Policy Issues

Just listened to a short discussion about the growing numbers of students requiring remediation in community colleges on NPR's Tell Me More. Host Michel Martin was talking with a reporter from Florida, so the conversation focused on the situation there. The discussion made some important points, but also some significant errors and omissions.

The reporter noted that most of the incoming students to community colleges in Florida are predominantly minority and/or low income. She also reported that the colleges use student performance on their college entrance tests to determine placement in remedial programs.

What was not mentioned is that in most places, individual colleges decide what scores students need to be classified as remedial. Here in Mississippi, for example, a student may be placed in regular Freshman College Composition with a score of 16 on the English section of the ACT at one community college, but need an 18 to enter that same course at another. Four-year universities, even Ivy League ones, also increasingly offer remedial classes (not mentioned in the story), and they may also have different score thresholds for determining who is or is not ready.  Yet, if a student enters say--Comp I at any of those institutions and passes it, that course will transfer to the institution with the higher or lower entrance score. Hmmm. Is there really a difference in the "readiness" of the student who scores 16 and the one who scores 18? Read on.

To further complicate the college entrance/college readiness maze, the tests used to measure student ability in reading, writing, and math (especially the SAT and ACT) are known to be historically, consistently poor predictors of actual student potential, and that is especially true for minority students. At the community college where I teach, we painstakingly followed the perfomance of several thousand students and found that their initial score on the English section of the ACT had no correlation to their ability to successfully complete Freshman Composition.

Remedial programs have become extremely costly for students---in time and money. Most students who enter remedial classes at the start of their college career do not complete a degree. Ever. Remedial courses cost the same as regular college courses, but do not count towards degree credit. Many poorer students burn up their financial aid in remediation, pushing them either into student loans sooner, or out of college all together when they run out of money.

Colleges and college faculty are hardly united over what constitutes
college readiness in math or English, which presents an interesting
scenario as schools all over the U.S. scramble to implement Common Core
standards that supposedly will ensure college readiness.

Consequently, there is a rising movement to radically change both the admission process and the approach to remediation at the college level. One suggestion is to do away with remedial classes, and place all entering students in credit-bearing college courses, while providing additional supports for those students who may need it (tutoring, learning centers, web resources, etc.).

Not only does a true professional
certification process for teachers make sense, it is long overdue.

For too long, we have tolerated a
hodge-podge of teacher licensing and certification requirements across states
and within states. In some places, a potential teacher must have a master’s
degree in education before applying for a license. In other places, a person
needs only a bachelor’s degree (in any subject) and as little as three weeks of
summer boot camp to be placed in full charge of students.

read more

Not only does a true professional
certification process for teachers make sense, it is long overdue.

For too long, we have tolerated a
hodge-podge of teacher licensing and certification requirements across states
and within states. In some places, a potential teacher must have a master’s
degree in education before applying for a license. In other places, a person
needs only a bachelor’s degree (in any subject) and as little as three weeks of
summer boot camp to be placed in full charge of students.

The call by the AFT task force is
just the latest in a growing consensus among educators of the need to make
teaching a true profession. I have been fortunate to be part of many of these
studies and discussions. For example, in November 2010, the National Council
for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) issued the report
of a blue-ribbon commission
representing teachers, parents, higher
education, state and local school administrators, researchers, and
policymakers. The Commission called for more rigorous teacher candidate
selection and preparation noting, “The nation needs an entire system of
excellent programs, not a cottage industry of path-breaking initiatives.”   The 2012 book,  The American Public School Teacher,
in which a broad range of education commentators reflect on 50 years of teacher
survey data, highlights the growing support among teachers for ideas such as
performance pay and peer evaluation.

It is also worth noting that the
membership and leadership of the much-maligned teacher unions have been at the
forefront of these calls. Earlier this year, NEA released the report
of a similar task force (Commission on Effective Teachers and Teaching)
advocating for “collective accountability and collaborative autonomy.”  Specifically, the 21-teacher Commission
argued for the creation of national teacher standards and for “one national
umbrella group” that would “lead to preparation, licensure, and certification
processes that are consistent, efficient, and cost effective.”  At the other end of the career spectrum, we
teachers on that Commission also recognized the need for “an evidence-based,
peer review teacher evaluation system.”  Tying teacher evaluation to the Common Core
State Standards specifically, may be premature and unwise, given that the CCSS
are just the most recent in a series of standards, and these have yet to be
implemented and proven in the field.

In our 2011 book, Teaching 2030, members of the Teacher Leader Network predicted many of the conditions and changes now being discussed around the teaching profession. As co-author Cindi Rigsbee correctly noted, "“We must expect the respect for teaching afforded to all other jobs.  That is a goal that can only be reached once the world begins to look at teaching as a different profession that it was when our great-grandmothers taught school.”

The creation of a true teaching
profession will require cooperation among the many education stakeholders, but
it is clearly possible and necessary for our children’s sake.  Moreover, Americans have shown consistently
they are willing to pay for quality education for our children. Raising the
overall quality and status of the teaching profession, lays the necessary moral
and economic groundwork for more appropriate professional compensation.  

Cross-posted at National Journal.com

As I was going through my blog reader this morning, I came across a fascinating juxtaposition. 

First, part of the ongoing series in Hechinger Report on the new evaluation system that has become law in neighboring Louisiana. The article notes: 

In English, math, science, and social studies, teachers will be measured on their students’ progress on existing state tests. But Louisiana school districts have broad latitude when selecting the exams that will be used in subjects without standard state tests. In some cases, district officials are letting teachers choose or design the assessments on which they will be judged. In other cases, school boards, superintendents, or principals are picking the exams without consulting or even notifying teachers.[emphasis mine]

State Superintendent John White said state officials recommended a few possible exams in subjects like foreign languages. They also offered guidance on acceptable learning targets for students, and advice as to how administrators can use those targets to decide whether an individual teacher is “effective.” But they felt that it would be “a mistake to impose a test.”

“Our philosophy is that local leadership should be empowered,” he said.

That last phrase is only comforting if you have competent and responsible local leadership. I'm thinking of the school district in which three of my grandchildren attend school, where the entire school board is appointed and not one member has or has ever had a child attend the public schools. 

Just above that was this post from one of the Teacher Ambassadors at the U.S. Department of Education explaining the Department's official position on use of standardized testing in teacher evaluations. Marciano Guttierrez, teacher from Mountain View, California notes that: 

At a speech to the National Council for Social Studies, Mr. Duncan stated, “Just to be 100 percent clear—evaluation should never be based only on test scores. That would be ridiculous. It should also include factors like principal observation or peer review, student work, parent feedback. It should be designed locally—and teachers should be at the table to help design it.” The Department’s work on educator evaluations has thus been to promote multiple measures to elicit a well-rounded perspective on one’s craft and to encourage districts and schools to primarily use these tools as a means for quality professional development. This thinking was also captured in a speech that the Secretary made to Baltimore County teachers this past fall....

...As a previous Teacher Fellow with the Hope Street Group, and in my current work with Race to the Top states, I have seen a variety of state-developed approaches and strategies that aim to meet this vision. I have come to realize that the strongest evaluation systems have been developed with robust teacher input at every stage of the process.  These evaluation systems, which are designed and improved with the practical insight of teachers, use test scores as only one of multiple measures of effectiveness, therefore allowing teachers of students like mine, to demonstrate quality teaching in ways that transcend test scores alone.

So why all the confusion? Why are so many places trying to develop teacher evaluations as if there are no guidelines, no models, and no professional educators to help design them? How is the teacher evaluation process developing where you are?

 

 

As I was going through my blog reader this morning, I came across a fascinating juxtaposition. 

First, part of the ongoing series in Hechinger Report on the new evaluation system that has become law in neighboring Louisiana. The article notes: 

read more


National Board Certified Teacher, Glenda Ritz, presented the voters of Indiana clear, consistent, convincing evidence that she deserved to be the new state school chief.

Although outspent by a 5 to 1 margin, Glenda defeated incumbent Tony Bennett (R), who had been hailed as a national example of education reform. She was the only Democrat to win a state office in Indiana, and she won it with more votes than almost any other candidate. 

Glenda, a 33-year teaching veteran, is a library/media specialist at Crooked Creek Elementary School in Indianapolis, and serves (as I do) on the Board of Directors of the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). 

Glenda's victory came as a result of massive grassroots reaction to Bennett's policy moves, rejected by parents and teachers across the state and across political lines. Glenda's platform, however, was straightforward and student-centered: 

1. Give more time to education, less time to testing.

2. Give more control to local school districts to implement state and federal standards

3. Make sure every child is safe and respected at school and at school activities.

4. Make teacher licensing and evaluation standards top in the nation. 

5.  Clear the barriers to quality vocational education.

Her decision to run and her victory should serve as an encouragement to teacher leaders across the nation: Don't just complain; be the change. 


National Board Certified Teacher, Glenda Ritz, presented the voters of Indiana clear, consistent, convincing evidence that she deserved to be the new state school chief.

read more

Confirming what many of us already know first hand, a recent report from the National Education Policy Center, argues that the school turnaround policies currently being favored (and funded) by the U.S. Department of Education and many states, are actually making conditions worse for the schools with the greatest needs.

The article is highlighted in the most recent issue of Public School Insights, and deserves more attention.

Here's a slice:

Confirming what many of us already know first hand, a recent report from the National Education Policy Center, argues that the school turnaround policies currently being favored (and funded) by the U.S. Department of Education and many states, are actually making conditions worse for the schools with the greatest needs.

The article is highlighted in the most recent issue of Public School Insights, and deserves more attention.

Here's a slice:

Those of you who think education issues have not been getting enough attention during the Presidential campaign, may want to check into this:

Jon Schnur, education advisor to President Obama, and Phil Handy, who serves the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney in the same role, will debate education policy matters at stake in the 2012 election during a special webcast co-hosted by Education Week, the leading education trade paper, and Teachers College at Columbia University. The event is sponsored by the International Reading Association. The session, scheduled for October 15, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. EST, will be moderated by Susan Fuhrman, president of Teachers College. Registration for the live webcast is free at www.edweek.org. (Click on "Topics" and then "Campaign 2012.") A panel discussion featuring education journalists and others will immediately follow the debate.

Some of you will recall that a similar event was held at Teachers College and hosted by Fuhrman prior to the last Presidential election. That one featured Linda Darling Hammond representing President Obama. Many of us hoped that her highly visible presence as an adviser during the campaign signaled she might be our next Secretary of Education.  Given that history, I'm a little skeptical (aren't you surprised) that what we hear from the surrogates in this debate will be an accurate reading of what we can expect in terms of policy after the election dust settles.

Still, thanks to EdWeek, IRA, and Teachers College for at least putting the campaigns on record. We'll be paying attention.

Syndicate content