Tag Archives: student achievement

How should student content mastery be judged?

Posted on by

New HampshireThe Alliance for Excellent Education suggests that New Hampshire’s shift from “seat time” measures of student proficiency to “competency-based learning” measures is one that other states would do well to follow.

As this blog wrote about previously, the Carnegie Unit, or credit hour, has long been the measure by which students were judged before they were deemed ready to advance to the next grade. The Carnegie Unit was originally created in 1906 by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching as a means by which professors could argue for pensions, but it quickly became the standard by which student levels of educational attainment were measured across the board.

Strengthening High School Teaching and Learning in New Hampshire’s Competency-Based System, a new report from the Alliance for Excellent Education, “profiles how two high schools in New Hampshire made a shift to competency-based learning and examines the necessary changes at both the school and in state policy. Competency-based advancement is an important part of New Hampshire’s strategy for implementing the Common Core State Standards and meeting the state department of education’s goal that every student ‘deserves a course of study that allows him or her to learn in a deep, meaningful, and practical way.’ ”

Bob Wise, the President of All4Ed and former governor of West Virginia commented about New Hampshire’s content-mastery model implementation:

“When people are buying a new car, they don’t ask how long it took to build. Instead, they ask how well it performs. For too long, the nation’s education system has promoted students based on how long they spent sitting in a classroom rather than what they have learned. New Hampshire’s experience, although still evolving, holds tremendous promise as an approach for improving student learning outcomes in a system that encourages advancement by demonstrating competency instead of completing seat time.”

Based on the experience of the two schools which so far have implemented the system, Sanborn Regional High School and Spaulding High School, new leadership models and new models of grading and assessment stand out as particularly important aspects of change. Principals and teachers need more time to become the active designers of curriculum and assessments that fit the new model because “both schools have eliminated the A–F and numbered grading system and replaced it with ratings that include not yet competent and insufficient work submitted.” “Students deemed not yet competent are offered additional interventions until they reach mastery, including online tools, one-on-one teacher time, and student collaboration. Additionally, both schools have adopted unique and innovative learning approaches, such as digital learning, that create a more flexible learning schedule that extends beyond the school day.”

A January 22 webinar, archived on the All4Ed website, featuring New Hampshire Department of Education Deputy Commissioner Paul Leather and two educators from New Hampshire, Brian Stack, principal of Sanborn Regional High, and Erica Stofanak, curriculum, instruction, and assessment coach for the Rochester School District provided a unique opportunity for teachers from other districts and states to learn about what is taking place in those two high schools.

For the link to the webinar and the link to the full report, please see below:

http://media.all4ed.org/webinar-jan-22-2013

http://www.all4ed.org/files/StrengtheningHSTeachingLearningNH.pdf

Share

Unlocking Student Effort

Posted on by

TNTP, a national nonprofit organization working to ensure that all students get excellent teachers, recently released a first-of-its-kind resource on effective teaching written by and for practicing teachers.

The resource, Unlocking Student Effort , is a paper that includes five essays written by the winners of TNTP’s 2012 Fishman Prize for Superlative Classroom Practice, a prestigious $25,000 award intended to spotlight excellence in teaching and the practices of the nation’s most effective educators.

Unlocking Student Effort focuses on a common challenge many teachers face: How to engage reluctant students in rigorous academic content. In their essays, the 2012 Fishman Prize winners explain how they overcome this challenge in their classrooms.

Individually, the essays provide a glimpse into five remarkable classrooms where students are achieving at high levels. Collectively, they offer a range of strategies from teachers who are having breakthrough success in some of the nation’s most challenging school settings.

  • Shira Fishman, a 9th-11th grade Math teacher in Washington, DC, and the teacher for whom the Fishman Prize was named, describes how she builds a sense of urgency and community in her classroom during the first five minutes of each class period.
  • Whitney Henderson, a 7th grade Writing teacher in New Orleans, LA, writes about showing students how the seemingly irrelevant academic content they study applies to the futures they dream of.
  • Jamie Irish, an 8th grade Math teacher in New Orleans, LA, vividly illustrates how he rallies students around the challenge of outperforming their peers at a more affluent, selective enrollment school just two miles away.
  • Katie Lyons, a 6th-8th grade Literacy/Social Studies teacher in Chicago, IL, describes how she engages her students in rigorous historical material by connecting it to their own lives and the diverse neighborhood around them.
  • Leslie Ross, a 9th grade Biology teacher in Greensboro, NC, shows how she leads her students to success in her highly rigorous biology course by gaining their trust and building a powerful sense of team spirit.

The paper is intended to be the first of an annual series from TNTP, written each year by a new cohort of Fishman Prize winners on a new topic related to best classroom practices.

The application period for the 2013 Fishman Prize will open early November 2012.

To learn more and download the full paper or request a print copy, visit tntp.org/fishmanprize.

Share

Dear Data, Please Make Yourself More Useful

Posted on by

In a recent commentary piece for Education Week, Brad C. Phillips and Jay J. Pfieffer reflect on data and how it is (mis)used in education.  “Factions are setting up camp at two extremes: one for those who believe data is the Holy Grail, and the other for those who shun it,” they write.  Phillips and Pfieffer’s view of data takes the middle ground: data is only useful if people can access and use it.

“Mountains” of data exist, but “there is little that busy people can use to make good decisions…the fixed and standardized ways that data are reported often do not strike educators as relevant or useful.”  To win teachers over to the belief that data can be useful in better understanding their students at the individual level, the authors offer several guidelines to help data meet what they call the “usefulness standard”:

  • Engage teachers and decision makers in the design of the tools used to collect data.  They observe that only 28 states make longitudinal student data available to teachers, and though 40 states offer feedback to teachers based on student performance data, few ask whether the data included are what teachers want and need.  Currently, the emphasis is on collecting summative test-score data, which only measures what has been learned at the end of a course of study—it does not help teachers make midcourse corrections or revisions to help students as they learn.
  • Create regular opportunities to huddle around the data.  Only 8 states require teachers and principals to be “data literate.”  Statewide longitudinal data systems should create regularly scheduled opportunities “for teachers to gather and strategize about particular students who are struggling.”
  • Tailor reports to your audience.  Data systems need to have the capacity to create multiple types of reports that can be pulled at different points of time—each stakeholder is going to want different information.  The authors believe that part of the reason some educators are skeptical about the utility of data is because the tools they have available are not the right ones for the job.
  • “Useful” means many things and has many audiences.  Currently, most data collection and reporting is narrowly confined to what is required by NCLB.  Adding other types of data, such as prior coursework and grades, writing samples, participation in tutoring programs, etc. will improve the usefulness of data to classroom teachers, who can use it to tailor their lessons.
  • Continuously hone validity and accuracy.  The focus on “accountability” and the way data is used for this purpose is often viewed as punitive and unfair.  On the other hand, statewide longitudinal data systems “have the opportunity to become highly developed instrument panels that guide teaching with a host of information about students, not just test scores.”  The daily practice of using data has been acknowledged by classroom teachers to improve their effectiveness, and thus the data produced.

In the end, the authors conclude that “the time is nigh for education data systems to make themselves much more useful.  Just as electronic health records and disease registries are fueling greater discoveries and personalized patient care, education data must become a necessity of teaching.”

To read the full article, please visit http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/05/23/32phillips.h31.html?qs=dear+data

Share

Student Motivation: An Overlooked Piece of School Reform

Posted on by

The Center on Education Policy at George Washington University has released a series of papers examining the role of student motivation in current reform efforts.  The summary paper, Student Motivation: An Overlooked Piece of School Reform, pulls together the research from six background papers, each addressing different aspect of student motivation.

Each report in the collection contains case studies of current programs and policies and implications for the future.  The reports include:

  • What is motivation and why does it matter?
  • Can money or other rewards motivate students?
  • Can goals motivate students?
  • What roles do parent involvement, family background, and culture play in student motivation?
  • What can schools do to motivate students?
  • What nontraditional approaches can motivate unenthusiastic students?
  • Appendix: Theories of motivation

While there is no single strategy that works to motivate all students, or even the same student in all contexts, the many different sources reviewed by CEP suggest various approaches that can help improve student motivation, the report finds.  Some of the strategies suggested include:

  • Programs that reward academic accomplishments are most effective when they reward students for mastering certain skills or increasing their understanding rather than rewarding them for reaching a performance target or outperforming others.
  • Tests are more motivating when students have an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge through low-stakes tests, performance tasks, or frequent assessments that gradually increase in difficulty before they take a high-stakes test.
  • Professional development can help teachers encourage student motivation by sharing ideas for increasing student autonomy, emphasizing mastery over performance, and creating classroom environments where students can take risks without fear of failure.
  • Parents can foster their children’s motivation by emphasizing effort over ability and praising children when they’ve mastered new skills or knowledge instead of praising their innate intelligence.

To read this series, please visit http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=405

Share

Shared Vision for the Next Generation of Teaching

Posted on by

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan joined seven fellow national education leaders last month in signing a shared vision for the future of the teaching profession during the opening 2012 Labor Management Conference in Cincinnati.

“Lessons and best practices from talented teachers is the driving force behind this shared vision for transforming the teaching profession,” said Duncan.  “The principles outlined in the document represent ways to strengthen and elevate teaching as one of our nation’s most valued and respected professions.”

The shared vision, Transforming the Teaching Profession, focuses on three main goals:  1) high levels of student achievement judged by multiple measures; 2) increased equity through narrowing achievement and opportunity gaps; and 3) increased global competitiveness.  Seven core principles make up the elements of achieving these goals. They include:

  1. A culture of shared responsibility and leadership;
  2. Recruiting top talent into schools prepared for success;
  3. Continuous growth and professional development;
  4. Effective teachers and principals;
  5. A professional career continuum with competitive compensation;
  6. Conditions that support successful teaching and learning; and
  7. Engaged communities

U.S. education leaders developed the shared vision following the 2012 International Summit on the Teaching Profession held in New York City in March. The event gathered teachers, union leaders, and education ministers from 23 high performing and rapidly improving countries and regions to share ideas and best practices for elevating teaching and improving student performance.

The 2012 Labor Management Conference brought together state and district teams nationwide to spotlight local work around the next generation of great teaching. Over a dozen state and district presenters showcased their work, which includes elements illustrated in the vision document such as collaborative working environments, career ladders, differentiated compensation, college and career ready standards, and community engagement to support classroom instruction.

For more information on the core principles, please visit http://www2.ed.gov/documents/labor-management-collaboration/2012-shared-vision.pdf

 

Share

The Condition of Education 2012

Posted on by

The National Center for Education Statistics released The Condition of Education 2012 last week, an annual publication mandated by Congress.  The report summarizes important developments and trends in education using the latest available data. The report presents 49 indicators on the status and condition of education. The indicators are grouped under three main areas: (1) participation in education; (2) elementary and secondary education; and (3) postsecondary education. In addition, the report contains a closer look at high schools in the United States over the past twenty years.

This year’s report features a closer look at high schools in the United States and how they have been changing in recent decades.  ”We have seen a lot of changes in high schools over the past 20 years,” said NCES Commissioner Jack Buckley. “The classroom is more diverse, far fewer students work, and more students are taking rigorous math and science courses. Schools are safer, and the use of distance education has rapidly expanded.”

The high school findings include:

  • GROWTH IN ENROLLMENT IN THE WEST AND SOUTH: From 1989 to 2010, public high school student enrollment increased by 52 percent in the West, from 2.4 to 3.7 million, and by 35 percent in the South, from 4.0 to 5.4 million.
  • MORE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ARE TAKING SCIENCE AND MATH COURSES: Some 16 percent of 2009 high school graduates had taken calculus, and 11 percent had taken statistics, compared to 7 percent and 1 percent, respectively, of 1990 graduates. Similarly, 70 percent of 2009 high school graduates had taken chemistry and 36 percent had taken physics, compared to 49 percent and 21 percent, respectively, of students in 1990.
  • DISTANCE LEARNING IS GROWING RAPIDLY: In 2009-10, some 53 percent of school districts in the United States had high school students enrolled in distance education. In that year there were over 1.3 million distance education course enrollments, compared to .2 million just seven years earlier.
  • ONLY 1 IN 6 HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WORK: Between 1990 and 2010, the percentage of high school students ages 16 and above who were employed decreased from 32 percent to 16 percent.
  •  HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES ARE IMPROVING: The overall averaged freshman graduation rate (AFGR) was higher for the graduating class of 2008-09 (75.5 percent) than it was for the graduating class of 1990-91 (73.7 percent).

This year’s report documents important indicators in elementary and secondary and postsecondary education, including:

  •  CHARTER SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS RISE: From 1990-2000 to 2009-10, the number of students enrolled in public charter schools more than quadrupled from 340,000 to 1.6 million students; in 2009-10, some 5 percent of all public schools were charter schools.
  • TEN PERCENT OF PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS ARE ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS: An estimated 4.7 million public school students in the United States were English language learners in 2009-10, compared to 3.7 million in 2000-01.
  •  UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT CONTINUES TO INCREASE: Between 2000 and 2010, undergraduate enrollment increased by 37 percent, from 13.2 to 18.1 million students. Projections indicate that undergraduate enrollment will continue to increase, reaching 20.6 million students in 2021.

To view the full report please visit http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/

Share

Improving Mathematical Problem Solving in Grades 4 Through 8

Posted on by

The What Works Clearinghouse has released a new guide focused on improving math skills in students in the middle grades.  The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), part of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), functions as a central repository for education research on “what works” in education.

Periodically, IES releases a “practice guide” based on the most recent research, to describe best practices for a particular area of education.  The new practice guide, Improving Mathematical Problem Solving in Grades 4 Through 8, describes five strategies to improve students’ mathematical problem-solving skills.  The guide recommends that teachers:

  1. Prepare problems and use them in whole-class instruction.
  2. Assist students in monitoring and reflecting on the problem-solving process.
  3. Teach students how to use visual representations.
  4. Expose students to multiple problem-solving strategies.
  5. Help students recognize and articulate mathematical concepts and notation.

Along with presenting the recommendations, IES indicates how much high-quality evidence backs up the publication panel’s recommendation.  For those above, the first has minimal evidence, the second and third strong evidence, and fourth and fifth moderate evidence.  “Despite the varying levels of evidence, the panel believes all five recommendations are important for promoting effective problem-solving skills in students.”  Particularly addressing recommendation one, the panel notes that few studies have actually focused on the effects of teacher planning on achievement, in any subject area.  However, it is clear that a teacher’s intentional construction of particular types of problems is integral for improving students’ skills.

To download the guide and see these recommendations in detail, including implementation ideas and examples, summaries of supporting research, and solutions to common roadblocks, please visit http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguide.aspx?sid=16.

Share

Special Education Approaches Go Mainstream

Posted on by

Instructional approaches usually associated with special education are gaining traction as states and districts are faced with implementing the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), reports Education Week. Two strategies, universal design for learning (UDL) and response to intervention (RTI), have been frequently cited in NCLB waiver requests for CCSS implementation in the section about how the state will implement the standards.

Broadly, UDL involves creating lessons and classroom materials flexible enough to accommodate different learning styles. The RTI approach can identify learning problems early and introduce focused lessons (interventions) to address those problems. The instructional methods have gained popularity because otherwise, educators are faced with narrow mandates and a broad population.

“Without a system to be responsive to student need, we’re back where we started with standards: aiming at the middle. There was going to be nothing intrinsically new unless we seized upon an opportunity to make this about every kid,” explains Emilie Amundson of the Wisconsin Education Department.

Districts already using one or both of these approaches believe they are best-suited for helping them implement the CCSS.  Though new approaches to instruction won’t erase the challenges of implementing standards that are more rigorous than current state standards, it may make implementation more responsive and mitigate fears that the standards will once again turn students with disabilities into scapegoats for poor performance.

To read the full story, please visit http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/04/25/29cs-speced.h31.html?tkn=RSBFzoH5F9GTJL57UTdUa%2BcVqA06%2BesABqRF&cmp=clp-ecseclips

Share

Chicago’s Teacher Incentive Program: Final Report

Posted on by

Mathematica Policy Research has released its final report on the Chicago Teacher Advancement Program (TAP), and found that the program did not do exactly as intended.  TAP aimed to improve schools by increasing teacher quality, and provided multiple opportunities for professional development, school leadership positions, structured feedback, and mentoring.

Overall, the program appears to have increased teacher retention.  Teachers in Chicago TAP schools when the program started in fall 2007 were about 20% more likely to still be in those schools three years later—a 20% higher retention rate than at comparison schools.  However, the real goal of the TAP program, that is, boosting student achievement through increased teacher quality, does not appear to have been met.  Over the first four years of the program, “there was no detectable impact on math, reading, or science achievement that was robust to different methods of estimation.”

TAP originally was supposed to include a pay-for-performance component, but this was never fully implemented.  The value-added component was also not implemented because the data needed to reliably link students and teachers was unavailable.  Additional payouts for performance were awarded, but never exceeded $6,400 and were tied to a value-added calculation at the school or grade level, not at the classroom level.

To read the full study, please visit http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/pdfs/education/TAP_year4_impacts.pdf

Share

Do High School Teachers Matter?

Posted on by

A new working paper by C. Kirabo Jackson, Assistant Professor at Northwestern, takes a closer look at value-added measures and their application to high school teachers.  Jackson notes that there is ample research at the elementary level detailing the importance of individual teachers on student outcomes in reading and math, but there isn’t much supporting this conclusion at the secondary level.  He also observes that “value-added methodologies designed for elementary school teachers may be inappropriate for measuring teacher quality in high school,” mainly because students are placed on different tracks in high school with different teachers, as opposed to spending time with one main teacher all day.

At the high school level, “even with random assignment of students to teachers, if different teachers teach in different tracks, and students in different tracks are exposed to different treatments, there will be bias due to ‘track treatment effects.’”  Track treatment effects may be due to other teachers, the content of other courses, or explicit track level requirements/treatments.  This results in two possibilities for selection bias: non-random placement of students due to their track, or omitted variables bias due to the different treatment of students based on their track.  Given all of this, using value-added measures at the high school level may be an inefficient (and unfair) basis for teacher evaluation policies.

In a detailed study of 9th grade Algebra and English teachers’ student test scores, Jackson found substantial bias due to track-specific treatments.  Once tracks are accounted for in the model, more than half of the teacher effects disappeared.  In other words, it doesn’t seem to matter which English teacher a student has, though there are some teacher effects present in Algebra.

Jackson also found evidence that because students are sorted into tracks based on previous achievement, some tracks have higher pre-test achieving students than would exist if students were assigned randomly.  There is no evidence of substantial sorting on other student characteristics within tracks.

Third, for Algebra there is a significant relationship between teachers’ previous value-added scores and current value-added score.  However, the persistence of value-added effects is weaker than has appeared in elementary school studies (only about 1/3 as powerful).  For English, no significant teacher effects were found.

Finally, Jackson found that Algebra teachers have no meaningful effect on English scores, and vice versa.  This is contrary to what other studies have found.  Jackson accounts for this difference by concluding other research has used methods that are biased and do not separate out the effects of random, non-persistent classroom effects.

To read the full paper, please visit http://works.bepress.com/c_kirabo_jackson/22/

Share