The US has the finest scientists in the world but the rest of the population is abysmally ignorant of science. Why? Because science education in the US today exists as a kind of mining and sorting operation in which existing scientists search for diamonds in the rough who can be cut and polished into elite scientists, according to David Goodstein, a professor of physics at Caltech. In elementary school, few children ever come into contact with a scientifically trained person; in high school, many teachers say their greatest satisfaction is not in preparing all students to thrive in an increasingly technical world, but in finding those diamonds in the rough; in college, students may satisfy science requirements with a single fun course that does little to prepare them for the 21st Century. The solution, according to Goodstein: make teaching attractive to people with science degrees by paying them more and treating them with professional respect. To read "Science Education Paradox," a two-page column that appeared in the September 1 issue of Technology Review, surf to http://www.biotechknowledge.com/showlib.php3?uid=5620&country=uk
Since 1975, the percentage of young adults who have gotten their diploma through the GED program has risen from less than 3 percent to 12 percent. Since the Census Bureau includes GED holders as high school completers, these statistics mask a steady rise in the nation's dropout rate. But does the GED measure up as a high school equivalence exam? In a 10-page story in the Chicago Tribune Magazine, Bruce Murphy traces the history of the GED and investigates claims made on its behalf. He reports that studies have found that GED holders are far less likely to succeed in college than high school graduates and more likely to drop out of the military. Astonishingly, some studies have found that GED holders have more job turnover and lower pay than even high school dropouts without a GED. Nobel Prize winner James Heckman is leading a team of researchers who have been documenting the poor performance of GED holders and raising questions about our use of the certificate. His research shows a 25 percent increase in high school dropouts since 1975. Back then, only one in 7 dropouts (age 18 to 24) had gotten a GED; today, half of all dropouts are GED holders. Some argue that raising the cut score for the GED would reduce the dropout rate. Others propose a return to the original rule that requires that test takers be 20 or older. Still others say that what is really needed is for states to stop the fiction of treating the GED as comparable to a high school diploma. For more, see "Shortcut to failure?" by Bruce Murphy, Chicago Tribune Magazine, August 5, 2001. You can retrieve the article from the Chicago Tribune archive for $2.95 by surfing to http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/ and searching for "Shortcut to Failure"
Charter schools have come under criticism in some quarters for failing to realize one of the goals emphasized by proponents: that they would serve as laboratories in which novel ideas and methods could be tested and best practices identified for dissemination among traditional public schools. For example, a recent study of California charter schools concluded: "... the charter schools we observed ... were not serving as models of innovation from which educators in other schools could learn." A new study of personnel policy in charter schools by economists Dale Ballou and Michael Podgursky suggests just the opposite conclusion. In the areas of recruitment and staffing, pay flexibility and incentive pay, and staffing flexibility they find evidence of major differences between charter and traditional public schools.
The authors surveyed administrators of charter schools that had been in operation at least two years. They focused on seven states with relatively strong enabling legislation, exempting charter schools from many state regulations and freeing them from collective bargaining agreements unless the charter school faculty chose to unionize. While their our conclusions pertain only to those states, they certainly suggest that when given the opportunity, charter schools will pursue innovative personnel policies differing in key respects from those of traditional public schools.
In what ways did charter schools differ? Charter schools employ more teachers and aides relative to the number of students than do traditional public schools. In states where it is permitted, charter schools recruit significant numbers of uncertified teachers. In fact, many charter school administrators in their survey identified the ability to recruit uncertified teachers as an important source of recruitment flexibility.
Very few charter schools grant tenure to their instructors. Most teachers work under one-year contracts or are employees at will. In sharp contrast to traditional public schools, very few charter schools are covered by collective bargaining agreements. The average length of the teacher work day and work year are longer in charter schools. Dismissals of teachers for unsatisfactory performance are commonplace in charter schools.
Rather than adhering to traditional salary schedules, many charter schools raise salaries of teachers in hard-to-recruit subjects such as math and science. Nearly one-half of charter schools report using merit or performance-based pay. Many charter schools have broken with the common practice of awarding increases based on seniority or the accumulation of advanced degrees and college credits.
Given the modest size of their sample, it was not possible to conduct an extensive statistical analysis to determine which charter schools are most likely to adopt innovative policies. Nonetheless, their limited investigation suggests that schools in which teachers are unionized are less innovative. In addition, schools that are chartered by local school districts generally pursue more traditional personnel policies than do schools chartered by outside agencies such as state boards or higher education institutions.
Charter schools are a recent phenomenon. The practices identified by these authors may undergo further change as charter schools expand and mature. Many charter schools rely heavily on the services of relatively inexperienced teachers. Even private schools, which generally have younger teachers than public school systems, are not so dependent on teachers with less than three years' experience. Nonetheless, at the present time, personnel policies in charter schools more closely resemble those in private as compared to traditional public schools.
Personnel Policy in Charter Schools, by Michael Podgursky and Dale Ballou, The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, August 2001, http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=19
In recent weeks, the Chancellor of the New York City public school system has been heavily criticized, especially about cost overruns in school construction. The sharks have been circling, and the New York Times ran an editorial defending him (a sure sign that he is in big trouble). I'd like to say a few things in his behalf.
Harold O. Levy, as everyone knows by now, is from the business world. He is a lawyer who worked for a major banking firm with global interests. He has a passionate commitment to education and to kids. He brings a different perspective to the job of chancellor because he still has the capacity to be amazed when things go wrong and to insist that they go right.
I have appreciated his love of literature, poetry, music, and the arts, and his unembarrassed insistence on quoting Plato or some other classic writer to make a point.
He is not a company man, and it shows in his readiness to jump in and try to make things happen.
Although I have not spoken to him in a long while, I have a sense that he has had a long and rude awakening; that he discovered that the chancellor is not able to make things happen quickly; that good will and intelligence go only so far when faced with entrenched interests and bureaucratic inertia; that the chancellor is in some sense a flea on an elephant, and that the elephant outlives many fleas.
Forgive me if I express an unabashed affection for this man who has tried so hard to show that one man can change the system. And forgive me too for a somewhat cynical belief, born of long study of the history of this school system, that the system will not be changed by tinkering and that it will survive virtually intact despite the best efforts of one good man.
Commission on High Technology Workforce Development August 14, 2001
The nation's teacher shortage-one that is not found in all school districts and all subjects, but which is particularly acute in math and science-is very much in the news as students and teachers head back to school. But it's not just schools that are having a hard time filling math and science positions; the scientific, engineering and information technology labor markets as a whole are experiencing a severe shortage of skilled workers. Last year, The New England Council formed a Commission on High Tech Workforce Development to examine the issue, placing special emphasis on the teacher labor shortage since schools' inability to hire qualified teachers restricts their ability to impart to students the knowledge necessary for high tech careers. A study of the teacher labor market in Massachusetts, conducted on behalf of the Commission by researchers at Northeastern University's Center for Labor Market Studies, revealed that teacher employment in the Bay State is actually quite stable, with a job vacancy rate of less than one percent. How can Massachusetts be suffering a severe teacher shortage if vacancy rates are so low? The report's authors explain that, "unlike other labor markets, teacher labor shortages do not manifest themselves through either rapid wage growth or high job vacancy rates. Instead of quantitative changes in supply-demand relationships that occur in most other labor market segments, the teacher labor market adjusts to shortages by reducing teacher quality." Thus, if highly qualified applicants are unavailable, schools will resort to hiring uncertified or less-qualified teachers to fill vacancies, in contrast to high-tech firms who "prefer to let jobs remain unfilled rather than hire workers who lack the skills required to do the job." Although the schools' practice is disturbing, it should be noted that the study defines a reduction in teacher quality as an increase in the number of uncertified teachers hired, under the mistaken assumption that certification is synonymous with quality and competency. The real cause for concern, then, is the body of "idiosyncratic institutional rules" that governs the teacher labor market and insulates it from corrective market forces and solutions-like differential pay-that could alleviate the "shortage" of qualified teachers if given the chance. Anyone seeking a greater understanding of the economic complexities behind the teacher shortage can order a free copy of the report by calling the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University at 617-373-2242 or e-mailing them at [email protected] (they'll e-mail you a copy).
Department for Education and Skills (UK) August 2001
Seeking to end a labor dispute that forced some schools to adopt a four-day schedule, the British government hired consultants from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) to analyze the workload of teachers and head teachers (principals) and suggest ways to improve their efficiency. In an interim report for the Department for Education and Skills, PwC explained their findings, which are based on fieldwork in 48 schools. Among the consultants' observations: teachers and head teachers work longer hours than many other occupations, though the volume of work is comparable to other professions when spread out over a year (adjusting for the typical 9 month school calendar); teachers welcome efforts to professionalize their field through greater accountability and higher expectations, yet they feel they are not given the support needed to meet those challenges (despite higher spending per pupil); and teachers' workloads are made excessive by having to perform tasks that could be carried out by other staff, by having inadequate technical support, and by wide variations in head teachers' and managers' effectiveness in managing workload. Nearly absent from the study, which contains all sorts of statistics and measurements relating to teachers' current working conditions and practices, is analysis of how these variables are affecting student achievement. Perhaps PwC's final report, to be released in November with recommended solutions for lessening teachers' workload, will shed some light on this most crucial element of the academic equation. In the meantime, if you'd like to read the interim report, request a free copy by emailing [email protected]
RAND 2001
RAND's Drug Policy Research Center has recently completed a project aimed at reviewing the structure and performance of the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act (SDFSCA), which was signed into law in 1986 as the first coordinated federal effort to curtail teen drug use and is up for renewal as part of ESEA this year. This report contains material drawn from a literature review, focus groups, commissioned papers, and a conference, all focused on the strengths and weaknesses of the Act and its implementation. Some problems with the enactment of SDFSCA that are identified by the researchers include: a severe lack of funds, poor appropriation of resources, vague goals and evaluative criteria, poor training for teachers dealing with drug abuse and prevention, and a lack of coordination with other federal and state programs. The authors credit the Clinton administration with improving accountability in the program, but note that the reforms failed to boost program capacity, the targeting of resources, or cost effectiveness. The study recommends a range of reforms, including changes in the way funds are allocated to states, efforts to assess the need and capacity of the districts receiving funds, enhancements to the content of individual programs, and clear standards to judge program performance. To read a summary of the findings, go http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1328.1/MR1328.1.pref.pdf. Paper copies of this 187-page report can be ordered for $20 by surfing to http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1328.1/ or contacting RAND at (310) 451-7002 (phone); (310) 451-6915 (fax); or e-mail, [email protected]
For the past hundred or so years, the training and certification of public school teachers has been largely in the hands of colleges of education, but this monopoly is now being challenged by private sector entrants into the teacher training business, explains Robert Holland in "The Rise of Private Teacher Training," an issue brief published by the Lexington Institute on August 10. Sylvan Leaning Centers contracts with school districts to provide training to bring uncertified teachers up to standards and also partners with Columbia University's Teachers College to prepare teachers for National Board certification; Edison Schools intends to open its own teacher colleges in 20 different cities over the next seven years; and the University of Phoenix, which trains teachers online, was recently admitted into the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, which has changed its bylaws to allow for-profit members. To read more about these developments, surf to http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/education/pvtteacher.htm.
This week, Phi Delta Kappa (an "honorary fraternity" of professional educators) and Gallup released their 33rd annual poll of the public's attitudes toward the public schools. Normally polls bring good news or bad news, depending on which side you are on. This poll brings a combination of no news and confusing news.
One way to insure that a poll does not provide much useful information is to frame questions so they force respondents to choose between alternatives that aren't really alternatives - to create a false dichotomy. This year's Kappan/Gallup poll asks people which they'd prefer, reforming the existing public school system OR finding an alternative to the existing public school system. If you like the idea of creating alternatives to the existing system because you think this is the best way to cause improvement in the system, you're out of luck.
What's especially puzzling is what the reader is supposed to think about the broadest question of all - whether today's public schools are any good. The heading of the lead figure in the "policy implications" section of the poll proclaims "Public Support for Local Public Schools Is at an All-Time High." That may be true, but only 51% of the population surveyed (and 62% of public school parents) would give their local public schools a grade of A or B. A thoughtful consumer of polls could be either dismayed that so many parents are sending their children to schools that they think are worth no better than a C, or alarmed that so many parents erroneously think their kids' schools are fine when so many hard indicators (e.g. NAEP and TIMSS results) show that they aren't.
If one thing is clear from the Kappan/Gallup poll, it's that Americans believe that President Bush's education plan is on the right track. By a margin of 49 to 33 (and 51 to 44 among public school parents), people also think Bush "will do a better job of school improvement than President Clinton." If only Congress had seen these numbers before it started dismembering Bush's proposal.
To download or view a copy of the 33rd Annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll, go to http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0109gal.htm or call Terri Hampton for a copy at 812-339-1156.
To read a more detailed analysis of the poll from the Center for Education Reform, go to http://www.edreform.com/press/2001/pdkpoll.htm
Two articles in the September issue of The Atlantic Monthly take a sausage-factory-like look at the college application and admissions process. In "The Early Decision Racket," James Fallows explores how early-decision programs have distorted the admissions process and added an insane level of intensity to middle-class obsessions about getting into college. In "Confessions of a Prep School College Counselor," Caitlan Flanagan deconstructs the perverse prejudices that fuel the elite college admissions frenzy. Unfortunately neither article is available online; you'll have to buy a copy of the magazine.