rhee was offering teachers a choice: No one would be forced to give up tenure, and those opting for the lower pay level would still get -- another fact overlooked -- a 28 percent salary boost over five years, plus $10,000 in bonuses.

Amen. I'm no union basher, far from it, but it is clear that the interests of all the teachers -- sometimes the most talented, often the younger generation -- is often not represented by older generation, often status quo-oriented union leadership. Such appears to be the case in the Nation's Capital.

The traditional steps-and-ladders compensation system for teachers needs to change in order to recruit a broader set of candidates to teaching -- individuals who are not necessarily in it for their lifetimes and who want to receive compensation based at least in part of their demonstrated impact on students and on their school communities -- and to retain individual educators who are making a real difference for kids.

It is also important that we don't lose sight of the fact that such new compensation systems should be developed in partnership with teachers and the associations that represent them. Now, if those groups are unwilling to come to the table or to bargain in good faith, then that presents a problem, because I believe that there is a growing consensus that teacher pay needs to change. But that isn't necessarily the norm.

Models such as Denver's ProComp are beacons in this on-going dialogue that follow the principle of engaging teachers and jointly developing a new system. The Joyce Foundation (which also funds my employer) is also funding some thoughtful work to recommend new ways of paying educators. Both initiatives are worth a look.

You have read this article Denver ProComp / Joyce Foundation / Michelle Rhee / teacher pay / teacher quality / teacher union / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/10/washington-post-chastizes-dc-teachers.html. Thanks!

Will The New President Support New Educators?

In yesterday's lukewarm editorial about the presidential candidates' education policy platforms, the Washington Post clearly sided with Barack Obama as the preferable option over John McCain. Not exactly a strong endorsement.

One thing is clear. Obama's presidential platform specifically focuses on developing excellent teachers--recognizing educators as the #1 school-based impact on student achievement. As a U.S. Senator, Obama has sponsored and co-sponsored legislation that would fund teacher residency programs and high-quality teacher induction programs. He's not a Johnny-come-lately to this issue.

Other than the fact that the charter-and-voucher-happy Lisa Graham Keegan (Matthew Yglesias/The Atlantic blog) (Arizona Republic article) is his chief education advisor, why is McCain clinging primarily to the tired, old right-wing focus on school structure, market-based reforms, and demonizing teachers at the exclusion of everything else? What too many conservatives don't seem willing to admit is that teachers drive results. Whether it's a public school, a charter school, a voucher school, a religious school or a home school, if a child has a good teacher he will be more likely to succeed. If teacher quality is lacking, learning is much less likely to occur. Teachers are not the enemy - they will lead us where we need to go if we support them and, yes, challenge them when appropriate to do better. But It can't be all sticks and no carrots. And It can't be done to teachers, it must be done with them.

The 'It' is what is in question in this campaign.

There is some hope in McCain's education platform. Buried within it is an interesting idea:

Provide Funding For Needed Professional Teacher Development. Where federal funds are involved, teacher development money should be used to enhance the ability of teachers to perform in today's technology driven environment. We need to provide teachers with high quality professional development opportunities with a primary focus on instructional strategies that address the academic needs of their students. The first 35 percent of Title II funding would be directed to the school level so principals and teachers could focus these resources on the specific needs of their schools.

I agree that Title II monies should be better directed at high-quality, high-impact professional development. About half of these funds currently go to class size reduction which is not necessarily the biggest bang for the buck, particularly outside the early grades. Certainly, some professional development monies are directed at low-quality, pray-and-spray, one-size-fits-all PD seminars. And some teachers are allowed to self-select PD offerings that really aren't focused on improving their teaching. I'm not saying that enrollment in Underwater Basket Weaving is rampant, but simply that districts and school leaders should have more say in -- and a better understanding about -- helping teachers improve through purposeful PD.

As McCain so often discusses, it is also appropriate to focus on weeding out ineffective teachers. But even more important is identifying the effective ones through meaningful evaluation systems [Ed Sector] [NGA] [NCCTQ], figuring out what makes them effective, and using that knowledge to transform the practice of the vast majority of mediocre-to-average-to very good teachers by improving preparation [ECS] [Edutopia] [SREB] [TNE], instituting high-quality induction programs [NTC] [AASCU] [AEE], and and designing career-long professional development opportunities [CCSR] [CCSSO] [PEN] [VA DOE] that support individualized teaching contexts.

The main problem with McCain's proposal is that he has proposed ratcheting down increases in domestic spending. That means little money to implement No Child Left Behind-related programs and fund needed teacher quality reforms. (Remember, we've got to fund those tax cuts for the rich that sickened McCain just a few years ago; oh yes, and pay for the 100-year war in Iraq.)

Obama, on the other hand, has signaled a willingness to reform teacher compensation and strengthen professional development systems and ante up federal resources and target them at high-need, hard-to-staff schools and districts across the country. His focus clearly is on making teachers better with a focus on student outcomes. That's a more comprehensive approach that makes a lot more sense. I agree with the Post that he needs to go further in fleshing out his views on issues such as teacher assignment and teacher tenure, but Obama's reform-minded, student-focused teacher policy proposals are a refreshing change from the "status quo or bust" and "more money is the only answer" ethos of many recent Democratic presidential contenders.

With regard to McCain, I wish he would spend less time talking about bad teachers and more time talking about how we can learn from good ones. And enough with this voucher obsession! Let's focus on making our public schools as good as they can be. That starts with strengthening America's teaching force.

You have read this article Barack Obama / Education / induction / John McCain / mentoring / presidential campaign / teacher education / teacher effectiveness / teacher quality / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/08/will-new-president-support-new-educators.html. Thanks!

A Generational Divide Over Teacher Pay

Interesting story in today's Washington Post about the continuing saga over D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee's teacher compensation proposal.... Based on anecdotal evidence, the article suggests that support and opposition to Rhee's plan is breaking down along generational lines, with younger teachers generally supportive of the Chancellor's plan to base salaries, in part, on student performance and older teachers opposed.

I've always thought that union opposition to moving away from the traditional steps-and-lanes teacher salary schedule would lessen over time as a new generation of takes over leadership of national, state and local union chapters. That day hasn't quite arrived in most places. But the debate in D.C. certainly exposes the generational rift within the teaching profession and within union membership. And the ranks of younger teachers are swelling as the Baby Boomers retire.

I have to wonder how many potential teaching candidates we lose by our failure to recognize performance (based on student achievement or anything else) at any point in most of our teacher compensation systems. How many forsake the teaching profession entirely because of the design of the compensation system? The steps-and-lanes approach to paying teachers (based on years of experiences, advanced degree and PD credits) certainly doesn't warm the cockles of the younger generations' hearts. Have districts like Denver with differentiated compensation systems attracted individuals to teaching that might otherwise gone to another field? Perhaps it's too soon to tell, but I think this is an area that warrants further research.

You have read this article compensation / Michelle Rhee / teacher pay / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/08/a-generational-divide-over-teacher-pay.html. Thanks!

"Illusory" Test Score Gains

Here is a neat little story from today's Washington Post that puts my recent post about Maryland test scores into some context.

Recent reports from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and [Bruce] Fuller's group, Policy Analysis for California Education, have concluded that most recent gains on state tests are illusory, reflecting better test-taking skills or lower standards rather than increased knowledge. Another study, from the Center on Education Policy, concluded that the gains seemed genuine but did not necessarily reflect greater learning.

You have read this article adequate yearly progress / Assessment / AYP / Maryland / NCLB / No Child Left Behind / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/07/test-score-gains.html. Thanks!

DC Pay Update

Today's Washington Post reports on the new teacher compensation proposal put forth by Washington, DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee.

D.C. teachers interested in the huge salary increases proposed by Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee would not only have to relinquish their seniority but also risk dismissal by spending a year on probation, according to details of the plan released yesterday.

The tradeoff, part of one of two salary scenarios under discussion, could earn an instructor with five years of experience as much as $100,000 in base pay and bonuses. The structure would put the city's teachers in an elite class in a profession in which the national average salary is $47,600, according to the most recent survey conducted by the American Federation of Teachers.

D.C. school officials said the leaps in pay would be subsidized partly by private foundations.

See background blog posts here and here.

You have read this article compensation / Michelle Rhee / Performance Pay / teacher pay / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/07/dc-pay-update.html. Thanks!

It Doesn't Add Up

Every couple of months it seems a new (inter)national report is released bemoaning the performance of American students in mathematics or recommending improvements. But what is clear from today's Washington Post editorial on John McCain's voodoo economics is that math lessons didn't always 'take' for past generations of students either. McCain - a self-professed economics neophyte - either doesn't know that 2+2=4 or refuses to acknowledge it. I'm not sure which is worse.

You have read this article John McCain / mathematics / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/07/it-doesn-add-up.html. Thanks!

Teacher Pay Reform in DC

Interesting developments on teacher compensation in District of Columbia Public Schools.... D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee is pushing performance pay for teachers and apparently has gotten a number of foundations interested in funding the proposed reform.

As a Democrat for education reform, I am open to and interested in the overhaul of the traditional steps-and-lanes approach to compensating teachers (based on years of experience and advanced degrees--factors largely unrelated to teacher quality). We've got to think about ways to attract new talent into the profession. Increasing overall salaries is one approach, but a good portion of any increase needs to be directed toward individuals willing to take on additional duties and leadership roles, those with high-demand knowledge and skills, those willing to teach in more challenging environments, and those who can demonstrate their effectiveness on student outcomes.

The devil is in the details, and I am wary of pay proposals based entirely on test scores. It isn't yet clear exactly how Rhee's proposal would function exactly and it is still under negotiation with the D.C. teachers union, but it does sound "test-score heavy". For instance, how would teachers who teach untested subjects or untested grades be compensated under the new system? Would there be school-wide bonuses available on top of individual bonuses? Would school principals, curriculum specialists, and others be eligible for the new pay system? What test score or scores would be used? Would they be appropriately scaled? Would additional pay be based on a value-added methodology, on overall proficiency, on a single year or multiple years worth of data? Do any readers have answers to these questions?

Leaving these questions unanswered for the moment, Rhee's proposal would appear to give teachers the choice of sticking with the current system or giving up seniority and tenure rights for the chance at dramatically boosting their pay based on demonstrated effectiveness. And it would inject a bunch of new money into the system to fund salary increases. All in all, it's a deal that many teachers -- including the younger generation of educators -- may be willing to accept.

Read more:
Washington Post editorial (7/8/08)
Washington Post story (7/3/08)

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

Additional resources on teacher compensation:
Brian Hassel/PPI - Better Pay for Better Teaching
Center for American Progress/Dan Goldhaber - Teacher Pay Reforms: Political Implications...
CPRE Policy Brief - Teacher Performance Pay
Denver's ProComp
ECS/Joyce Foundation - Funding Diversified Teacher Compensation Systems
Educator Compensation Institute
NGA - Improving Teaching Through Pay for Contribution

You have read this article compensation / Michelle Rhee / Performance Pay / teacher pay / teacher quality / Washington DC / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/07/teacher-pay-reform-in-dc.html. Thanks!

Journalists Who Make Claims About Educational Practice Without Hard Evidence

This is part 1 of a continuing series...

Today's example: Susan Kinzie of the Washington Post.

In Sunday's WaPo Kinzie wrote an upbeat article about a University of Virginia administrator (Sylvia Terry) who really cares about the success of college students, particularly minority students struggling to make it on that elite Southern campus. Overall, a nice portrait of someone who appears to be a nice woman.

But Kinzie's judgment lapsed when she wrote her lead:
"More black students graduate from the University of Virginia within six years than from any other public university in the country, and here's why: institutional commitment, an admissions process that selects strong students, generous financial aid and a network of peer advisers."

While Kinzie was smart enough to not chalk up UVa's successes to a single factor or person, and even wise enough to note the selection process which generates an able student population, she made a strong causal statement without citing a shred of empirical support. Did anyone do a multivariate analysis comparing UVa to other schools, identifying factors such as institutional commitment as the drivers setting the school apart from others? I didn't think so.

The problem with statements like these is that they give the false impression that taking actions like increasing admissions standards or ramping up advising will close black/white gaps in college completion. They *might* but we don't know that from what Kinzie's indicated here.

Don't get me wrong-- I don't disagree with Kinzie's hypothesis. I just want reporters to accurately depict what we know-- and don't know-- about works in education.

You have read this article college / college completion / University of Virginia / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/05/journalists-who-make-claims-about.html. Thanks!

Education Missing in Latest Presidential Debate

Tom Shales wrote a spot-on column ("In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC") in today's Washington Post slamming moderators Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos of ABC News for their performance in last evening's presidential debate between Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama. Shales chastized Gibson and Stephanopoulos for dwelling on "specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed," rather than ask substantive questions about important policy issues like education.

Their efforts resulted in the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's name being mentioned 16 times during the debate. From the way-way-backkkk machine, even the Weather Underground was mentioned twice. I expected Timothy Leary to jump out from behind the curtain at any moment.

Fascinating. Don't believe me? Read the debate transcript.

What discussion was there of education? Not much amidst the inane questions, parries and thrusts about stark raving mad pastors, imagined sniper fire, flag lapel pins, and bomb throwing radicals who were pardoned by President Clinton and who sit on nonprofit boards in Chicago.

In her opening statement, Senator Clinton vowed to "make our education system the true passport to opportunity." Later on, she called herself "a strong supporter of early childhood education and universal pre-kindergarten" and said she would "end" No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Early childhood is worthy of greater investment, but what exactly would she replace NCLB with?

Senator Obama framed some of his comments about education around the issue of tax fairness, saying that "those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries." Obama went on to say that "investing in our schools" and other national priorities can't be done "for free." If I were a Republican, I'd call him "a tax and spend liberal." Of course, after 8 years of W, that seems like a breath of fresh air. Let's line up the millionaires and let them pay their fair share for a change.

You have read this article Clinton / Education / No Child Left Behind / Obama / Tom Shales / Washington Post with the title Washington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/04/education-missing-in-latest.html. Thanks!