Examining the NAEP 2019 Results in Terms of Equity. Benchmark indicators are critical tools to help education stakeholders track their education system’s performance (1) over time, (2) in comparison to other similar level education systems and (3) across student groups. They also can provide critical information regarding the “equity” in a system. In other words, to what extent does a student’s ethnicity, socio economic status, or location predict/impact their education performance. One of the most respected tools for answering this question is the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), as it disaggregates test data by student ethnicity, socio-economic status, and location of schools. The most recent test results (NAEP 2019) suggest we have significant inequities in our K-12 education system.
The following figure maps out education performance by ethnicity and grade level for reading proficiency. “At or above proficiency” becomes a critical benchmark because it is the level at which students have met the standards for a subject area. It is also a benchmark metric by which most states school districts accountable.
Figure 1
This most recent NAEP data suggest that there is significant inequality in learning outcomes in the U.S. education system for children of particular ethnicities (Black, Hispanic).
In 2019, there was a significant gap in fourth-grade reading proficiency between White (45%) and Hispanic (23%) students (22 percentage points) and between White (45%) and Black (18%) students (a difference of 27 percentage points)..
The gap does not change significantly over the remaining two tested grades. The White – Hispanic gap is 20% in 8th grade, and 21% in 12th grade. The White – Black gap is 27% in 8th grade and 29% in 12th grade.
The gaps have remained virtually constant over the testing years going back to 1992. In 1992, the fourth-grade reading proficiency gap between White and Hispanic students was 23 percentage points, and between White and Black was 27 percentage points.
A similar NAEP analysis examines the reading performance for students based on their socio economic status. Children’s eligibility for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is used to identify low-income families.
Figure 2
As with ethnicity, NAEP data for reading proficiency across grades show an enormous gap between students who are lower income and those with higher income. In 2019, there was a significant gap in fourth-grade reading proficiency between students from higher income families and those from lower income families (30%). In eighth-grade the gap was 26 points and in twelfth grade 22 points.
These gaps, and their resulting low proficiency scores, definitely document a system that is out of balance when it comes to providing equitable outcomes across ethnicity and SES.
Citation(s): National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Nation’s report card. National Assessment of Educational Progress.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). NAEP Data Explorer. National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Why is this question important? Given the limited resources that are available for the education of children, it is important to select interventions that have the greatest impact we can afford. Using Stuart Yeh’s effectiveness cost ratio formula, a rough comparison can be drawn comparing class size reduction with other educational interventions.
Citation: Yeh, S. S. (2007). The Cost-Effectiveness of Five Policies for Improving Student Achievement, American Journal of Evaluation, 28(4), 416-436.
Research Synthesis of Meta-Analyses of Preservice Teacher Preparation Practices in Higher Education. Identification of best practices in teacher preservice training remains one of the top goals of education reform. This research synthesis of teacher preparation practices examines meta-analyses on the topic to identify those practices that predictably lead to effective classroom instruction. The paper examines practices such as teacher degrees, preparation models, methods of course delivery, technology-based instruction, cooperative learning practices, instruction methods, field experience, field experience supervision, and induction practices. A cluster of six practices was associated with a medium effect size of preservice teacher training and positive educational outcomes. The highest impact practices include; extended student teaching (ten or more weeks), simulated instruction with practice, coaching and feedback, critical thinking instruction, micro-teaching, peer instruction, and course-based learning practices. Low impact practices identified in the study are teacher degree, number of education classes, explanation-based teaching methods, teacher certification, extended preparation programs, first-year teaching seminars, and teacher induction. The study finds high impact training practices to be reliable indicators that produce the most effective teachers. The results are consistent with previous research supporting course instruction linked to classroom teaching experiences, coaching while working with children in classrooms, frequent feedback based on observations of the preservice teachers performing tasks using evidence-based teaching methods.
Citation: Dunst, C. J., Hamby, D. W., Howse, R. B., Wilkie, H., & Annas, K. (2020). Research Synthesis of Meta-Analyses of Preservice Teacher Preparation Practices in Higher Education. Higher Education, 10(1).
Does School Spending Matter? The New Literature on an Old Question. The impact of school finances on student achievement has long interested educators. Research conducted before the mid-1990s suggested a link between the available resources provided schools and student outcomes, but much of this research is correlational. Because correlational research cannot imply causation, studies of a more rigorous nature are needed if policymakers are to redesign school financing that predictably maximizes learning for all students, regardless of the parent’s socio-economic status. Recently published studies employing larger data-sets and based on quasi-experimental methods offer a clearer understanding of how schools might be better funded. This paper of American United States school finances finds evidence to support the importance of providing equitable funding across school districts. These results have important policy implications and suggest areas for future research.
Citation: Jackson, C. K. (2018). Does school spending matter? The new literature on an old question (No. w25368). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Overview of Value-Added Research in Education: Reliability, Validity, Efficacy, and Usefulness. Value-added modeling (VAM) is a statistical approach that provides quantitative performance measures for monitoring and evaluating schools and other aspects of the education system. VAM comprises a collection of complex statistical techniques that use standardized test scores to estimate the effects of individual schools or teachers on student performance. Although the VAM approach holds promise, serious technical issues have been raised regarding VAM as a high-stakes instrument in accountability initiatives. The key question remains: Can VAM scores of standardized test scores serve as a proxy for measuring teaching quality? To date, research on the efficacy of VAM is mixed. There is a body of research that supports VAM, but there is also a body of studies suggesting that model estimates are unstable over time and subject to bias and imprecision. A second issue with VAM is the sole use of standardized tests as a measure of student performance. Despite these valid concerns, VAM has been shown to be valuable in performance improvement efforts when used cautiously in combination with other measures of student performance such as end-of-course tests, final grades, and structured classroom observations.
Citation: Cleaver, S., Detrich, R. & States, J. (2020). Overview of Value-Added Research in Education: Reliability, Validity, Efficacy, and Usefulness. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/staff-value-added.
Trend in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 2018. This report provides the most recent year of data available for each dropout and completion rate, summarizes long-term trends, and examines the characteristics of high school dropouts and completers. Five rates are presented to provide a broad perspective on high school dropouts and completers in the United States: the event dropout rate, the status dropout rate, the status completion rate, the adjusted cohort graduation rate, and the averaged freshman graduation rate. The report also provides information about individuals who completed an alternative high school credential.
Citation: McFarland, J., Cui, J., Rathbun, A., and Holmes, J. (2019). Trend in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States:2018. National Center for Education Statistics. NCES 2019-117 US Department of Education.
What to Make of Declining Enrollment in Teacher Preparation Programs. This policy report provides a look at the decline in the enrollment of American teacher preparation programs, along with potential consequences for schools and the students they serve. The analysis offers education policymakers with insight into the complex issues involved in maintaining sufficient numbers of qualified teachers. While enrollment in teacher preparation programs has declined by more than one-third since 2010, the analysis described in this report paints a more complex and nuanced picture than the national numbers portray. The study finds significant variations among states in the change in enrollment in teacher preparation programs.
School Principal Competencies. Research has consistently shown that principals play a critical role in determining the quality of teaching, and in turn, student learning and achievement. Recent meta-analytic reviews suggest that effective principals are highly competent in the following areas: 1) establishing and conveying the school’s vision, goals and expectations by modeling aspirational practices and promoting data use for continuous improvement; 2) building teachers’ professional capacity by providing targeted and job-embedded professional development, protecting instructional time, and selecting educators who are the “right fit” for the school; 3) creating a supportive organization for learning by sharing and distributing leadership, understanding and building on diversity, and strategically acquiring and allocating resources; 4) facilitating a high-quality student learning experience by developing and monitoring curriculum, instruction, and assessment, and creating learning environments that are personalized, safe, and orderly; and 5) connecting with external partners who can support fulfillment of school goals, and building productive and collaborative relationships with families. While these principal competencies are relevant for a range of school contexts, leaders operating in varying school environments (e.g., high/low poverty, urban/rural) must ultimately determine how best to enact them to optimize teaching and learning.
Citation: Donley, J., Detrich, R., States, J., & Keyworth, (2020). Principal Competencies. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/principal-competencies-research
Practice Outpacing Policy? Credit Recovery in American School Districts. Traditionally, students who failed classes could get credit by taking the class over during summer school. In a relatively brief period of time, most high schools have a undergone a complete and rapid transformation in this area, shifting to “credit recovery” programs to help at-risk students earn credits towards graduation for classes they have failed. These programs typically offer online alternatives to students rather than having them retake the failed class. In the 2015-16 school year approximately three out of four high schools offered credit recovery programs with about 6% of all students participating. This growth in credit recovery programs, rapid expansion of new online models, and numerous cases of misuse to inflate graduation rates highlight the need for research into the implementation and effectiveness of this intervention.
This study examined the policies and practices of a representative sample of high schools to identify how they structure their credit recovery programs. It found: Over 95% of the credit recovery program had online components (58% online with some in-person instruction, 37% were exclusively online). Seventy-eight percent used just one online credit recovery provider to manage their system. Eighty-seven percent of districts offer credit recovery programs year-round. Forty percent of the districts limited credit recovery to courses
Traditionally, students who failed classes could get credit by taking the course over during summer school. In a relatively brief time, most high schools have undergone a complete and rapid transformation in this area, shifting to “credit recovery” programs to help at-risk students earn credits towards graduation for classes they have failed. These programs typically offer online alternatives to students rather than having them retake the failed class. In the 2015-16 school year, approximately three out of four high schools offered credit recovery programs with, about 6% of all students participating. This growth in credit recovery programs, a rapid expansion of new online models, and numerous cases of misuse to inflate graduation rates highlight the need for research into the implementation and effectiveness of this intervention
This study examined the policies and practices of a representative sample of high schools to identify how they structure their credit recovery programs. It found: Over 95% of the credit recovery program had online components (58% online with some in-person instruction, 37% were exclusively online). Seventy-eight percent used just one online credit recovery provider to manage their system. Eighty-seven percent of districts offer credit recovery programs year-round. Forty percent of the districts limited credit recovery to courses required for graduation. Only 16% limited the option to twelfth graders, allowing students from all high school grades to avail themselves of the option. The study concluded that “many districts’ policies allow lots of flexibility for student access and assessment with relatively little constraint. Taken individually, these policies could be justifiable but taken together, and they leave credit recovery programs ripe for abuse.”
Citation: Malkus, N. (2019). Practice Outpacing Policy? Credit Recovery in American School Districts. American Enterprise Institute.
A Review of the Literature on Principal Turnover.When it comes to variables that impact student achievement, school principals consistently come up second, behind teachers. They play a critical role in supporting teachers and students to ensure a school’s success. Hiring and maintaining qualified school principals is as important as it is challenging. Yet, principal turnover remains high, impacting the consistency of services and school improvement efforts.
This paper examines research on what we know about the causes and impact of principal turnover. The author is interested in answering three questions: how principal turnover is defined and measured, identifying the causes of turnover, and understanding the consequences of high rates of turnover. The review of the literature shows that there are insufficient numbers and quality of studies on this topic. The current knowledge base consists of case studies and correlational research. The fact there is a shortage of experimental research is not surprising given challenges confronted in implementing research on principal turnover. Because of this, the author was unable to conduct a meta-analysis for this paper. It appears that principal turnover is closely related to student achievement and teacher turnover, but the research is not sufficient to make definitive conclusions at this time. Snodgrass concludes the field needs additional quality studies on this topic.
Citation: Snodgrass Rangel, V. (2018). A review of the literature on principal turnover. Review of Educational Research, 88(1), 87-124.
