Friday, July 30, 2004

Does national certification help students?

An article in today's Journal Sentinel announces that a local foundation has given $20,000 to increase the number of teachers with national certification. The reader is left with two puzzles:

1. Why is the grant being announced by Milwaukee's mayor rather than the MPS superintendent? The superintendent is strangely missing from the article?

2. Will this grant help students? Despite the millions of dollars spent nationwide on national certification of teachers (called National Board for Professional Teaching Standards or NBPTS), there is remarkable little research on its effectiveness.

A recent study by Goldhaber--the most favorable to certification so far--found that students of teachers gaining NBPTS certification did slightly better, on average, than students whose teachers attempted certification but failed to gain it. But it did not find that the teachers improved their effectiveness as the result of the process. Nor did it find that those applying for certification, as a group, were more effective than those who did not. This latter finding seems particularly surprising since one might expect that teachers willing to put in the time and effort for certification would be more committed than their colleagues.

Based on this study it is hard to figure out how NBPTS certification could be used to improve teaching. Knowing that one group of teachers is slightly more effective than another brings benefits only if, as a result, more of the first group stays in teaching or more of the second leaves. Many of the unsuccessful NBPTS applicants are more effective, as judged by student scores, than many of the successful ones. Based on the standard deviations given, I estimate that about 44% of the unsuccessful applicants had higher student gains than the average successful applicant. So NBPTS would not serve as a particularly effective screening device.

Education has a long history of embracing panaceas that lack a research justification, only to eventually abandon them and turn to the next one. Let's hope that NBPTS certification proves to be the exception.

Wednesday, July 28, 2004

TABOR, Rest in Peace

The so-called taxpayers' bill of rights (TABOR) died today when three Republican senators said they would vote against the proposed constitutional amendment that would limit spending by local units of government. Supporters promised to bring it back next year. In my view, TABOR is an example of good politics leading to bad legislation.

Supporters of TABOR did a good job of casting it as a choice between taxes and spending. But it also shifted control from local to state government. Ironically, Republicans have traditionally been the strongest advocates of local control, of keeping government as close to the people as possible.

Local government has always been in danger of being solely an insiders' game, followed only by those with a direct interest, such as employees and contractors. By taking away the spending decision, TABOR would likely accelerate that tendency, as I mentioned earlier.

Labor Negotiation Follies

School district labor negotiations get a good deal more complicated in school districts than in private industry, where management and the unions are separate and distinct. The classical model is especially challenged when a majority of the school board owes its election to the support of the union. In the worst case scenario, the union is essentially negotiating with itself. Management negotiators may find themselves fighting a two-front war, wondering whether the board will back them up at crunch time.

This is no theoretical concern. The last time MPS had a union-backed majority, then-president Joe Fisher took it upon himself to meet with the union and came back with an agreement that included most of the union demands. These included the expansion of the early-retirement pension plan, whose ballooning costs is helping put a continuing squeeze on the schools' budgets.

Will history repeat itself? There are disturbing signs that it may. Once again, the board has a union-backed majority. And once again, it has a president--now Peter Blewett--who seems eager to inject himself into the negotiations. Word is out that, like Fisher, he has visited with union officials and seems to be making himself into an advocate of the union position.

Welcome from the Blogosphere

Schools Now got its first link from another blog. Daryl Cobranchi runs a blog called Homeschool and Other Education Stuff. Lots of interesting commentary and links.

Now if we can just generate some arguments in the comments section, it will feel like a real blog.

Saturday, July 24, 2004

The permanent superintendent class

Today's Washington Post has an article by Sewell Chan, "Four Finalists Chosen For D.C. Schools Chief." Two of the four were candidates for Milwaukee superintendent seven years ago.

A permanent rotating superintendent class seems to have developed. They serve a few years in a district and then move on to another district, often as they are eased out from the first district. The same names keep reappearing in searches. It seems to reassure school boards if their new superintendent is already a superintendent. It does not seem to matter much whether the person was successful.

There are several disadvantages with this approach. The new person comes in without a deep understanding of the district, of what has already been tried in the district, or of the strengths and weaknesses of the people. As new superintendents attempt to make their mark, initiatives come and go before any has a chance to make a lasting impression.

While certainly no guarantee of success, I prefer the route Milwaukee chose the last two times: choosing an internal candidate. Often the most cogent critiques of what a district is doing wrong are in the district. And this person is much more likely to understand the people.

Update: John Merrow has an interesting article on the current Washington DC superintendent search and the tendancy to look at the same people over and over. His suggested solution is quite a bit more draconian: turn the district over to a bankruptcy firm, to cut and restructure.

Friday, July 23, 2004

Do charter schools fall short?

An article published at EducationNews.org by Dennis Redovich criticizes the third grade reading results for Milwaukee charter schools. Redovich calculates that the percentage of students rated proficient and advanced is 84.9% statewide, 66.4% for MPS, and 43.2% for eight schools chartered by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee or the city of Milwaukee. (He has a line for schools chartered by MPS but has left it blank.)

Advocates for charter schools (including Schools Now) may find it easy to discount the Redovich analysis. For one thing, he is a long-time opponent of the charter and choice program who regards them as part of a conspiracy to destroy MPS. Also, his language is distinctively hyperbolic: "it is incredible that," "outrageously labels," "outrageous is too mild a term...!", "hypocrisy and stupidity in Milwaukee." (Full disclosure: some years ago I was dropped from his e-mail distribution for suggesting that milder language would be more effective.)

Yet the fact remains that for those hoping that charter schools would be a panacea for poor student achievement, the Milwaukee test scores so far are disappointing. Clearly expectations by some of the more starry-eyed supporters were unrealistic: getting rid of the public school bureaucracy does not solve all the problems of achievement among urban children.

Despite these data, it is not at all clear that the charter schools are doing less well than traditional schools:

1. These are new schools. It is increasingly evident that starting a school is difficult and it takes a while for the school to coalesce. As a result, student achievement usually suffers in the early years of a school, including with the few new MPS schools started in this period. Something of the same phenomenon seems to appear in grades where most of the students (but not the teachers) are new to the school, such as ninth grade and sixth grade; the latter helps explain the achievement advantage of K-8 schools over middle schools in MPS.

2. There is no information on how these students were doing before switching to the charter school. It seems plausible that a student struggling in a traditional school would be more likely to switch than one who was doing well. The early study of the Milwaukee choice program found that to be the case.

Also it should be noted that giving parents more choices is a good thing in itself. It is clear from enrollment numbers that there is a demand for alternatives.


Thursday, July 22, 2004

One more argument for value added measures

Wauwatosa, a Milwaukee suburb, is debating whether to close schools or bring in more students from outside the city through the state's open enrollment program. Most of these students are from Milwaukee and there lies the rub. According to the school superintendent these students change the culture and depress test scores. An article describes the debate while an opinion column attacks the suburb for using and then abandoning black students.

The test score issue, at least, would be less critical if schools were judged by the value added by the schools, rather than the absolute values of the test scores. Value-added measures compare schools' outputs to their inputs, reducing the incentive to avoid enrolling students who are behind.

Wednesday, July 21, 2004

More on Bush "the Education President"

A previous post noted an article praising George W. Bush as the education president. When the moderator of an education discussion group posted this article, electronic road rage resulted. The article was described as "right wing crap" and as "homage to Bush"and its author as a "neo-Nazi war monger." Defenders of the article, including its author, responded in kind, describing liberals as "irrational, America-hating, lying, McCarthyite left that is doing so much to poison our society's political and intellectual discourse."

An easy conclusion is that this experience illustrates how much society's discourse has been poisoned. It particularly illustrates the use of labels to dismiss the need to look at the merits of an idea. To criticize an idea as "liberal" or "conservative" is often a way to try to shut down discussion, to say the idea is not worthy of discussion.

Yet the members of this group, despite their nastiness to each other, pretty much agree on some of the big issues of education: the need to test students and the need for effective programs to replace ineffective ones which too often were introduced for ideological reasons. In this they are largely in agreement with the thrust of the No Child Left Behind act and of the Bush educational initiative.

Yet, as the reaction to the article showed, they are by no means either Republicans or conservatives. And this hints at why the Bush educational legacy may be much more negative than the Bush educational plan would suggest.

NCLB is the one example I can recall where the Bush administration had genuine consultations with the Democrats. Initially the law enjoyed wide bi-partisan support. That it is now the Bush NCLB and not the Kennedy-Bush NCLB reflects in large part the administration's decision to play to its base rather than work for consensus. By being such a divisive president, Bush has made the reforms supported by members of this discussion group less politically viable, at least among Democrats.

Governor wants deal on education

In an interview with the Journal Sentinel editorial board, Governor Doyle proposed a deal that would both allow the choice program to expand and increase funding for the SAGE low class program. The interview is described in both an article and an editorial.

At first glance, this proposal looks like a good deal for Milwaukee children, benefitting both those in the public schools and those in private schools. And that may be the catch: legislators from outside Milwaukee may feel it is too good a deal.

Perverse incentives and school budgets

A Journal Sentinel article describes one of the perverse incentives in the Wisconsin spending caps. A bit of explanation is in order. Wisconsin puts a limit on the amount of money a school district can spend, based on the district's enrollment and the district's spending in the previous year. The latter creates a perverse incentive: to spend at the limit. If a district spends less than the limit it will be able to spend less in the future. So even if the district wants to spend less in one year, it does not wish to tie its hands in the future.

Technical detail: 75% of the unspent money is recoverable, but that means 25% is permanently lost. This creates another catch: if the district does decide to recover the 75% the following year, taxes may take a sudden jump since state aid is based on the previous year's spending.

Apparently, according to this article, several districts decided not to spend at the limit, in the expectation that the law would be changed. It was not, and now they are discovering that their future budgets will be lower because of their one-year decision.

Caps like these, although designed to set a ceiling on spending, in practice become a floor. As local taxpayers realize tax rates are set at the state rather than the local level their interest in local government declines. As a result, in my experience, local politics increasingly becomes an insider's game--dominated by employees and those pursuing a particular agenda. I was struck by the lack of interest in those appearing before our board in finding ways the money could be spent more effectively; practically everyone simply demanded more money. The irony, of course, is that spending more was the one thing the board could not do.

Monday, July 19, 2004

Liberals vs. conservatives and school reform

Wisconsinites who watch any television know that an election is on the way. While it seems unlikely that education will be a dominant issue in the next election, it will certainly be one of them. A current article in City Journal makes the case that Bush is Yes, the Education President, in part by discounting the role Democrats played in passing the No Child Left Behind Act.

There are dangers, I think, in allowing educational reforms to become too closely associated with one party or one ideological grouping. An obvious one is what happens if Bush is not reelected. Will the policies that show potential (annual testing, making sure programs are effective, expanding charter schools and other alternatives) be reversed if they are viewed as conservative and Republican initiatives? (Click here for one Democratic voice that supports most of the NCLB initiatives.)

A second is that it allows opponents of reform to change the subject; instead of talking about the merits of the reform, they concentrate on the politics of those supporting the reform. I saw this last winter when a group of inner-city Milwaukee legislators appeared before a group of their constituents who supported the school choice program. The legislators justified their votes against expanding the program by pointing to the politics of the bills' Republican sponsors. The proposals were not to benefit the black community, they argued, but part of a right-wing agenda.

This strategy of guilt by association is especially effective because urban education is at the intersection of two cultures: urban politics and education, both of which are far more liberal than American society as a whole.

Bilingual programs in the New York Times

In the New York Times, Samuel Friedman describes opposition from New York parents to their children being placed in bilingual programs. Having read earlier accounts similar to Freedman's in the past, I anticipated there might be similar opposition in Milwaukee.

My experience while on the Milwaukee school board with Hispanic parents' attitudes towards bilingual programs was quite different. As part of our neighborhood schools plan we did extensive surveys and held public hearings to ask parents what it would take for them to send their kids to the neighborhood school. One clear conclusion was that parents wanted more bilingual programs and they wanted them in their neighborhood school so that their children wouldn't have to ride a bus.

My own bias is that most children find it far easier than most adults to pick up a new language so that a long transition period is not needed in most cases. But in Milwaukee many Hispanic parents did not share that view. Perhaps parents in Milwaukee have so many choices that those who dislike bilingual programs simply do not choose them and have no reason to oppose them.

In essence, Friedman short-circuits the argument. Instead of demonstrating that bilingual programs are less effective than English immersion, he changes the subject to the actions of a stupid, insensitive bureaucracy.

More on closing choice schools

In my comments on Sarah Carr's article on banning two schools from the choice (voucher) program, I overlooked her implication that the law allowing that action was opposed by the choice coalition. In fact, as George Mitchell, points out in a letter to Carr, "Act 155, the law DPI correctly used this week, was developed with substantial
involvement from the school choice coalition."

One reason that the coalition had held back in earlier years from pushing such legislation was the belief among many members that the state Department of Public Instruction already had the power to cut off these schools for violating the reporting, financial, and other requirements of the program.

How precise are the tests?

In an earlier post, I expressed my unease at using a single test to make definitive conclusions about either a school or a student. Part of the problem is that individual students' results can vary quite a bit from one test to another. When MPS first introduced annual testing using the Terra Nova, it started with second graders. Wisconsin tested third using its own third grade reading test (called the WRCT). Thus for that first year MPS third graders were given two different reading tests. How well did the tests track each other?

See this figure comparing the third grade reading scores for the two tests. On average, students who did well on one also did better on the other, but the points do not fall on a straight line. For any individual student the story may be quite different: a student may do superbly on one and dismally on the other. Some of the difference may reflect differences in the tests: whether they were timed and differences in the kinds of questions. Some may reflect differences in the student's mood on test day.

Some opponents of testing might argue that that this lack of precision argues for doing away with the tests. I would argue the opposite: that it calls for more testing to better understand the student. The aim, after all, is not high test scores but skilled readers.

To take the medical analogy, if a test for a disease is one hundred percent accurate there is no reason to do additional tests. If however, the test often produces false positives or negatives, additional testing is called for.

Wednesday, July 14, 2004

Two choice schools banned from program

Tomorrow's Journal Sentinel reports that Wisconsin has expelled Mandella School of Science and Math and Alex's Academics of Excellence from the Choice program. These two schools clearly had serious management problems for years and their termination was long overdue.

Despite their well-publicized financial and educational problems, the schools continued to attract students. Leaders at MPS should find this disturbing. Why would parents prefer a shaky private school to the local public schools? Have the parents tried the public school and found it wanting? Or do they have the impression that the public school is not nearly as anxious to enroll their students as are these two schools?

This action raises issues of what level of regulation is best for the Choice schools. Pure free market theorists would expect the schools to have collapsed on their own as parents found better schools. That they did not may reflect parents' sense of desperation. In practice most markets, such as the stock market, depend on regulation that allows consumers the assurance that minimal standards are met.

The danger is that the Department of Public Instruction will use this precedent to further regulate the schools, taking away some of their distinctiveness. A quote in the article is ominous: "We believe taxpayers and parents should have the same kind of accountability measures that are in place for public schools." Does that mean, for example, that DPI will resume pushing for certified teachers?

Update (July 23): An editorial in today's Journal Sentinel makes much the same two points:
1. Cutting off the two schools is a good thing.
2. But the comment about wanting to apply the same standards as for public schools is worrisome.

Wisconsin releases third grade reading scores

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction released its scores for schools for the third grade reading scores for the 2003-04 school year. A Journal Sentinel article noted that both statewide and for Milwaukee the percentage of students rated proficient had increased. This seems to fit the pattern of progress in the early grades, coupled with stagnation at the high school level.

Schools Now is a strong advocate of measuring student progress. However, there is a tendency to overinterpret the results of a single test, either to declare overall success or to rate schools. We will be returning periodically to the issues of using the results of many tests to get a more complete picture of how well students are learning.

Monday, July 12, 2004

Choice and charter schools feel squeeze

Tomorrow morning's Journal Sentinel has a letter from the president of the Downtown Montessori Academy, defending charter schools and protesting the WEAC (Wisconsin Education Association Council) attacks on them. Full disclosure: for my connection to Downtown Montessori, click here. An earlier post discusses the article referred to in the letter.

A squeeze is likely soon on choice and charter school enrollment:

1. Choice (voucher) schools: State law limits the number of choice seats to 15% of MPS enrollment, or about 15,000 students, a cap that is expected to be hit in the next year. The governor vetoed proposals to raise the cap, leading to the spread of lawn signs asking him to allow the cap to be raised. It is as yet unclear how seats will be allocated to schools once the cap is reached--or how students will be selected.

2. MPS Charter Schools: About six years ago, then-superintendent Alan Brown signed an agreement (called a "memorandum of understanding" or mou) with the MTEA (the Milwaukee teachers' union) to cap enrollment at non-MPS organizations, including charter schools, at 8% of MPS' or about 8,000 students. A justification for the mou was that the MTEA had an injunction against such contracts, but this was overturned shortly afterwards. The mou was not approved by the school board. The number of students in charters and other contracted programs will soon bump up against this cap.

3. Other Charter Programs: Charters issued by the Milwaukee common council and University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee are not directly affected by these caps, but their number has been small and they have recently been a particular target of the state union. It is unclear whether the new mayor or a majority of the council will favor new charters, particularly if MPS is unable to continue issuing them.

This is likely to be a continuing saga.

Sunday, July 11, 2004

J-S finds foes of NCLB are all talk

In Law's foes are all talk, no action, Alan Borsuk describes the lack of action to challenge the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. The big news is that there is no news, despite a standing offer from the National Education Association to fund a state challenge and an opinion from Wisconsin's attorney general that the law is an unfunded mandate.

Borsuk suggests several reasons for the lack of a challenge, most notably the amount of aid involved: $76.8 million for Milwaukee Public Schools, about seven percent of the MPS budget. This figure, while hardly small, is a reminder of the relatively minor role of the federal government in the MPS budget.

Bad decisions can take away far more funds from education than the federal government puts in. For example, an earlier article says that $63.9 million of the next budget is to go towards pensions, with most of the increase going towards the second pension plan that encourages teachers to take early retirement. Meanwhile, $195 million will go to health insurance, according to the same article. This suggests that even a very large increase in federal funding would be quickly eaten up by rising MPS health and pension costs. The annual increase in pension and health costs is $23.1 million--or over one-third of total federal aid.

Friday, July 09, 2004

Krug ends congressional race

In a press release, state representative Shirley Krug announced she was ending her campaign for U.S. Congress. Most important accomplishment listed: "My Milwaukee Neighborhood Schools Initiative created over 11,000 new classroom seats for the Milwaukee Public Schools without raising property taxes or state spending."

Although the NSI is still a work in progress, it has already led to a substantial increase in classrooms in overcrowded Milwaukee neighborhoods, to a series of interesting partnerships between MPS and community organizations, and to an increase in specialty programs such as Montessori.

Krug's skill in getting this measure into the state's budget bill and the challenges she faced have been underreported. First, she was Democratic minority leader of the assembly at the time; typically, only the majority party leadership has much influence on the state budget. Many in the Milwaukee delegation--including her fellow congressional candidates Tim Carpenter and Gwen Moore--seemed hostile towards the notion of neighborhood schools and itching for an excuse to shoot it down. The proposal was also widely resented by many outstate legislators who regarded it as too generous to Milwaukee. Despite these odds, she was able to maneuver this proposal into the governor's budget, and, along with Antonio Riley, through the legislative process.

Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Taxes and Choice/Charters

Tomorrow's Journal Sentinel has an article by Alan Borsuk describing the argument between the state teacher's union and supporters of choice and charters about funding for those schools ("Choice program debate turns fiscal"). Despite the many convolutions in the state funding formulas, the argument basically depends on assumptions about where the children from these schools would go if the choice and charter programs were eliminated.

The teacher's union assumes that most would not choose the public schools, betraying a striking lack of faith in public education. By supporting fewer students the taxpayers would be ahead, in WEAC's view. If, however, most moved to the more expensive public schools (either because they found the public schools acceptable or felt they had no other choice), taxes would rise.

The possibilities implied by the WEAC strategy of cutting taxes by reducing the number of students educated at public expense have barely been scratched. Rather than lamenting the dropout rate, for example, this logic implies it should be applauded for reducing the amount taxpayers must spend on education.

Here are links to the first and second fiscal bureau reports.

Does NCLB bite schools?

An article in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel points out that, despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the No Child Left Behind law, the repercussions on schools have been mild, at least so far ("Education law lacks expected bite"). The most serious consequence of being put on the "needs improvement" list seems to be the resulting humiliation.

Both defenders and critics of NCLB are likely to take comfort from this conclusion: defenders because the sky has not fallen, critics because the sky has not fallen enough to cause real change. The latter, of course, requires those criticizing NCLB for doing too much to shift gears and attack for doing too little.

The harsh attacks on NCLB have encouraged its defenders to close ranks and deny the need for any improvements in the law. As presently written, schools identified for improvement overwhelmingly serve low-income students. A variety of models, often called value-added, have been proposed to account for the added challenges for schools serving those students. For an example of a rating system of schools that incorporates student poverty, see this article that used data from Milwaukee Public Schools. Other value-added ratings adjust for test scores of incoming students, but these are mainly applicable to middle schools and above since students are seldom tested before they start elementary school.

The use of poverty in rating schools has run into ideological opposition, notably from the Education Trust, who fear that such use would reinforce lower-expectations for low-income students.

Sunday, July 04, 2004

Journal Sentinel looks at school funding

An article by Amy Hetzner in today's Milwaukee Sentinel gives a thoroughly depressing picture of the insolubility of Wisconsin's school financing problem ("No solution in sight for baffling school funding problems"). A sidebar lists four proposals from various groups none of which seem politically viable.

While most of the information in the article will come as no surprise to anyone following Wisconsin's educational issues, Hetzner puts an unusual spin on the QEO (qualified economic offer). The QEO allows school districts to impose contracts on teachers' unions so long as the total increase in salaries and benefits is at least 3.8%, and the other terms are unchanged. This law is normally considered an aid to school boards in holding down costs and giving them leverage in negotiations. Thus it is widely assumed, at least among school board members, that ending the QEO (as proposed by the Governor's Taskforce on Educational Excellence), would raise the costs of education and result in further cuts to school programs.

But, Hetzner points to a counter argument. In this view ending the QEO would encourage more aggressiveness on the part of districts to attack the rising cost of benefits. Under the QEO law a district could not impose a new contract unless it kept the same benefits. Thus districts try to control costs mainly by holding down salary increases. Without the QEO, in this argument, districts would be much more motivated to challenge benefit packages.

I find this argument unconvincing even if plausible. The problem is that without the QEO it is likely that many labor contracts will go to arbitration. Would these arbitrators be willing to clamp down on benefit costs, especially if doing so antagonized the unions and put at risk future arbitration work?

Saturday, July 03, 2004

First reviews from What Works Clearinghouse

The What Works Clearinghouse is a federally funded website aimed at evaluating research on various educational programs. It has finally published its first reviews at http://www.w-w-c.org/.

This is important for those of us interested in Milwaukee schools because one of the first topics is middle school math programs. Several years ago, Milwaukee Public Schools adopted the Connected Mathematics Project for its middle schools. CMP is one of several programs that have come under fire nationally, sometimes described as "fuzzy math." (See Mathematically Correct and NYC Hold for the criticisms that have been leveled at CMP and similar programs.)

As middle school students, my own daughter and her friends, good math students, criticized it for being confusing and overly elementary.

The CMP website lists five studies as supporting the effectiveness of CMP. What Works Clearinghouse rejects two of these as not meeting its expectations for scientific research. It lists the other three (along with two others) as still being evaluated.