A recent National Education Summit on High Schools focused on what state government in partnership with philanthropic foundations can do to address the high drop-out rate and lack of college or workplace readiness in many high schools.

High schools have been a top priority of the National Governors Association (NGA) in recent years, as well as a major interest of the second term Bush administration. Governors from 45 states and territories attended the conference which was co-sponsored by the NGA and Achieve, Inc.

At the end of the summit, six foundations (see below) pledged $23 million (£12.6 million*) to help states create and implement policies designed to improve graduation rates and effective preparation for college or the workplace. Matching funds pledged from the state sector brought the total for this initiative to $42 million (£23 million*). The NGA Center for Best Practices will manage and award the grants on a competitive basis.

Following the summit, 13 states (Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Texas) immediately signed on to redesign their high schools in collaboration with Achieve, Inc, with more states expected to join the initiative soon.

The policy and practice changes suggested to states as a result of the summit are outlined in an Action Agenda for Improving America's High Schools. The five steps described in the agenda are:

• Make all students proficient and prepared
• Redesign the American high school
• Give high schools the excellent teachers and principals they need
• Hold high schools and colleges accountable for student success
• Streamline and improve education governance.

As the current chair of the NGA, Virginia’s Governor Mark Warner has pushed the agenda on redesigning the American high school, which he has been doing within his own state, and was instrumental in the national education summit. Earlier in the year he and the NGA released a ten step plan to help states get started on education reform.

Download and read Getting It Done: Ten Steps to a State Action Agenda.

Six foundations: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Michael & Susan Dell Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, The Wallace Foundation, The Prudential Foundation and the State Farm Foundation.

*exchange rate as of June 2005: US$ 1.82 = 1GBP.

(Sources: Progressive Policy Institute’s 21st Century Schools Project Update Feb. 22, 2005 and March 15, 2005; Education Week March 9, 2005)

The third annual report on the impact of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act has been released by the Center on Education Policy. It is based on an extensive body of original research and analysis, including a survey of education officials in 49 states, a survey of 314 nationally representative school districts, and in-depth case studies in 36 districts.

A majority of school districts report that student achievement on state tests is improving, and the achievement gap is narrowing between white students and their minority peers. However, states and districts also indicate that they have concerns about understaffing and lack of funding to implement the provisions of the law. Districts also question the fairness of reporting adequate yearly progress (AYP) and the goal of having all students proficient in reading and math by 2014.

Only one percent of eligible students had taken the option to transfer out of their low-performing school; 18 percent of eligible students had participated in supplemental services such as private tutoring. Two-thirds of districts did not know what effect the school choice provisions were having on student achievement.

Read the press release and Report on the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, Year 3.

Shortly after the above report, the Education Secretary, Margaret Spellings, announced greater flexibility for states implementing the NCLB law:

• Special education students would be assessed separately
• A panel would look at ways of giving states credit for raising achievement, even if the standards were not yet at the levels required by the law
• The Education Department would work with states over waivers of certain rules within the law, only if states continued to show rising achievement (with evidence such as higher test scores, a narrowing achievement gap, or increased graduation rates).

The backbone of the law – annual testing in reading and math in grades three through eight, and once in high school and reporting scores by demographic and racial categories – were deemed non-negotiable.

The state of Connecticut has announced plans to file a lawsuit against the US Department of Education over the requirements of NCLB. Connecticut asserts that it will spend $8 million (£4.4 million*) of its own budget to implement the law. It says the federal government is mandating a law without providing adequate funding. Connecticut has not yet set a date for filing the suit and has invited other states to join its action.

In the meantime, the National Education Association (the largest teachers’ union) along with several school districts has filed a similar lawsuit against the Education Department for federally mandating an under-funded law. Although reaction has been mixed as to the efficacy of such actions, the political symbolism has not been lost on commentators who point to a growing discontent with NCLB.

Read more on the National Education Association’s lawsuit against the US Department of Education.

*exchange rate as of June 2005: US$ 1.82 = 1GBP.

(Source: Education Week, March 23, 2005; April 13, 2005; April 27, 2005)

The policy of zero tolerance for school discipline issues is pushing students needlessly into the juvenile criminal system, according to a recent report from the Advancement Project. The report looks at school districts in Chicago, Denver and Palm Beach and concludes that the involvement of police for minor incidents has risen sharply over the last few years. It suggests that a policy, which was introduced for the most serious behavioral issues, has expanded and is now more widely implemented for minor discipline problems. The report suggests that many of the disciplinary infractions could be handled by school and parental intervention. It also concludes that minority students are adversely affected by the zero tolerance policy.

Download an executive summary of Education on Lockdown: The Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track or read the full report (64 pages). The report can be downloaded in sections from Advancement Project's website.

Learn about the three target cities at Stop the Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track.

(Source: Education Week April 6, 2005)

A study by the RAND Corporation uses information from four federal databases to track the achievement gap in math between black and Latino students and their white peers between 1972 and 2002.

The study finds that the achievement gap, although it persists, decreased over the twenty year period when the social conditions of the lower-performing groups improved. They also noted that achievement suffered when schools became more racially isolated and less diverse (that is, predominantly black or Latino). This is particularly worrying for policymakers as current statistics suggest that schools are becoming more racially segregated.

Rather than identifying any new ideas to tackle the problem, the researchers suggest a broadening of approaches used currently (such as linking education policy more to welfare policy).

Download and read Examining the Gaps in Mathematics Achievement Among Racial-Ethnic Groups, 1972-1992.

(Source: Education Week, May 4, 2005)

A nonprofit organization, EPIC (Every Person Influences Children), has a mission to help parents, teachers, and community members raise children to become responsible and capable adults. EPIC sponsors parent centers which can be found in more than 15 states.

Each parent center serves economically disadvantaged, minority and limited-English proficient communities and is typically housed in a school. Each is staffed with professionals and offers parenting resources and training, a lending library and computers with Internet access. The centers serve as central locations for the referral of community-based services and information. EPIC centers conduct two main parent-focused programs: Pathways to Parenting and Pathways to Leadership.

The Pathways to Parenting program trains community members, often parents themselves, to lead small discussion groups where participants discover solutions to parenting challenges and enhance their parenting skills. It also provides specialized workshops that target specific needs in a community, such as Ready, Set, Read, which focuses on enhancing family literacy.

The second program, Pathways to Leadership, links parents, teachers and school faculty in a collaboration to develop participants’ leadership skills. The program aims to increase participants’ knowledge about how to become effective advocates for children in their local community.

In 2003, the EPIC parent centers’ program was evaluated by an independent agency, Magi Educational Services, Inc. The three-year study found that EPIC centers improved parent-child relationships, increased parents’ knowledge of child development and academic achievement and increased parent involvement in schools. In the first year of the program, parent participation in parent/teacher conferences at EPIC schools was at 34 percent. By the third year, participation increased to 60 percent. In 2003, 79 percent of teachers who taught in schools where a parent center was located attributed increased parent involvement at the school to the center. Evaluations of EPIC parenting workshops over the past 10 years show similar results.

EPIC parent centers are funded by federal (Parental Information and Resource Centers Grant Program), state and private grants.

(Source: adapted from the US Department of Education’s The Education Innovator, April 4, 2005)

A report released by the RAND Corporation provides a cost-benefit analysis of sending every Californian four-year-old to preschool and concludes that the state would reap $2-4 for every dollar spent on early childhood education.

The researchers say that the costs of providing universal preschool would be offset by reduced spending on special education, less grade retention, less crime and a more productive workforce. The study looks at the potential benefits of a universal preschool program rather than a program targeted only at children with a higher risk for educational and behavioral problems. According to the analysis, the state would “break even” when a child enrolled in preschool reached age 14.

There is a growing demand for preschool in Chicago where the school district recently opened a “third shift” of free classes for three and four-year-olds between 3.30pm and 5pm at four city sites. Some Illinois policymakers are calling for free preschool for all families.

Each state differs in the preschool service it provides, with only Georgia and Oklahoma offering preschool to all, regardless of income. (Florida voters passed a mandate to provide universal preschool but it is not yet in operation.) Most states serve the neediest children first, but the growing evidence of the importance of quality early childhood education has policymakers looking to increase funding and services.

Download and read The Economics of Investing in Universal Preschool Education in California.

(Source: Chicago Tribune, March 15, 2005; Education Week April 6, 2005)

For anyone interested in a one-stop shop for basic data on charter schools (publicly funded, independently run schools), the Charter School Leadership Council (CSLC) has produced a useful guide.

For example, it provides data on the number of charters (3,400), their enrollment (300,000), waiting lists (39 percent have them, averaging 135 students each) and locations (more than half are in three states, California, Arizona, and Florida).

Ten percent of charter schools are managed by Education Management Organizations (EMOs), approximately 14 percent use the Core Knowledge method and 16 percent were converted from existing public schools. 27 states have caps on charters; about half of traditional schools have started new programs in response to charter school competition; and half of all charter school authorizers* work with just a single charter school. The CSLC's guide summarizes the research on academic achievement, noting the mixed but "encouraging" results.

Download and read State of the Charter Movement 2005: Trends, Issues and Indicators.

*Charter school authorizers are educational agencies that authorize and oversee charter schools. They can be local school boards and districts, state education boards and departments of education, universities or colleges, municipal bodies. For more information go to the National Association of Charter School Authorizers.

(Source: The Education Gadfly, May 19, 2005)

A report from Jobs for the Future (JFF) looks at dual enrollment programs as a way of expanding access to college for underrepresented groups. Dual enrollment is where high school students take college courses at a postsecondary institution during their final two years of school.

The report outlines strategies which states can adopt to implement dual enrollment programs. It provides:

• an overview of dual enrollment and the rationale for its expansion
• guidelines and funding models for states wishing to adopt dual enrollment
• brief case studies in Florida, Utah and New York City.

The report is part of JFF’s Double the Numbers initiative which is designed to support state and federal policies aimed at dramatically increasing participation in postsecondary education by low-income families.

At the same time, the National Center for Education Statistics released a report showing that a majority of high schools now have students pursuing “dual credit” (high school courses for college credit). Larger schools are most likely to offer such programs. The data include Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses.

Download and read Add and Subtract: Dual Enrollment as a State Strategy to Increase Postsecondary Success for Underrepresented Students and Dual Credit and Exam-Based Courses in U.S. Public High Schools: 2002-03.

A US Department of Education study describes the various groups of students attending community colleges and finds that the number of younger adult students (aged 24 and under) is increasing compared to the more traditional older student. Younger adults account for 42 percent of the community college population compared to 32 percent a decade ago.

The rising cost of attending a four-year institution is thought to account in part for more younger students choosing community colleges (as well as the spike in college-age offspring due to the so-called “baby boom echo”).

The research shows that transfers from community college to four-year institutions perform as well as students who began their college life at the university, with the exception of those in scientific fields who appear to be lagging their peers.

A study which uses data collected from the National Education Longitudinal Survey, a federally financed project that tracked more than 12,000 participants from 1988 until 2000 (aged 13 to around 26), describes how different racial groups use community colleges:

• Latino students appear to make much greater use of community colleges than do students in other ethnic groups.
• Among students in the longitudinal study who graduated from high school on time, in 1992, Latino students were much more likely to earn at least some course credits at two-year institutions than were white or African-American students: 45 percent of the Latino students in the study attended a two-year institution at some point between 1992 and 2000, as opposed to 35 percent of white students and 32 percent of black students.
• Among the three ethnic groups, Latino students were the only ones who were more likely to attend a two-year institution than to attend a four-year college. Only 29 percent of Latino students attended a four-year college, as opposed to 44 percent of white students and 38 percent of black students.

Read Moving Into Town—and Moving On: The Community College in the Lives of Traditional-age Students and Improving Student Attainment in Community Colleges: Institutional Characteristics and Policies.

(Sources: Education Week, March 16, 2005; Chronicle of Higher Education, April 12, 2005)

Reauthorization of the Carl D Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act took a further step forward with a large majority vote in the House of Representatives in favor of the act. A unanimous vote in the Senate in favor of reauthorizing the act took place in March. The differences between the two bills will now be debated between the two chambers.

The votes point to the bipartisan approach to the popular act which finances career and technical programs. The Bush administration had wanted to redirect funding from the Perkins Act to fund its high school initiative. Lawmakers want to retain the Perkins Act but are likely to demand increased accountability and evidence of achievement which the President feels has been lacking.

Meanwhile Congress continues to work on reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA). Congress failed to reach agreement on the act, which was last reauthorized in 1998, during the last session, and it has been extended twice for one-year periods.

The act that authorizes federal programs for student loans, grants, work-study and institutional aid also covers programs to improve teacher preparation. Reauthorization is viewed as especially important at a time of rising college tuition costs and access to college for low and middle income students.

Under Republican measures, the revised HEA would:

• Increase the maximum Pell Grant award from $4,050 to $5,800 (£2,225 to £3,187*) for the 2006-07 through 2012-13 academic years
• Prevent borrowers who wished to refinance student loans from locking in a low, fixed interest rate
• Place colleges that consistently raise tuition at a certain rate above inflation on a government watch list.

Under proposals favored by Democrats, the revised law would:

• Increase the maximum Pell Grant from $4,050 to $4,500 (£2,225 to £2,472*) in 2005-06 and $7,600 (£4,176*)  the following year, increasing thereafter by $1,000 each year through 2010-11
• Offer incentives to colleges and universities for choosing to participate in the Federal Direct-Loan Program
• Provide for increased amounts of loan forgiveness and cancellation under HEA programs for certain teachers.

Early signs are hopeful that the partisan disagreements will be reconciled during this session of Congress.

*exchange rate as of June 2005: US$ 1.82 = 1GBP.

(Source: Education Week, March 16, 2005, April 13, 2005 and May 11, 2005)