The Education Gadfly Weekly

Lisa Snell, Reason Public Policy Institute July 2004

The Reason Public Policy Institute's Lisa Snell authored this 30-pager addressing how, and how well, charter schools are accountable for their (estimated) 56-80,000 special ed pupils and how to strengthen their capacity to do right by such youngsters. It presents results from a survey of California charters, some of them quite interesting, especially with respect to ways that IDEA cramps innovation by charter schools. The biggest challenge is the mismatch between IDEA's funding mechanisms and the circumstances of charter schools - and how much better they, and their disabled students, would be served by a weighted per-pupil funding system in which the dollars follow the student to the school he/she attends. You can find it online here. 

Chrisanne L. Gayle, Progressive Policy InstituteJuly 2004

This short PPI report argues on behalf of federally funded after-school programs, which made the news last year when President Bush proposed cutting the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program (see Gadfly, Volume 3, Number 6; Congress ultimately kept the funding intact). A study by Mathematica kicked off the controversy, as it concluded that the program not only has scant academic merit but actually worsened students' behavior in some cases. But PPI says it's rash to judge a program on a single study, particularly when other studies of out-of-school time programs have revealed "small positive effects on student achievement in reading and math." So rather than cut funding, PPI recommends determining what's wrong with the 21st Century program and fixing it. One would hope that the program must eventually yield measurable gains in student learning. PPI agrees in part, arguing that such programs also have merit because they "help children develop social skills" and improve their attitudes toward school. Thus Ms. Gayle would prefer to "evaluate the effectiveness of after-school programs based on the entire range of benefits to children, families, and communities, while maintaining a strong emphasis on student learning." Well, maybe. The paper is available by clicking here.

The Education Alliance July 2004

West Virginia's Education Alliance, with support from the Benedum Foundation, engaged PK Educational Enterprises to conduct focus groups with high-school students, including white, black, and low-income youngsters. The core question was what, in students' eyes, schools should do to boost learning and narrow the achievement gap. What the analysts concluded from this fascinating exercise is expressed with admirable clarity and concision in the report's own executive summary, quoted herewith. The main point is stark: students believe that schools and educators are the cause of much of the achievement gap. "Some white students have support, encouragement, social capital, and the resources that teachers, counselors, and administrators can provide. . . . These are the 'favorite' students and schools support and nurture them. . . . However, other students, particularly lower-achieving whites, experience classism at school. It is clear to these students that some school personnel do not expect anything from them academically. These students lack support and direction from school personnel and have no meaningful vision for the future. . . . African-American students described many challenges including racism, neglect, and verbal abuse by some school personnel and disenfranchisement from academic enrichment opportunities. Even in 2004, racist sentiments and actions appear to be acceptable among some white students and school personnel, particularly in rural schools." Strong stuff. You can find it online here.

Krista Kafer, Heritage FoundationJuly 6, 2004

This short Heritage "Backgrounder" offers an overview of NCLB and some suggestions for how to improve that law and keep its implementation going forward. The suggestions are sensible, if not surprising: ensure that the choice provisions are used; resist cries for more funding; and offer more flexibility for states that do well. They also call for an "honest discussion of the benefits and costs of NCLB," though that's probably wishful thinking, at least during election time. This paper is most useful for its succinct summary of NCLB, including background on the birth of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in the '60s, the trend toward achievement testing that took root in the '90s, and the compromises and challenges that accompanied NCLB's drafting and, now, its implementation. You can find it online by clicking here.

According to the Washington Post, Mexico's largest teachers' union (also the largest union period in Latin America) has created "a monstrous system of perks and patronage" that has basically made it impossible for teachers to be fired, even if they rarely show up for work. Teachers in Mexico often work two full-time jobs, missing half or more of their classes, abuses that education officials are powerless to curb. And like some sort of medieval guild, they have the right to bequeath their job to their children - or sell it to the highest bidder, a practice that is nominally illegal but widely tolerated by union leaders. A good lesson for American education reformers: things could always be worse.

"A union's grip stifles learning," by Mary Jordan, Washington Post, July 14, 2004

What does it take to kill a damaging and misleading falsehood? For years, respectable researchers and advocacy groups from left and right have been trying to quash and correct the misleading high-school graduation rate figure put out annually by the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS). Yet the exercise feels like shooting at a cloud of dust; no matter how many times you hit it, the thing just keeps rolling on. You might suppose that embarrassment, if not professional research standards, would be enough to get the Census Bureau to stop publishing it, or at least express doubts about its accuracy. Yet there it was again the other day, a new ridiculous figure based on 2003 data to replace its ridiculous 2002 figure.

The new bogus figures claim that 85 percent of all U.S. adults (those over 24) and 80 percent of black adults have completed high school. These numbers are hailed as all-time highs by the Census Bureau's press release. For those more interested in the current graduation rate, the Census Bureau claims that a full 87 percent of young adults (ages 25-29) have completed high school. You can read the report for yourself by clicking here.

This would be fantastic news if it were true, but it isn't. Since many news outlets report these figures as actual graduation rates because of the credibility that always attends Census Bureau numbers, it's important to once again explain why they can't be believed.

First of all, the CPS counts those who receive a high-school equivalency certificate (like the GED) as identical to regular high school graduates. This badly inflates the graduation rate, since earning such a certificate is decidedly not "equivalent" to graduating from high school. Indeed, research shows that life outcomes for GED recipients are far closer to those of high school dropouts without GEDs than to those of true high school graduates.

The underlying problem here is that CPS's survey question is too vague. It asks, "What is the highest grade of school [this person] has completed, or the highest degree [this person] has received?" Since the question does not ask the respondent to distinguish between a GED and a real diploma, CPS has no choice but to report all high school "completers" in the same category. Everyone from the Business Roundtable to the Urban Institute has denounced this practice. Yet the CPS plugs on, year after year, asking the same defective survey question, oblivious to the urgent national need for accurate high-school graduation rate figures.

Second, the CPS does not include in its survey America's sizeable population of people living in institutional settings. This means, among other things, that approximately 1.3 million prison inmates are not included. Since it is well established that high school dropouts are over represented in prison, CPS thus overestimates the high school graduation rate.

Third is the inherent problem of self-reporting. A survey asking about educational outcomes of respondents and their family members is vulnerable to inaccurate reporting, given the stigma associated with dropping out of high school. Respondents may also be confused due to the vagueness of the CPS's survey question; a person who completed 12th grade but did not receive a diploma, for example, perhaps because he failed an exit exam, may well report that he completed high school.

These problems explain the huge discrepancy between the CPS figures and everybody else's estimates, which are based on more solid data. For example, the U.S. Department of Education collects state enrollment figures and diploma counts every year. These data tell a different story. In 1998-99, for instance, there were about 3.8 million 9th graders in public schools in the United States, but when those 9th graders should have graduated (in 2001-02) only about 2.6 million high school diplomas were handed out by U.S. public schools. In 1998-99, U.S. public schools enrolled about 661,000 black 9th graders, but in 2001-02 only 325,000 diplomas were awarded to black students. Analysts have devised various methods for adjusting these figures to account for population changes and other problems. You can read Jay Greene's and my preferred method at http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_03.htm. But you don't have to take our word for it. The Business Roundtable, the Harvard Civil Rights Project, and the Urban Institute, using different methods, have produced almost identical results. Indeed, a surprisingly broad consensus has emerged among researchers across the political landscape: the overall U.S. high-school graduation rate today is close to 70 percent and the black graduation rate is about 50 percent. That's compared with the Census Bureau estimates of 85 and 80 percent.

Sure, some small part of this discrepancy occurs because Census includes graduates from private schools as well as public schools, and private schools have a somewhat higher graduation rate. But this can't come close to accounting for the yawning gap. We know that public high schools gave out about 2.6 million diplomas in 2001-02, and private high schools gave out approximately 280,000 diplomas, adding up to about 2.9 million diplomas total. In June 2001, according to the Census, there were almost exactly 4 million 17-year-olds in the U.S. That comes out to about 72 percent. Even counting GEDs would only get us up to 80 percent.

The bottom line is that the CPS graduation rate isn't consistent with the number of young people in the population and the number of diplomas we give out. Are extra graduates parachuting in from high schools on the moon?

It's time for the Census Bureau to come clean about the unreliability of its numbers. Ideally, it would fix these problems. But that would mean changing the CPS, and the Census bureaucracy is far more interested in maintaining the year-to-year comparability of its numbers. In any case, while there are obvious improvements the Bureau should make (a more precise survey question to distinguish GEDs from real graduates, for starters), it may just not be feasible to produce a fully satisfactory graduation rate figure based on a survey. A second-best solution would be for the Bureau to stop publishing its graduation rate. But if it must put out reports claiming to provide information on educational attainment, it should at least make clear the limitations of its data - and acknowledge the wide consensus in the research field that what CPS measures doesn't reflect the important realities of American secondary education.

If the Census Bureau enjoys being the slowest, fattest target on the educational shooting range, that's its business. It should (and as a government agency probably will) keep right on doing what it's always done. But it shouldn't expect the rest of us to quit taking shots at its work any time soon.

Greg Forster is a senior research associate at the Manhattan Institute's Education Research Office (www.miedresearchoffice.org).

Bloodied but unbowed, Cheri Pierson Yecke - whose nomination as Minnesota's education chief was defeated on a party line vote marked by the worst kind of partisan rancor (see Gadfly, Volume 4, Number 17) - has joined the Center of the American Experiment, the most distinguished think tank in the Twin Cities. (Visit www.amexp.org.) There she joins Dr. Mitchell Pearlstein, Kathy Kersten, and other distinguished analysts and commentators at one of America's best state policy groups. We hope she uses that perch not only to advance knowledge and deepen understanding but also to stick it to Minnesota DFLers who killed her nomination as a way to stick it to GOP Governor Tim Pawlenty. Revenge, it is said, is a dish best enjoyed cold. But politicians have short memories so it oughtn't be left in the freezer too long.

"Yecke takes job at Minneapolis think tank," Associated Press, July 7, 2004

One senses mounting desperation among the more vociferous opponents of No Child Left Behind. Consider, for example, the "protest songs" unveiled at the National Education Association's recent convention. What fun for all concerned. What a trip. Oh, for the heady days of revolution, when music could change the world! (Though in the descent from Joan Baez to Lily Eskelsen's effort, with its unforgettable refrain of "If we have to test their butts off, there'll be no child's behind left," we detect a marked deterioration in lyric quality. As we didn't hear her croon it, we can't compare their vocalizations.) Now, the Los Angeles Times reports that humor has become another weapon in the anti-NCLB arsenal, though we doubt Rod Paige is quaking in his boots as a result of such efforts as "No School Budget Left for the Mind." (Truly hysterical, you will doubtless agree.) Better still, some educators have recently tried to connect some dots and concluded: it's a conspiracy! A coalition of Massachusetts school administrators "said emphatically that the current system is designed to fail nearly every public school in America, no matter how good it is. 'I don't think this was an accident,' said Phillip F. Flaherty, assistant director of the Massachusetts Secondary School Administrators Association. 'This (No Child Left Behind) was written by very, very gifted, very bright people.'" Of course, Mr. Flaherty, of course. Why don't you come down off that ledge and we'll talk some more?

"Humor not left behind in attacks on Bush law," by Erika Hayasaki, Los Angeles Times, July 14, 2004

"Fed law designed to fail, say educators," by Steve Urbon, Dartmouth Standard-Times, July 11, 2004

"No Child Left Behind has teachers singing protest songs," by Greg Toppo, USA Today, July 6, 2004

This year, the Georgia State Board of Education has revised its academic standards in reading, math, science, and social studies - the first major curriculum overhaul in the Peach State in nearly two decades. And last week, the board voted to adopt the new standards for K-12 science, middle school English, and K-8 math. The board has yet to vote on the contentious new social studies standards, which received 3,000 of the 5,000 comments posted on the board's website during the public comment period and were the focus of a Gadfly debate earlier this year. (See Gadfly, Volume 4, Number 4 and Gadfly, Volume 4, Number 5 for more.) Georgia officials are heralding these new curriculum changes as the answer to the state's education woes: "We have great hope that these standardized curriculum guidelines will improve Georgia's student performance on the state CRCT and national measures such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test," an editorial in the Macon Telegraph reported. "The sweeping reform of what is taught in our schools should also positively impact the new Adequate Yearly Progress reports that rate schools' effectiveness in teaching rather than students' mastery of knowledge." Fortunately, you won't have to wait long to see if outside analysts share this optimism. In a couple of months, we'll unveil Fordham's new reviews of state English and math standards, the first such since enactment of NCLB.

"State curriculum gets new look," by Adam Crisp, Savannah Morning News, July 9, 2004

"Curriculum changes could lead state out of the mire," Macon Telegraph, July 9, 2004

In today's Wall Street Journal, Education Secretary Rod Paige gives a blistering critique of the NAACP leadership, accusing Julian Bond and Kweisi Mfume of taking "a proud, effective organization in a totally new direction: naked partisan politics, pure and simple." Specifically, Paige accuses the NAACP leaders of attacking NCLB - whose goals are designed to improve the educational opportunity for black students - "merely because of its origins in the Bush administration." Paige argues that, while he agrees with Mr. Bond that "we still have two school systems in this country: one that serves children well and the other that hasn't," he strongly believes "the answer to this problem is to ensure that schools focus on the needs of the children first, not the 'system,'" which is "what NCLB is about." The article is a must-read, particularly for blacks who have been brow-beaten by their peers for not toeing the party line on education issues.

"Naked Partisans," by Rod Paige, Wall Street Journal, July 15, 2004 (subscription required)

Let's call it failing upward: This year, a South Carolina middle school teacher charged with helping students cheat on the state's standardized test was inadvertently rewarded for her actions with a new job (and $5,000 stipend) teaching other educators how to be effective math instructors. To be considered for the position, teachers must have two years of teaching experience plus a master's degree, or five years' experience plus a bachelor's degree. Evidently, they need supply no evidence of effectiveness in the classroom - or, it would seem, integrity. In its defense, state education department spokesperson Marsha Johnson said "We assume the districts are going to make the best recommendations possible for us. We have no way of knowing that type of information (criminal charges) unless a district tells us."

"Teacher hired despite charges," by Gina Smith, The South Carolina State, July 12, 2004

Chrisanne L. Gayle, Progressive Policy InstituteJuly 2004

This short PPI report argues on behalf of federally funded after-school programs, which made the news last year when President Bush proposed cutting the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program (see Gadfly, Volume 3, Number 6; Congress ultimately kept the funding intact). A study by Mathematica kicked off the controversy, as it concluded that the program not only has scant academic merit but actually worsened students' behavior in some cases. But PPI says it's rash to judge a program on a single study, particularly when other studies of out-of-school time programs have revealed "small positive effects on student achievement in reading and math." So rather than cut funding, PPI recommends determining what's wrong with the 21st Century program and fixing it. One would hope that the program must eventually yield measurable gains in student learning. PPI agrees in part, arguing that such programs also have merit because they "help children develop social skills" and improve their attitudes toward school. Thus Ms. Gayle would prefer to "evaluate the effectiveness of after-school programs based on the entire range of benefits to children, families, and communities, while maintaining a strong emphasis on student learning." Well, maybe. The paper is available by clicking here.

Krista Kafer, Heritage FoundationJuly 6, 2004

This short Heritage "Backgrounder" offers an overview of NCLB and some suggestions for how to improve that law and keep its implementation going forward. The suggestions are sensible, if not surprising: ensure that the choice provisions are used; resist cries for more funding; and offer more flexibility for states that do well. They also call for an "honest discussion of the benefits and costs of NCLB," though that's probably wishful thinking, at least during election time. This paper is most useful for its succinct summary of NCLB, including background on the birth of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in the '60s, the trend toward achievement testing that took root in the '90s, and the compromises and challenges that accompanied NCLB's drafting and, now, its implementation. You can find it online by clicking here.

Lisa Snell, Reason Public Policy Institute July 2004

The Reason Public Policy Institute's Lisa Snell authored this 30-pager addressing how, and how well, charter schools are accountable for their (estimated) 56-80,000 special ed pupils and how to strengthen their capacity to do right by such youngsters. It presents results from a survey of California charters, some of them quite interesting, especially with respect to ways that IDEA cramps innovation by charter schools. The biggest challenge is the mismatch between IDEA's funding mechanisms and the circumstances of charter schools - and how much better they, and their disabled students, would be served by a weighted per-pupil funding system in which the dollars follow the student to the school he/she attends. You can find it online here. 

The Education Alliance July 2004

West Virginia's Education Alliance, with support from the Benedum Foundation, engaged PK Educational Enterprises to conduct focus groups with high-school students, including white, black, and low-income youngsters. The core question was what, in students' eyes, schools should do to boost learning and narrow the achievement gap. What the analysts concluded from this fascinating exercise is expressed with admirable clarity and concision in the report's own executive summary, quoted herewith. The main point is stark: students believe that schools and educators are the cause of much of the achievement gap. "Some white students have support, encouragement, social capital, and the resources that teachers, counselors, and administrators can provide. . . . These are the 'favorite' students and schools support and nurture them. . . . However, other students, particularly lower-achieving whites, experience classism at school. It is clear to these students that some school personnel do not expect anything from them academically. These students lack support and direction from school personnel and have no meaningful vision for the future. . . . African-American students described many challenges including racism, neglect, and verbal abuse by some school personnel and disenfranchisement from academic enrichment opportunities. Even in 2004, racist sentiments and actions appear to be acceptable among some white students and school personnel, particularly in rural schools." Strong stuff. You can find it online here.