working together to improve student achievement and close gaps----

Working Together to Improve Student Achievement and Close Gaps----Oregon’s Superintendents’ Summer Institute

2006 Superintendents’ Summer Institute:“Strategies for Student Success”State Department of Education

Portland, Oregon August 7, 2006

First, some good news.After more than a decade of fairly flat achievement and stagnant or growing gaps, we appear to be

turning the corner.

NAEP Reading, 9 Year-Olds:Record Performance for All

Groups

150

170

190

210

230

250

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core

African American Latino White

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic ProgressNote: Long-Term Trends NAEP

African American-White Gap Narrows to Smallest Size in History

NAEP Reading, 9 Year-Olds

150

170

190

210

230

250

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core

African American White

29 3526


Latino-White Gap Narrows to Smallest Size in History


150

170

190

210

230

250

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core

Latino White

24 2821



200

220

240

260

280

300

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core



NAEP Math, 13 Year-Olds:Increases and Record

Performance for All Groups

200

220

240

260

280

300

1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core



Bottom Line:When We Really Focus on

Something, We Make Progress

Clearly, much more remains to be done in elementary and

middle schoolToo many youngsters still

enter high school way behind.

2005 NAEP Grade 8 MathAll Students, Nation

32

39

29

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Students

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

Proficient/AdvancedBasicBelow Basic

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/

2005 NAEP Grade 8 Mathby Race/Ethnicity, Nation

59

19

50 45

21

33

34

38 41

42

9

47

13 1537

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AfricanAmerican

Asian Latino NativeAmerican

White

Per

cent

of S

tude

nts



2005 NAEP Grade 8 Mathby Family Income, Nation

49

21

38

41

13

38

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Poor Non-Poor

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s



But at least we have some traction on these

problems.

The Same is NOT

True of High School

High School

Age 17: Math and Science NAEP Long-Term Trends

280285290295300305310315

1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Scal

e Sc

ore

MathScience

Source: NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress and NAEP 1999 Trends in Academic Progress.Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP

Age 17: Reading and Writing NAEP Long-Term Trends

250255260265270275280285290295300

1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Scal

e Sc

ore

READINGWRITING

Source: NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress.Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP

Gaps between groups wider today than in 1990


220

240

260

280

300

320

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core


21 29


NAEP Math, 17 Year-Olds

220

240

260

280

300

320

1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rage

Sca

le S

core


20 28


Students Make More Growth Grade 5 to 8

than Grade 9 to 12

Value Added in High School Declined During

the Nineties

Not just a pattern on NAEP.State assessments show

similar trends.

Hormones?

Students in Other Countries Gain far More in

Secondary School TIMSS

2003: U.S. Ranked 24th out of 29 OECD Countries in Mathematics

300

350

400

450

500

550

Finl

and

Kor

eaN

ethe

rland

sJa

pan

Can

ada

Bel

gium

Sw

itzer

land

New

Zea

land

Aus

tralia

Cze

ch R

epub

licIc

elan

dD

enm

ark

Fran

ceS

wed

enA

ustri

aG

erm

any

Irela

ndO

EC

D A

vera

geS

lova

ck R

epub

licN

orw

ayLu

xem

bour

gP

olan

dH

unga

ryS

pain

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Por

tuga

lIta

lyG

reec

eTu

rkey

Mex

ico

Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , data available at http://www.oecd.org/

http://www.oecd.org/

Problems are not limited to our high-poverty and high-

minority schools . . .

U.S. Ranks Low in the Percent of Students in the Highest Achievement Level (Level 6)

in Math

0

2

4

6

8

10

Bel

gium

Kor

eaJa

pan

Finl

and

Net

herla

nds

New

Zea

land

Sw

itzer

land

Aus

tralia

Can

ada

Cze

ch R

epub

licIc

elan

dD

enm

ark

Sw

eden

OE

CD

Ave

rage

Aus

tria

Ger

man

yFr

ance

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Nor

way

Irela

ndP

olan

dLu

xem

bour

gH

unga

ryU

nite

d S

tate

sIta

lyTu

rkey

Spa

inP

ortu

gal

Gre

ece

Mex

ico

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s



U.S. Ranks 23rd out of 29OECD Countries in the Math

Achievement of High-SES Students

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Bel

gium

Net

herla

nds

Finl

and

Cze

ch R

epub

licC

anad

aJa

pan

Kore

aS

witz

erla

ndA

ustra

liaG

erm

any

New

Zea

land

Fran

ceD

enm

ark

Sw

eden

Aust

riaH

unga

ryO

EC

D A

VE

RA

GE

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Luxe

mbo

urg

Irela

ndIc

elan

dP

olan

dN

orw

ayU

nite

d S

tate

sS

pain

Por

tuga

lIta

lyG

reec

eTu

rkey

Mex

ico

Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore





Problems not limited to math, either.

Let’s Take A Quick Look At Achievement in Oregon

NAEP 4th Grade Reading: All

White 4th graders: NAEP Reading

Low-Income 4th Graders: NAEP READING

NAEP 8th Grade Math: All

Low Income 8th Graders? NAEP MATH

White 8th Graders: NAEP Math

According to the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP), only 31% of

Oregon’s 4th graders read at the proficient level.

Though state test scores suggest much higher levels of proficiency, they also

show large gaps.

64

79

50

66

81

0

20

40

60

80

100

AfricanAmerican


White

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

2003 Oregon Statewide Assessment (OSA), Grade 5 Reading & Literature

Source: The Education Trust * Edwatch Online 2004 * State Summary Report

Similarly, according to NAEP, only 32% of Oregon’s 8th grade students possess

proficient level math skills.

Here again, state assessment data show higher scores but large gaps.

36

71

3140

63

0

20

40

60

80

100

AfricanAmerican


White

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

2003 Oregon Statewide Assessment (OSA), Grade 8 Math

Source: The Education Trust * Edwatch Online 2004 * State Summary Report

Latino students in Oregon score significantly lower than Latino students

from other states.

Latino students, in contrast to their White peers, are underrepresented in

Advanced Placement courses.

Latino students go to college at rates much lower than their White

counterparts.

Statewide, Oregon lags a little behind top states in its college participation

rates.

Oregon ranks 12th in the nation for its education funding effort

in relation to its per capita income.

Source: Kevin Carey, “State Poverty-Based Education Funding: A Survey of Current Programs and Options for Improvement”, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, November 2002

Oregon spends an above average percent of its per capita income on

education funding, ranking 12th in the nation for its effort.

115.70%100%

0%

20%40%

60%80%

100%120%

U.S. Average Oregon

The ratio of K-12 per-pupil spending in relation to state per-capita income

Source: Kevin Carey, “State Poverty-Based Education Funding: A Survey of Current Programs and Options for Improvement”, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, November 2002

Oregon funds its high-poverty districts with more per-student than its low-poverty districts,

though not as generously as states like Minnesota and New Jersey.

Source: Education Trust calculations based on U.S. Department of Education, school district revenue data for the 2000-2001 school year.

Oregon’s high-minority districts receive $353 more per student than its low-

minority districts.

That translates into:• $8,825 more for a classroom of 25 each

year• $141,200 more for a school of 400 each

yearSource: Education Trust calculations based on U.S. Department of Education, school district revenue data for the 2000-2001 school year.

Federal funding for K-12 in Oregon has increased by 42% since 2001.

Source: U.S Department of Education, “Funds for State-Allocated Student-Aid programs (estimates for 2004-2005 school year).

$182

$136

$211$235

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2001 2002 2003 2004 (estimate)

Mill

ions

of D

olla

rs

Designated funding for the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

Since NCLB’s passage, Oregon’s Grade 5 Reading Scores have

Declined by 3 Points

77 79 76 76

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

ent M

eets

and

Exc

eeds

2001200220032004

Source: Oregon Department of Education, http://www.ode.state.or.us/

Oregon Statewide Assessment (OSA)

The African American-White 5th grade reading gap narrowed by 4 Points.

58

80

6563

8183

0

20

40

60

80

100

2001 2002 2003 2004

Perc

ent M

eets

and

Exc

eeds

African AmericanWhite


22 1620


The Latino-White 5th grade reading gap narrowed by 1 point.

51

80

5455

8183

0

20

40

60

80

100

2001 2002 2003 2004

Perc

ent M

eets

and

Exc

eeds

LatinoWhite


29 2728


However, Oregon’s Grade 5 Math Scores have Increased by 4 Points

since NCLB’s passage

73 75 76 79

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

ent M

eets

and

Exc

eeds

2001200220032004



The African American-White 5th grade math gap narrowed by 6 points.

59

77

6657

8279

0

20

40

60

80

100

2001 2002 2003 2004

Perc

ent M

eets

and

Exc

eeds

African AmericanWhite


181622


The Latino-White 5th grade math gap narrowed by 7 Points.

47

77

6050

8279

0

20

40

60

80

100

2001 2002 2003 2004

Perc

ent M

eets

and

Exc

eeds

LatinoWhite


30 2229


One measure on which we rank high?

Inequality!

These gaps begin before children arrive at the

schoolhouse door.But, rather than organizing our

educational system to ameliorate this problem, we organize it to

exacerbate the problem.

How?

By giving students who arrive with less, less in school, too.

Some of these “lesses” are a result of choices that policymakers make.

Nation:Inequities in State and Local

Revenue Per StudentGap

High Poverty vs. Low Poverty Districts

-$907 per student

High Minority vs. Low Minority Districts

-$614 per student

Source: The Education Trust, The Funding Gap 2005. Data are for 2003

Not Just K-12: In higher education, we spend less per student in the

institutions where most low-income students start.

Expenditures per student

2 Year Colleges $9,183

4 Year Colleges $27,973

Source: NCES Digest of Education Statistics, 2003

But some of the “lesses”–indeed, perhaps the most

devastating ones—are a function of choices that

educators make.

Choices we make about what to expect of whom…

Choices we make about what to teach whom…

Source: CCSSO, State Indicators of Science and Mathematics Education, 2005

Fewer Latino students are enrolled

in Algebra 1 in Grade 8

2429

0

50

2003

Perc

ent E

nrol

led

LatinoWhite

Source: CCSSO, State Indicators of Science and Mathematics Education, 2001

Fewer Latino students are enrolled

in Algebra 2

45

62

0

80

1998

Perc

ent E

nrol

led

LatinoWhite

And choices we make about Who

teaches whom…

More Classes in High-Poverty, High-Minority Schools Taught By Out-of-

Field Teachers34%

19%

29%

21%

0%

50%

Perc

ent o

f Cla

sses

Tau

ght b

y O

ut

of F

ield

Tea

cher

s

*Teachers lacking a college major or minor in the field. Data for secondary-level core academic classes.Source: Richard M. Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania. Original analysis for the Ed Trust of 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey.

High poverty Low poverty High minority Low minorityNote: High Poverty school-50% or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low-poverty school -15% or fewer of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch.

High-minority school - 50% or more of the students are nonwhite. Low-minority school- 15% or fewer of the students are nonwhite.

Poor and Minority Students Get More Inexperienced*

Teachers20%

11%

21%

10%

0%

25%

Perc

ent o

f Tea

cher

s W

ho A

re

Inex

perie

nced

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, “Monitoring Quality: An Indicators Report,” December 2000.

*Teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience.

High poverty Low poverty High minority Low minority

Note: High poverty refers to the top quartile of schools with students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low poverty-bottom quartile of schools with students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. High minority-top quartile; those schools with the highest concentrations of minority students. Low minority-bottom quartile of schools with the lowest concentrations of minority students

Results are devastating.

Kids who come in a little behind, leave a lot behind.

By the end of high school?

African American and Latino 17 Year-Olds Do Math at Same Levels

As White 13 Year-Olds

0%

100%

200 250 300 350

Average Scale Score

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

White 13 Year-Olds African American 17 Year-Olds Latino 17-Year Olds

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress

Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP

African American and Latino 17 Year-Olds Read at Same Levels As

White 13 Year-Olds

0%

100%

150 200 250 300 350

Average Scale Score

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

White 13 Year-Olds African American 17 Year-Olds Latino 17 Year-Olds

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress

Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP

Students Graduate From High School At Different Rates

* 4-Year Graduation Rates

55%

72%

53%

78%

0%

100%

Perc

ent

of S

tude

nts

Gra

duat

ing

in 4

Yea

rs

African American Asian Latino White

Source: Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, The Manhattan Institute, 2006. Leaving Boys Behind: Public High SchoolGraduation Rates.

Data is for the class of 2003.

ADD IT ALL UP...

Of Every 100 White Kindergartners:

94 Graduate from high school

66 Complete at least some college

34 Obtain at least a Bachelor’s Degree

(25-to 29-Year-Olds)

Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. March Current Population Surveys, 1971-2003, in The Condition of Education 2005. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2005/section3/indicator23.asp#info

Of Every 100 African American Kindergartners:

89 Graduate from High School

51 Complete at Least Some College

18 Obtain at Least a Bachelor’s Degree

(25-to 29-Year-Olds)

Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. March Current Population Surveys, 1971-2003, in The Condition of Education 2005. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2005/section3/indicator23.asp#info

Of Every 100 Latino Kindergartners:




(25-to 29-Year-Olds)Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. March Current Population Surveys, 1971-2003, in The Condition of Education 2005. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2005/section3/indicator23.asp#info

Of Every 100 American Indian/Alaskan Native

Kindergartners:

(25 Years Old and Older)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, We the People: American Indians and Alaska Natives in the United States. Data source: Census 2000, www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/race/censr-28.pdf




http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/race/censr-28.pdf

College Graduates by Age 26

Young People From High Income Families

60%

Young People From Low Income Families

7%

SES is a weighted variable developed by NCES, which includes parental education levels and occupations and family income. “High” and “low” refer to the highest and lowest quartiles of SES.

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Coming of Age in the 1990’s: The Eighth Grade Class of 1988 12 Years Later, March, 2002. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2002321

Why do these gaps in achievement exist?

What We Hear Many Educators Say:

• They’re poor;• Their parents don’t care;• They come to schools without

breakfast; • Not enough books• Not enough parents . . .

But if they are right, why are low-income students and

students of color performing so high in some schools…

George Mason Elementary, Richmond City Public Schools

• 319 Students PK-Grade 5• 99.7% African American• 75% Low-Income• Made AYP in 2005

Source: School Matters, www.schoolmatters.com

http://www.schoolmatters.com/

George Mason Gains in Grade 5 Reading

34

90

0

20

40

60

80

100

2002 2003 2004 2005

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

and

Adv

ance

d



George Mason Gains in Grade 5 Math

31

94

0

20

40

60

80

100

2002 2003 2004 2005

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

and

Adv

ance

d



Centennial Place Elementary School

Atlanta, Georgia

• 528 students in grades K-5• 92% African American• 62% Low-Income

Source: School Information Partnership, http://www.schoolmatters.com

Centennial PlaceHigh Achievement for All Students

Grade 5 Math, 200592 92 92 92

0

20

40

60

80

100

Overall AfricanAmerican

Poor Non-Poor

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient


Centennial PlaceHigh Achievement for All Students

Grade 5 Reading, 200591 91 90 92

0

20

40

60

80

100

Overall AfricanAmerican

Poor Non-Poor

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient


Frankford ElementaryFrankford, Delaware

• 29% African-American• 34% Latino• 34% White• 76% Low-Income

Source: Delaware Department of Education Online School Profiles,

http://issm.doe.state.de.us/profiles/EntitySearch.ASPX

Frankford ElementaryClosing Gaps, Grade 5 Math

70

9696 94

0

20

40

60

80

100

2003 2005

Perc

ent M

eetin

g or

Exc

eedi

ng S

tand

ards

PoorNon-Poor

Source: Delaware Department of Education, DSTP Online Reports, http://dstp.doe.k12.de.us/DSTPmart/default.asp

Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High Elmont, New York

• 75% African American• 12% Latino• 11% Asian/Pacific Islander/American

Ind.• 3% White• 24% Low-Income

Source: http://emsc33.nysed.gov/repcrd2004/cir/280252070002.pdf

Elmont MemorialHigh Achievement in

Mathematics969797 100100100 949495

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AfricanAmerican

Latino Low IncomePerc

ent M

eetin

g G

radu

atio

n R

equi

rem

ent

1998 Cohort 1999 Cohort 2000 Cohort (Class of 2004)

Source: http://emsc33.nysed.gov/repcrd2004/overview-analysis/280252070002.pdf

Elmont Memorial High Achievement in English

969796 9897100 10010099

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AfricanAmerican

Latino Low Income

Perc

ent M

eetin

g G

radu

atio

n R

equi

rem

ent

1998 Cohort 1999 Cohort 2000 Cohort (Class of 2004)

Source: http://emsc33.nysed.gov/repcrd2004/overview-analysis/280252070002.pdf

Some of Oregon’s schools have been particularly

successful at helping all students to succeed at high

levels.

Kenton Elementary SchoolPortland, Oregon

• 24% Low-Income• 33% African American• Made AYP for 2003-04

SOURCE: Oregon Department of Education, http://www.ode.state.or.us

Closing the Income Gap at Kenton2003 ELA Composite and Math

Composite

7368

8074

0

20

40

60

80

100

English/Language Arts Math

Perc

ent M

eetin

g or

Exc

eedi

ng S

tand

ards

AllLow Income

SOURCE: Oregon Department of Education, http://www.ode.state.or.us

Ball Elementary SchoolPortland, Oregon

• 80% Low-Income• 33% African American• 21% Latino• Made AYP for 2003-04

SOURCE: Oregon Department of Education, http://www.ode.state.or.us; Dispelling the Myth Online, http://www.edtrust.org

http://www.ode.state.or.us/

http://www.edtrust.org/


Academic Progress at Ball Elementary

Composite Math scores, 2004

Source: Dispelling the Myth Online, http://www.edtrust.org; Oregon Department of Education, http://www.ode.state.or.us/data/reportcard/RCpdfs/04/04-ReportCard-829.pdf

93%

57%63%

52%

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002 2003

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

State AYP target (2003)= 39% Proficiency


Steady Progress at Ball Elementary

Reading Composite, 2004

Source: Dispelling the Myth Online, http://www.edtrust.org; Oregon Department of Education, http://www.ode.state.or.us/data/reportcard/RCpdfs/04/04-ReportCard-829.pdf

84%85%

66%55%

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002 2003

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

State AYP target (2003)= 40% Proficiency



Guess What?Also very big differences in

college results…even among those who serve “same”

kinds of students.

Higher education institutions graduation rates

College Results Online

Bottom Line:At Every Level of Education, What We Do Matters A Lot!

MOVING FORWARD

So What Can We Do?

#1. Don’t be bashful about pressing for all students to

graduate high school “college ready.”

High impact schools aim high for all students. Even when they start with high dropout rates, they aim

students toward college and careers.

That’s Good, Because Education Pays: 2000 U.S. Median Earnings

$15,000

$21,000 $22,700

$28,200

$36,000

$0

$20,000

$40,000

Less ThanHigh School

High SchoolGraduate

Some College AssociateDegree

BaccalaureateDegree

2000

U.S

. Med

ian

Earn

ings

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Public Use Microdata Samples (based on the 2000 Decennial Census)

75% OF NEW JOB GROWTH REQUIRES SOME LEVEL OF

POST-SECONDARY TRAINING

Growing Need for Higher Levels of Education:

Projections of Education Shortages and Surpluses in 2012

-4,000,000 -3,000,000 -2,000,000 -1,000,000 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000

Less Than HighSchool

High School

Associates Degree

Some College

Shortage Surplus

Source: Analysis by Anthony Carnevale, 2006 of Current Population Survey (1992-2004) and Census Population Projection Estimates

Bachelor’s Degree

NEW STUDY FROM ACT:College ready, workforce

training ready=same thing

#2. Add your voice to the movement to make the

“college prep” curriculum the default curriculum for all

students.

Single biggest predictor post-high school success is

QUALITY AND INTENSITY OF HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM

Source: Cliff Adelman, 2006, The Toolbox Revisited, U.S. Department of Education.

Oregon’s Diploma Project: College prep curriculum has benefits far beyond

college.

Students of all sorts will learn more...

Source: USDOE, NCES, Vocational Education in the United States: Toward the Year 2000, in Issue Brief: Students Who Prepare for College and Vocation

*Grade 8-grade 12 test score gains based on 8th grade achievement.

Low Quartile Students Gain More From College

Prep Courses*19

16

28

20

0

30

Math Reading

NELS

Sco

re G

ain

Vocational College Prep

They will also fail less often...

Challenging Curriculum Results in Lower Failure Rates, Even for Lowest Achievers

1623

47

31

0

50

Quartile I (Lowest) Quartile 2

Perc

ent E

arni

ng "

D"

or "

F"

College Prep Low Level

Source: SREB, “Middle Grades to High School: Mending a Weak Link”. Unpublished Draft, 2002.

Ninth-grade English performance, by high/low level course, and eighth-grade reading achievement quartiles

And they’ll be better prepared for the

workplace.

Leading districts, states making college prep the

default curriculum.Texas, Indiana, Arkansas,

Oklahoma, Kentucky, Kansas.

#3. Getting All Students in Courses With the Right

Labels Isn’t Enough.

Higher education can be strong partner in quality assurance strategies.

Historically, most of the really important decisions

about what students should learn and what kind

of work was “good enough” left to individual

teachers.

Result? A System That:• Doesn’t expect very much from

MOST students; and,• Expects much less from some

types of students than others.

Students can do no better than

the assignments they are given...

Grade 10 Writing AssignmentA frequent theme in literature is the conflict between the individual and society. From literature you have read, select a character who struggled with society. In a well-developed essay, identify the character and explain why this character’s conflict with society is important.

Grade 10 Writing Assignment

Write a composition of at least 4 paragraphs on Martin Luther King’s most important contribution to this society. Illustrate your work with a neat cover page. Neatness counts.

#4. Good teachers matter big time.

Students in Dallas Gain More in Math with Effective Teachers: One Year Growth From 3rd-4th

Grade

7

16

02468

1012141618

Students with Teachers inLowest Quintile of

Effectiveness

Students with Teachers inHighest Quintile of

Effectiveness

Ave

rage

Nor

mal

C

urve

Equ

ival

ents

Source: Heather Jordan, Robert Mendro, and Dash Weerasinghe, The Effects of Teachers on Longitudinal Student Achievement, 1997.

Cumulative Teacher Effects On Students’ Math Scores in

Dallas (Grades 3-5)76

27

0102030405060708090

100

Ave

rage

Per

cent

ile R

ank

Dallas StudentsAssigned to 3Highly EffectiveTeachers in aRow

Dallas StudentsAssigned to 3IneffectiveTeachers in aRow

Source: Heather Jordan, Robert Mendro, and Dash Weerasinghe, The Effects of Teachers on Longitudinal Student Achievement, 1997.

Beginning Grade 3Percentile Rank= 55

Beginning Grade 3Percentile Rank= 57

Good teachers matter a lot.

But some groups of kids don’t get their fair share of quality

teachers.

Classes in High Poverty High Schools More Often Taught by

Misassigned* Teachers

28%

14%19% 16%

40%

20%

31%

18%

0%

50%

Math Science English Social Studies

less than 20% Free Lunch greater than 49% Free Lunch

*Teachers who lack a major or minor in the fieldSource: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future (p.16) 1996.

Impact?

Four Concrete Things That Higher Education Can Do To

Help1. Help build the data systems necessary to

understand teacher effectiveness and how it is distributed;

2. Help us understand the practices and characteristics of teachers who produce strong learning gains for students;

3. Produce more teachers with the commitment and skills to teach all students to high levels, and don’t put your stamp of approval on those without the necessary characteristics; and,

4. Join in the effort to make sure that students in high poverty and high minority schools get the teachers they need to succeed.

5. Finally, we’ve got to get serious about success in higher education, too.

Many institutions putting higher priority on access

than success.High Impact Colleges:

See AASCU and EdTrust reports

Bottom line clear: Leadership Matters

Student success must become a higher priority for

all academic units.

YOUcan help to make this happen

by setting stretch goals on student success for each of your institutions, publishing

data on results, and rewarding progress.

Surely we can do better.

The Education TrustPaul F. Ruiz, PhD; Principal Partner

The Education Trust [email protected] www.edtrust.org

Washington, DC: 202-293-1217San Antonio, TX: 210-979-0575

working together to improve student achievement and close gaps----

Documents

similar trends

longterm trends naepage

longterm trends naepstudents

longterm trends naepgaps

education statistics

national center

longterm trends naepnaep

naep data explorer