Closing Achievement Gap Presentation

RAISING ACHIEVEMENT AND CLOSING GAPS BETWEEN GROUPS: Where are we? What can we do?
Joseph Yeado and Natasha Ushomirsky September 25, 2012

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST
THE EDUCATION TRUST

WHO WE ARE
The Education Trust works for the high academic achievement of all students at all levels, prekindergarten through college, and forever closing the achievement gaps that separate low-income students and students of color from other youth. Our basic tenet is this All children will learn at high levels when they are taught to high levels.
WHAT WE DO
Advocacy to help schools, colleges, and communities mount campaigns to close gaps Research and policy analysis on patterns and practices that both cause and close gaps Technical assistance to schools, colleges, and community-based organizations to raise student achievement and close gaps
Overview of Presentation
Whats the status of achievement and gaps today? How do ARCC states compare to the rest of the nation? What do we know about improving student outcomes?
First, some good news.
Large gains for all groups of students, especially students of color

9 Year Olds NAEP Reading
250 240 230
Average Scale Score
220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150
African American
Latino
White
1971* 1975* 1980* 1984* 1988* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999* 2004
*Denotes previous assessment format
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, The Nation's Report Card: Trends in Academic Progress 2012
2008
2012
Performance for all groups has risen dramatically

13 Year Olds NAEP Math
300 290 280
Average Scale Score
270 260 250 240
230
220 210 200
African American
Latino
White
1973* 1978* 1982* 1986* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999*

2004
2008
2012
Rising performance for students of color leads to gap narrowing over time
17 Year Olds NAEP Reading
320 310 300
Average Scale Score
290
280
270 260 250 240 230 220
African American
Latino
White
1971* 1975* 1980* 1984* 1988* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999* 2004
2008
2012
And next time somebody tells you, Were spending more on education, but the results are flat, show them the results of 15 years of effort in mathematics
1996 NAEP Grade 4 Math

By Ethnicity - National Public
100% 90% 80% 70% 3 24 32 7 26
60%
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% African American Below basic
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
49 73
61
26 Hispanic Basic Proficient or advanced White

By Ethnicity - National Public
100% 90% 80% 70% 52 49 17 22
60%
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
48
39 34 28 9 African American Below basic Basic Hispanic Proficient or advanced White
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/
2011 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST
More low-income students are performing at higher levels today than in 1996
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 60 27 48 33 7 24
20%
10% 0% 1996 Below basic
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
2011 Basic Proficient or advanced
Bottom Line: When we really focus on something, we make progress!

Clearly, though, much more remains to be done.
2011 NAEP Grade 4 Reading

Students Overall - National Public
100% 90% 80%
32%
Percentage of Students
70%
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Proficient/Advanced
34%
Basic Below Basic
34%
2011 NAEP Grade 4 Reading

By Race/Ethnicity National Public
100% 90% 80%
16% 49% 32%
17%
19% 42%
70%
60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
33%
30%
Proficient/Advanced
30% 51% 21%
African American Asian/Pacific Islander Latino American Indian/Alaska Native
35% 50%
Basic Below Basic
51% 23%
White
10%
0%

Students Overall - National Public
100% 90% 80%
34%
70%
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Proficient/Advanced
39%
Basic Below Basic
28%

By Family Income National Public
100% 90% 80%
18% 47% 41%
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Proficient/Advanced Basic
37% 41% 16%
Below Basic
Lower Income
Higher Income
Gaps in achievement are a direct result of gaps in opportunity to learn. These opportunity gaps begin before children arrive at the schoolhouse door.
But, rather than organizing our educational system to close these gaps, weve organized it in a way that widens them.
How?
By giving students who arrive with less, less in school, too.
Less funding
Funding Gaps Between States: Inequities in federal, state, and local expenditures per student
Gap $2,278 per student $2,330 per student
High-Poverty versus Low-Poverty States High-Minority versus Low-Minority States
Source: Preliminary Education Trust analyses of U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Census Bureau data for the 2008-09 school year.
Lower expectations
Low SES students are receiving As for work that would earn high SES students Cs or lower.
Performance on the HSLS Algebra Assessment by Grade and SES Among Students in 8th grade Algebra
60
53 50 44 Estimated Number Right 40 38 33 30 33 49 46 39
Lowest SES Quintile Highest SES Quintile
20
10
Source: Education Trust analysis of data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009.
Less access to rigorous courses
The single biggest predictor post-high school success is the QUALITY AND INTENSITY OF THE HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM
Cliff Adelman, The Toolbox Revisited, U.S. Department of Education
Even African-American students with high math performance in fifth grade are unlikely to be placed in algebra in eighth grade
Percentage of students who were in the top two quintiles of math performance in fifth grade and in algebra in eighth grade
100%
94%
80%
68%
60%
63%
40%
35%
20%
0%
African American
Latino
White
Asian
Source: NCES, Eighth-Grade Algebra: Findings from the Eighth-Grade Round of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K) (2010).
Only one in five African-American high school students took an AP course they had the potential to do well in
High School Class of 2011
Percent who took an AP course they were likely to do well in
100%
80%
60%
58%
40%
38%
30% 26%
20%
20%
0%
African American Asian/Pacific Islander
Latino
American Indian/Alaska Native
White
Note: Students were considered to have taken an AP subject if they took an AP exam in a subject for which they had potential. Students were considered to have AP potential if they had a 70% or greater likelihood of scoring at least a 3 on an AP exam based on their PSAT/NMSQT scores.
Source: College Board, The 8th Annual AP Report to the Nation, 2012.
Low-income and minority students are also less likely to have access to high-quality assignments.
Using the same textbook, School A in California offered high-level assignments; School B did not.
School A
1,467 students enrolled in 2005
School B
2,001 students enrolled in 2005
82% White 6% Asian 4% Latino 2% Black 2% Low-Income
45% White 4% Asian 48% Latino 1% Black 27% Low-Income

Source: Education Trust West analysis of two high schools in unnamed California districts
High-Level College-Prep Assignment

Describe the fundamental problems in the economy that helped cause the Great Depression. Consider agriculture, consumer spending and debt, distribution of wealth, the stock market. Describe how people struggled to survive during the Depression. How did Hoovers belief in rugged individualism shape his policies during the Depression?
Low-Level College-Prep Assignment

Role play (Meet the Press) and interview key people of the era. Draw a political cartoon highlighting a major event of the time. Share excerpts from noted literary authors-Lewis, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Hughes. Listen to jazz artists of the 1920s. Construct a collage depicting new inventions.
Less access to the strongest teachers
Classes at high-poverty secondary schools are more likely to be taught by out-of-field* teachers.
Percent of Class Taught by Teachers With Neither Certification nor Major 30%
22% 20%
11% 10%
0%
High Poverty
Low Poverty
Note: High-poverty school: 55 percent or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced-price lunch. Low-poverty school :15 percent or fewer of the students are eligible for free/reduced-price lunch. *Teachers with neither certification nor major. Data for secondary-level core academic classes (math, science, social studies, English) across the U.S. Source: Education Trust Analysis of 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey data.
Nationally, students in high-poverty schools are more likely to be taught by novice* teachers.
9.0% 8.2% 8.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.6% 5.8% 4.9% 4.4% 4.0% 4.2% High Poverty 4.7% Low Poverty
Percentage of First Year Teachers
7.0%
6.0% 5.0%
3.0%
2.0% 1.0% 0.0%
National
City
Suburban
Small Towns
Rural
*Teachers in first year as the teacher of record. Note: High-Poverty = schools with 55% or more students eligible for free or reduced price lunch. Low-Poverty = 15% or fewer students eligible for free or reduced price lunch.
Source: Analysis of 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey data by U.S. Department of Education. Data from a representative sample of schools across the USA.
33
Recent research found that low-income students in LAUSD were 2x as likely to be taught by the Least Effective teachers and over 1.5x less likely to be taught by the Most Effective ones.
Distribution of Teacher Effectiveness* by Student Income
50% Percent of Students 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Least Effective Most Effective
English Language Arts Teachers
*Most effective teachers are those placing in the top quartile on a student-level value-added measure and Least effective are those placing in the bottom quartile. Average are those teachers in the middle 50% of the value-added distribution. Note: Low-income students are those eligible for free/reduced price lunch.
Source: Learning Denied: The Case for Equitable Access to Effective Teaching in Californias Largest School District. Education Tru st-West, January 2012.
43%
26% 20% 10%
Low-Income Non Low-Income
34
More access to harsh, exclusionary discipline practices
African American and Latino students are more likely to have ever been suspended than white students
Percent of Students Who Have Ever Been Suspended 60% Percent of Students 50% 40% 30% 20% 13% 25% 18% 49%
10%
0% African American
Note: Data are from 2007
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Parent and Family Involvement in Education Survey of the National Household Education Surveys Program (PFI-NHES), 1999, 2003, and 2007.
Asian/Pacific Islander
Latino
White
The results are devastating.

Kids who come in a little behind, leave a lot behind.
Only 16 percent of African-American and 29 percent of Latino graduates are college-ready in reading.
Percent of tested graduates reaching college-readiness benchmark on ACT in reading
60%
Percent of tested graduates
54%
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% African American American Indian Latino White 16% 26% 29%
Source: ACT, 2013, The Condition of College and Career Readiness
And the results are similar in math.

Percent of tested graduates reaching college-readiness benchmark on ACT in math
60% 53%
Percent of tested graduates
50% 40% 30% 22% 20% 10% 0% African American American Indian Latino White 14% 30%
Source: ACT, 2013, The Condition of College and Career Readiness
What about other options?
Only 61% of African American and 71% of Latino graduates who were interested in serving in the military met the minimum score necessary for enlistment in the Army.
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% White African American Latino
81% 71% 61%
Data based on the results of the Armed Forces Qualification Test, a component of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, 2004 2009. Note: The data represent a self-selected sample of individuals whose highest degree was a high school diploma and who had an interest in enlisting in the military. Data are not representative of all students.
Source: The Education Trust, 2010, Shut out of the Military: Todays High School Education Doesnt Mean Youre Ready for Todays Army
And these are the students who remain in school through 12th grade.
Students of color are less likely to graduate from high school on time.
Class of 2010
100%
Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate
93% 83% 71% 69%
80%
66%
60%
40%
20%
0%
African American
Latino
White
Asian
Native American
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Public School Graduates and Dropouts from the Common Core of Data: School Year :20 09-10 (2013).
So, how are ARCC states doing?
K-12 Enrollment by State and Ethnicity (2011)

100%
3.9 90% 80% 70% Percent of students 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Kentucky Tennessee West Virginia
6.1 23.9
1.1 5.2
4.1 5.9 11.4
10.8
24.1
92.0 81.9 67.3 54.1
White
Black
Hispanic
American Indian
Asian
Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander
Two or more races
Source:
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), April 2012, Public Elementary and Secondary School Student Enrollment and Staff Counts From the Common Core of Data: School Year 2010 11, Tables 1 and 2, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/snf201011/index.asp
Percent of students qualifying for free/reduced price lunch (2011)

100 80
Percent of students
60 40 20 0
56.5
55.1
51.4 36.7
Kentucky
Tennessee
West Virginia
Source: Secondary Schools From the Common Core of Data: School Year 201011 , Table 7, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/pesschools10/index.asp
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), April 2012, Numbers and Types of Public Elementary and
How do Kentucky, Tennessee Virginia, and West Virginia compare to other states?
State Improvement on NAEP 4th Grade Reading, All Students

Alabama Maryland Massachusetts Pennsylvania Georgia Florida New Jersey Kentucky Rhode Island California Louisiana Nevada Hawaii New Mexico North Dakota Mississippi National Public Arizona Texas Kansas Illinois Virginia Arkansas Nebraska Tennessee New Hampshire Idaho Montana Wyoming Ohio Oklahoma Delaware Utah Vermont Wisconsin Indiana New York North Carolina South Carolina Michigan Colorado Minnesota Washington Connecticut Oregon Maine Missouri South Dakota Iowa Alaska West Virginia
13.2 12.1 9.2 8.5 7.2 6.5 6.2 6.0 5.7 5.7 5.6 5.4 4.8 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.2 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
6.1
3.6
3.0 2.7
Virginia Kentucky Tennessee West Virginia
-4.8 -5.0
-0.2 -0.3 -0.6 -0.9 -1.2 -1.8 -1.9 -2.5 -2.6 -3.6 0.0
-10.0
5.0 2003-2011 Change in Scale Scores
10.0
15.0
20.0
State Improvement on NAEP 4th Grade Reading, Low Income Students

Alabama Maryland Pennsylvania New Jersey Florida New Hampshire Nevada Georgia Massachusetts Arizona Rhode Island Louisiana California Kentucky Tennessee Montana National public North Dakota Illinois Kansas Mississippi New Mexico Ohio Indiana Oklahoma New York Texas Michigan Hawaii Arkansas Idaho North Carolina Wyoming Virginia Nebraska Delaware Minnesota Wisconsin Utah South Carolina Connecticut Alaska Vermont Missouri Oregon Colorado Maine South Dakota Iowa Washington West Virginia
16.3 16.0 12.6 11.5 11.1 9.8 9.8 9.6 8.7 8.2 7.9 7.4 6.9
5.9 5.7 5.5 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.1 4.6 4.2 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.4 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.4 0.9 0.3
6.3 6.2 5.8
-7.6
-0.1 -0.2 -0.5 -0.8 -0.9 -1.2 -1.4 -2.4 -2.7 -2.9 -3.8
-10
-5
10
15
20
2003-2011 Change in Scale Scores
2011 NAEP Scale Scores, 4th Grade Reading
Massachusetts New Jersey Maryland New Hampshire Connecticut Pennsylvania Vermont Virginia North Dakota Montana Kentucky Delaware Florida Wyoming Ohio Kansas Colorado Nebraska New York Rhode Island Minnesota Maine North Carolina Wisconsin Idaho Georgia Indiana Iowa Washington Utah Missouri Alabama National Public South Dakota Illinois Michigan Texas Arkansas Oregon Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee West Virginia Hawaii Nevada Arizona California Louisiana Mississippi New Mexico Alaska
175 Virginia Kentucky Tennessee West Virginia
185
195
205
215
225
235
245
States 2011 performance on NAEP - 4th Grade Reading, All Students
2011 NAEP Scale Scores, 4th Grade Reading
Massachusetts North Dakota New Hampshire Florida Kentucky New Jersey Maryland Wyoming Montana Delaware Vermont New York Kansas Ohio Pennsylvania Maine Idaho Indiana Georgia Alabama Texas Nebraska North Carolina Rhode Island Oklahoma Arkansas South Dakota Virginia National public Missouri Utah Wisconsin Iowa Colorado Connecticut Minnesota Michigan West Virginia Washington Oregon Tennessee Illinois South Carolina Louisiana Nevada Mississippi Arizona Hawaii New Mexico California Alaska
175 Virginia Kentucky Tennessee West Virginia
185
195
205
215
225
235
245
States 2011 performance on NAEP - 4th Grade Reading, Low Income Students
State Improvement on NAEP 8th Grade Math, All Students

Arkansas Texas New Jersey Hawaii Massachusetts New Mexico Rhode Island Maryland Nevada Georgia Colorado Mississippi Vermont Arizona Virginia Pennsylvania Kentucky Oklahoma Alabama Ohio Montana Washington Maine Idaho National public Louisiana Florida Illinois New Hampshire Tennessee South Dakota California Delaware Kansas North Carolina North Dakota Wisconsin Minnesota Wyoming Alaska Indiana Michigan South Carolina Connecticut Missouri Utah West Virginia Oregon Nebraska Iowa New York
1.0 1.0 0.7
1.6
2.7 2.5
3.3 3.2
3.8 3.7 3.7
4.3 4.3 4.2
5.0 4.9 4.8
6.1 5.9 5.9 5.7 5.7 5.6 5.4
8.3 8.3 8.2 7.9 7.6 7.6 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.8 6.7 6.6 6.5 6.5
8.8
10.3 10.1
11.2 10.9
12.1 12.0
12.7
13.3 13.3
10
12
14
16
18
20
State Improvement on NAEP 8th Grade Math, Low Income Students

Massachusetts New Jersey Texas Georgia New Mexico Hawaii Rhode Island Illinois Arkansas Nevada Tennessee Maryland Pennsylvania Florida Colorado Ohio National public Wisconsin North Carolina Oklahoma Arizona Mississippi Alabama Kentucky California Vermont Delaware Virginia Louisiana Idaho Michigan Maine Alaska New Hampshire Washington Indiana Montana New York Wyoming Kansas Missouri Minnesota South Carolina South Dakota Oregon Iowa Connecticut Nebraska North Dakota Utah West Virginia
2.9 2.8
3.3
4.1 3.8
4.7 4.6
6.5 6.4 6.0 5.7 5.4 5.2 5.1
7.4 7.3 7.1
9.2 9.2 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.7 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.3 8.3
12.0 11.5 11.4 11.3 11.1 10.8 10.6 10.4 10.1 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.7
13.3 13.0 13.0 13.0
14.0
14.6 14.5
16.6
18.3
19.0
10
12
14
16
18
20
2011 NAEP Scale Scores, 8th Grade Math
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
Virginia
Kentucky Tennessee
States 2011 performance on NAEP - 8th Grade Math, All Students
Massachusetts Minnesota New Jersey Vermont Montana New Hampshire North Dakota Colorado South Dakota Texas Kansas Virginia Maine Wisconsin Ohio Washington Maryland Wyoming Connecticut Idaho North Carolina Pennsylvania Indiana Iowa Utah Alaska Illinois Nebraska Rhode Island Delaware National public Oregon Missouri Kentucky South Carolina New York Michigan Oklahoma Arkansas Arizona Georgia Nevada Florida Hawaii New Mexico Tennessee West Virginia Louisiana California Mississippi Alabama
West Virginia
2011 NAEP Scale Scores, 8th Grade Math
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
Virginia
Kentucky Tennessee
States 2011 performance on NAEP - 8th Grade Math, Low Income Students
Texas Massachusetts Montana North Dakota Vermont Wyoming South Dakota Kansas Maine Minnesota New Hampshire Idaho Ohio New Jersey North Carolina Indiana Colorado Washington Oregon Iowa Kentucky Virginia Oklahoma Delaware Illinois Arkansas Wisconsin Utah National public New York Nebraska Missouri Alaska South Carolina Pennsylvania Hawaii Arizona Nevada Georgia Florida New Mexico Rhode Island Maryland Michigan Louisiana Connecticut West Virginia Tennessee Mississippi California Alabama
West Virginia
Two ways of pulling all of this information together

Uneven at the Start: Differences in State Track Records Foreshadow Challenges and Opportunities for Common Core Available at: http://www.edtrust.org/dc/publication/uneven_start
State Academic Performance and Improvement Tool Available at: ttp://www.edtrust.org/naep_state_scores
Well take a closer look at this now

State Academic Performance and Improvement Tool

Generates scatterplots that show state performance and gains on NAEP for students overall and by student group in 4th and 8th grade reading and math. Sample questions the tool can help you answer:
Compared with other states and the nation, how does my state rate on current achievement? How about on improvement over time? For which groups of students is my state higher achieving and faster improving than other states? For which student groups is my state lower achieving and lower improving? Are there states that are doing better or improving faster that my state can learn from?
States performance and gains on NAEP for all students 4th grade math
VA
States performance and gains on NAEP for low-income students 4th grade math
VA
U.S.
Source: Education Trust Analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress data
States performance and gains on NAEP for African American students 4th grade math
States performance and gains on NAEP for all students 8th grade reading
VA
States performance and gains on NAEP for low-income students 8th grade reading
VA
States performance and gains on NAEP for white students 8th grade reading
VA
In addition to the Uneven at the Start analysis and the State Academic Performance and Improvement Tool, Ed Trust also released updated Ed Watch state reports.
An additional resource:
Present best available compilation of data on achievement, attainment, and equity in a consistent format so that educators, parents, and public officials can squarely face the issue of achievement for all groups of students. Include a wide array of achievement and attainment data for each state, including:
Comparisons between state assessment and NAEP proficiency rates College-and-career readiness indicators High school graduation rates College graduation rates and degree attainment
Available at: http://www.edtrust.org/dc/resources/edwatch_state_reports

What Can We Do?

An awful lot of Americans have decided that we cant do much.
What we hear many say:

Theyre poor. Their parents dont care. They come to school without breakfast. They dont have enough books. They dont have enough parents.
But if theres truly nothing that schools can do, why are low-income students and students of color performing so much higher in some states
Scale Scores by State Low-Income Students

Grade 8 NAEP Math (2011)
290 280
Average Scale Score
270 260 250 240 230 220
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Proficient Scale Score = 299)
In some districts
Low-Income African-American Students Do Better in Some Districts

Grade 8 NAEP Math (2011)
320
310
Average Scale Score
300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220
Note: Basic Scale Score = 262; Proficient Scale Score = 299 Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
And most certainly, in some schools
De Queen Elementary School

De Queen, AR
537 students in grades 3-5 64% Latino 30% White 3% African American 2% American Indian 80% Low Income
Note: Enrollment data are for 2010-11 school year. Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data
High Performance at De Queen Elementary School

Grade 5 Math (2012)
100%
90%
93% 86% 89% 93%
83% 70%
Percentage Proficient and Above
80%
76%
74% 68%
60%
DeQueen
40%
Arkansas
20%
0%
Overall
Latino
White
Low Income
English language learner
Source: Arkansas Department of Education
High Performance at De Queen Elementary School

Grade 5 Reading (2012)
100%
94% 95% 96% 92% 93%
86% Percentage Proficient and Above

80%
89%
84%
81%
80%
60%
DeQueen
40%
Arkansas
20%
0%
Overall
Latino
White
Low Income
English language learner
Source:
Advanced Performance at De Queen Elementary

100% Percent of Students Proficient and Above 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30%
36% 44%
Latino Students Grade 4 Literacy (2011)
36% 57% Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic
20% 10% 0%
6%
17%
4%
De Queen
Source: Arkansas Department of Education
Arkansas
Jack Britt High School

Fayetteville, North Carolina
1,872 students in grades 9 12

33% African American 11% Latino 45% White
26% Low Income
Note: Enrollment and ethnicity data are from 2011-12; low income data are from 2009-10 Source: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
High Performance Across Groups at Jack Britt High School

African-American Students - End-of-Course Examination (2012)
100%
91%
91%
95%
Percentage at Level III or above
80%
72% 65%
70%
60%
Jack Britt
40%
North Carolina
20%
0%
English I
Algebra I
Biology
Note: More than 95% of African-American students at Jack Britt scored at or above Level III in Biology, but North Carolina did not provide exact numbers. Source: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
High Graduation Rates at Jack Britt High School

Graduation Rate (Class of 2012)
100% 90% 80%
93% 80%
93% 85%
91% 75%
93%
75%
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Jack Britt North Carolina
Students Overall
Source: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
White
African American Lower Income
Available from Harvard Education Press and amazon.com
What Do We Know About How To Accelerate Success?

What do the high performers do?
#1. They focus on what they can do, rather than what they cant.
Lack of experiences outside the community Second language at home
Lack of wide reading
Cultural differences
My Challenge
Students Lack of Background knowledge
Academic vocabulary
No one reads to kids at home
Economic status
Action Plan
Marzano Background Chapter 1 United Streaming video clips Background knowledge literacy center
#2. They set their goals high.
They celebrate progress, but constantly acknowledge how far they still need to go.
Yes, he certainly has grown, but if he doesnt move faster he is likely never to graduate from high school or go to college.
#3. They dont leave anything about teaching and learning to chance.
An awful lot of our teacherseven brand new onesare left to figure out on their own what to teach and what constitutes good enough work.
What does this do? Leaves teachers entirely on their own to figure out what to teach, what order to teach it in, HOW to teach itand to what level.
The result?
Grade 7 Writing Assignment

Essay on Anne Frank Your essay will consist of an opening paragraph which introduced the title, author and general background of the novel.
Your thesis will state specifically what Anne's overall personality is, and what general psychological and intellectual changes she exhibits over the course of the book You might organize your essay by grouping psychological and intellectual changes OR you might choose 3 or 4 characteristics (like friendliness, patience, optimism, self doubt) and show how she changes in this area.
Source: Unnamed school district in California, 2002-03 school year.
Grade 7 Writing Assignment

My Best Friend: A chore I hate: A car I want: My heartthrob:
Source: Unnamed school district in California, 2002-03 school year.
Adopting new standards even very high ones is only the first step
Common Core State Standards have the potential to dramatically raise the rigor of instruction and student achievement in classrooms across the country. But to realize this potential, states will need to make sure that teachers and students have the supports they need to meet these expectations.
What does that mean?

To name a few Professional development. Instructional materials curriculum, sample assignments, etc. Examples of what meeting the standards looks like. Purposeful, carefully designed supports for students who are starting further behind
#3. They strive to give ALL students not just some students access to a rigorous curriculum
And they make sure that students get the support they need to succeed in these classes.
#4. Good schools know how much teachers matter, and they act on that knowledge.
They know who their strongest teachers are. And they know who is struggling.
They make sure the students who are struggling most get the strongest teachers
They do all they can to support their teachers. But they do not tolerate bad teaching.
It is your job as principal to make a marginal teacher uncomfortable.
--Jennie Black, assistant principal, Ware Elementary School, Fort Riley, Kansas
Becoming Agents of Scale

For kids, schools and classrooms are the units of change. Our role those of us who work with states and district is to figure out how to help schools learn from places that are doing something right, and create systems where principals and teachers help all kids succeed.
Stay in touch!
www.edtrust.org
Stay connected with The Education Trust online: www.twitter.com/edtrust www.facebook.com/edtrust
Natasha Ushomirsky
nushomirsky@edtrust.org
1250 H Street N.W. Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20005 202/293-1217

Closing Achievement Gap Presentation

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Closing Achievement Gap Presentation

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

RAISING ACHIEVEMENT AND CLOSING GAPS BETWEEN GROUPS: Where are we? What can we do?

Joseph Yeado and Natasha Ushomirsky September 25, 2012

THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

First, some good news.

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Large gains for all groups of students, especially students of color

Average Scale Score

220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Performance for all groups has risen dramatically

Average Scale Score

270 260 250 240

1973* 1978* 1982* 1986* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999*

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Average Scale Score

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

1996 NAEP Grade 4 Math

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2011 NAEP Grade 4 Math

39 34 28 9 African American Below basic Basic Hispanic Proficient or advanced White

2011 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST

2011 Basic Proficient or advanced

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Bottom Line: When we really focus on something, we make progress!

Clearly, though, much more remains to be done.

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2011 NAEP Grade 4 Reading

Basic Below Basic

2011 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST

2011 NAEP Grade 4 Reading

16% 49% 32%

Basic Below Basic

2011 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST

2011 NAEP Grade 8 Math

Basic Below Basic

2011 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST

2011 NAEP Grade 8 Math

18% 47% 41%

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

2011 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

High-Poverty versus Low-Poverty States High-Minority versus Low-Minority States

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Lowest SES Quintile Highest SES Quintile

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Less access to rigorous courses

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

African American Asian/Pacific Islander

American Indian/Alaska Native

2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

82% White 6% Asian 4% Latino 2% Black 2% Low-Income

45% White 4% Asian 48% Latino 1% Black 27% Low-Income

High-Level College-Prep Assignment

2012 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST

Low-Level College-Prep Assignment

2012 2012 THE THE EDUCATION EDUCATION TRUST TRUST