As students and teachers settle back into school routines, thousands of high schoolers are getting their first taste of classes that are supposed to prepare them for college. Some of them are sitting in Advanced Placement courses, while others have enrolled in district-designed advanced courses. In general, most people seem to take it for granted that high school courses that are labeled “advanced” are an effective preparation tool for college. A new analysis out of Brookings calls the conventional wisdom into question.
At issue is whether high school courses impact college performance at all. The Brookings authors point to a 2009 review of college preparation from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) that found “low evidence” that academic preparation for college actually improved college classroom outcomes. Despite myriad college preparation methods reviewed, none of them—including advanced coursework like AP classes—was strongly predictive of college readiness.
The Brookings authors did some further analysis of their own on the impacts of high school course-taking. After examining a nationally representative database of U.S. students and controlling for academic, demographic, and individual-level variables, they found that, on average, advanced high school courses do little to prepare students to succeed...
Politicians are wise to pay attention to public opinion data, but they are also responsible for crafting sound policies based on research and evidence. So what are they supposed to do when these two goods conflict?
These findings shouldn’t come as a huge surprise (as my colleague Robert Pondiscio pointed out here). No one wants to see a school closed, no matter how persistently underperforming. For many communities, schools offer not just an education, but a place...
School meals are on the minds of journalists in Springfield. Here is a very long piece on lunch and breakfast service in Springfield and other Clark County districts. (Springfield News-Sun, 9/18/16) Dietician and professor Diana Cuy Castellanos is quoted as a child nutrition expert in the meals piece above.
College may not be for all, but it is the chosen path of nearly fifty thousand Ohio high school grads. Unfortunately, almost one-third of Ohio’s college goers are unprepared for the academic rigor of post-secondary coursework. To better ensure that all incoming students are equipped with the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in university courses, all Ohio public colleges and universities require their least prepared students to enroll in remedial, non-credit-bearing classes (primarily in math and English).
Remediation is a burden on college students and taxpayers who pay twice. First they shell out to the K–12 system. Then they pay additional taxes toward the state’s higher education system, this time for the cost of coursework that should have been completed prior to entering college (and for which students earn no college credit). The remediation costs further emphasize the importance of every student arriving on campus prepared.
Perhaps the bigger problem with remedial education is that it doesn’t work very well. In Ohio, just 51 percent of freshmen requiring remediation at a flagship university—and 38 percent of those in remedial classes at a non-flagship school—go on to complete entry-level college courses within two academic years....
Earlier the same day, the US Department of Education finally released the $71 million Charter School Program grant that Ohio won many months ago. As you’ll no doubt recall, the release of the funds was put on hold when questions arose in regard to the application. As a result of those questions – and the answers provided by the state – Ohio’s grant award was declared “high risk” and a number of new conditions were placed upon it. Chad and others tell you all about it in the following pieces from the Dispatch (Columbus Dispatch, 9/15/16), the Beacon Journal (Akron Beacon Journal, 9/14/16) and
Ohio’s report card release showed a slight narrowing of the “honesty gap”—the difference between the state’s own proficiency rate and proficiency rates as defined by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The NAEP proficiency standard has been long considered stringent—and one that can be tied to college and career readiness. When states report inflated state proficiency rates relative to NAEP, they may label their students “proficient” but they overstate to the public the number of students who are meeting high academic standards.
The chart below displays Ohio’s three-year trend in proficiency on fourth and eighth grade math and reading exams, compared to the fraction of Buckeye students who met proficiency on the latest round of NAEP. The red arrows show the disparity between NAEP proficiency and the 2015-16 state proficiency rates.
Chart 1: Ohio’s proficiency rates 2013-14 to 2015-16 versus Ohio’s 2015 NAEP proficiency
As you can see, Ohio narrowed its honesty gap by lifting its proficiency standard significantly in 2014-15 with the replacement of the Ohio Achievement Assessments and its implementation of PARCC. (The higher PARCC standards meant lower proficiency...
School report cards offer important view of student achievement - critical that schools be given continuity moving forward
The Ohio Department of Education today released school report cards for the 2015-16 school year. After a couple tumultuous years, today’s traditional fall report card release reflects a return to normalcy. This year also marked the first year of administration for next-generation exams developed jointly by Ohio educators and the American Institutes for Research (AIR).
“This year’s state testing and report card cycle represents a huge improvement from last year,” said Chad L. Aldis, Vice President for Ohio Policy and Advocacy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. “Last year’s controversy made it easy to forget the simple yet critical role state assessments and school report cards play. They are, quite simply, necessary, annual checkups to see how well schools are preparing students for college or career.”
“The state tests are designed to measure the extent to which our children are learning so that our students can compete with students around the country and around the globe,” said Andy Boy, Founder and CEO of United Schools Network, a group of high-performing charter schools in Columbus....
Today, the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) announced that it would release the $71 million Charter School Program (CSP) grant awarded to Ohio last September, but with additional restrictions attached. The letter outlines "high-risk" special conditions for how Ohio's award can be spent. This includes excluding virtual charter schools, placing extra requirements on subgrants to dropout recovery charter schools, and a promise that USDOE will carefully monitor and ensure that Ohio completes its authorizer evaluations on time.
The federal CSP program dates back to 1994, and has been used to seed new charter schools across the U.S. as well as enable top-performing charter networks to grow and expand. In recent years, the CSP program has drawn broad bi-partisan support in Congress.
Ohio’s grant was put on hold shortly after it was announced, as the USDOE considered additional safeguards on how the funds would be spent. The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) revised its application in January 2016 to further describe the state’s charter accountability infrastructure. More recently, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Paolo DeMaria aggressively moved forward with charter sponsor evaluations—a key part of the state’s CSP application—despite attempts to delay them.
“We’re extremely pleased that the USDOE, after a...
Speaking of court cases, the ongoing kerfuffle between Ohio’s largest online school and the state department of education over the parameters and definitions of an attendance audit has made it to court with a couple days of testimony so far this week. You can check out Day One details here… (Columbus Dispatch, 9/12/16) …and here (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 9/12/16, with video!). Day Two coverage is here. (Columbus Dispatch, 9/13/16)
Back in the real world, Columbus City Schools’ board of education may decide next week to sell off as many
The state board of education is meeting this week. One item on members’ agenda: discussion of proposed new rules for gifted education in Ohio. Here’s a piece that purports to showcase the debate over said rules but seems to me to present only one side of the argument in interviews. But I might have missed something. (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 9/11/16)