“If we are to put an end to stubborn cycles of poverty and social failure, and put our country on track for long-term economic prosperity, we must address the needs of children who have long been ignored and marginalized in chronically low-achieving schools,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who made the announcement with Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) at Harley Harmon Elementary School in Las Vegas, Nevada. “States and school districts have an opportunity to put unprecedented resources toward reforms that would increase graduation rates, reduce dropout rates and improve teacher quality for all students, and particularly for children who most need good teaching in order to catch up.”

The proposed requirements would define the criteria states must use to award over $3.5 billion for SIGs to the districts with the lowest-achieving Title I schools that demonstrate the greatest need for the funds. Specifically, states would be required to identify three tiers of schools that are eligible for the funds:

1)      Tier I: the lowest-achieving 5% of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring;

2)      Tier II: equally low-achieving secondary schools (both middle level and high schools) that are eligible for, but do not currently receive, Title I funds; and

3)      Tier III: the remaining Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that are not Tier I schools.

Districts desiring a grant would submit an application to their state identifying which Tier I and Tier II schools they would commit to serve, and states would be encouraged to give priority to those districts serving both Tier I and Tier II schools. Districts would then be required to use the funding for implementing one of four specific interventions in the identified schools:

• Turnaround Model, which includes replacing the principal and at least 50% of the school’s staff, adopting a new governance structure, and implementing a new and revised instructional program;
• Restart Model, which would require a district to close the school and reopen it under the management of a charter school operator, a charter management organization, or an educational management organization;
• School Closure, which would require a district to close the school and enroll the students who attended the school in other, high-achieving schools within the district; or
• Transformation Model, which would require a district to address four specific areas critical to transforming the lowest-achieving schools:
• Developing teacher and school leader effectiveness;
• Implementing comprehensive instructional reform strategies;
• Extending learning time and creating community-oriented schools; and
• Providing operating flexibility and sustained support.

Grants would be awarded for up to three years and would be of sufficient size to implement reforms in each of the identified schools. Schools that choose to implement the Turnaround, Restart, or Transformation models would receive $500,000 per year. Schools receiving a grant would be required to report student achievement data to their district, and only those schools that are meeting, or are on track to meeting, the district’s student achievement goals may renew their grant beyond the first year.

After reviewing the public comments, ED will release the final guidance and an invitation for applications to states later this fall. For more information, go to: http://www.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 01:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (31)

A new report by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute raises the issue of whether private schools receiving public funds (through voucher-bearing students) should be subject to increased accountability and transparency. The report’s authors call for a sliding scale in which the more public dollars a private school receives, the more they should be subject to the transparency and accountability requirements that all public schools must currently meet.

“Private school vouchers should be rejected en bloc, and public dollars should remain in public schools” said NASSP Executive Director Gerald N. Tirozzi. “Extensive research has shown that vouchers have no significant impact on student achievement. In particular, a recent groundbreaking study comparing Milwaukee’s public school students with those participating in its private school voucher program found no statistically significant difference in the academic progress between students attending public schools and those participating in the voucher program. This is particularly noteworthy, as the Milwaukee voucher program is one of the largest and most significant of its kind in the nation,” he continued.

Voucher Advocates Weight In
The recommendations from the Fordham Institute contrast sharply with the attitudes of the survey respondents. The report surveyed school choice advocates, scholars, program administrators, and private school representatives, all of which were in general agreement that private schools that accept public funds should not be regulated like public schools.

Survey respondents argued that to maintain the freedom and individuality of private schools, the schools should not be required to meet teacher qualification and certification measures. They also generally agreed that private schools should be able to maintain their own student admissions and retention policies, which often allow them to accept, reject, and expel students as they see fit.

While respondents agreed that providing test scores and other information to current and prospective parents of private school students was essential, agreement broke down over which students should be tested and with whom this information should be shared. Respondents also disagreed over whether and how private schools should be held accountable for student academic achievement.

Reaching a Middle Ground
To solve the puzzle of private school autonomy versus transparency and accountability, the authors propose a simple sliding scale, in which the more public dollars a private school accepts (and the more it begins to look like a public school), the more it should be treated like a public school.

The authors argue that such a scale would encourage popular, highly rated private schools to participate in voucher programs because they would only be subject to relatively light transparency and accountability requirements. At the same time, this scale would satisfy taxpayers’ desire for accountability and public oversight.

To view the report, When Private Schools Take Public Dollars: What's the Place of Accountability in School Voucher Programs? visit www.edexcellence.net.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 11:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The name “Arne Duncan” is apparently derived from the words “innovation” and “accountability,” or at least that’s the impression U.S. Secretary of Education Duncan gave to Senators and onlookers at his January 13 confirmation hearing.

Duncan was unanimously confirmed by the Senate as the nation’s new Secretary of Education on January 20 – the same day Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States of America.

Duncan is no ordinary candidate for Secretary of Education. Not only is he the first former Australian pro-basketball player to ever be nominated for this position, but he also grew up helping his mother tutor children at the Sue Duncan’s Children’s Center in the rough inner city of Chicago, IL.

According to Duncan, several of those who participated in the Center went on to accomplish great things—including success in Hollywood and in the medical field. Those experiences showed him that with effort and determination, education has the power to transform students’ lives, even in the face of very challenging life circumstances.

Following President Barack Obama’s nomination of Duncan for Secretary of Education in December, NASSP Executive Director Gerald N. Tirozzi said the following: “We at NASSP are extremely pleased with the nomination of Arne Duncan for Secretary of Education. As the head of Chicago Public Schools, he has demonstrated a commitment to improving the education of all students and a willingness to bring educators of all stripes together in the pursuit of meaningful school reform. We are also pleased that he has called for additional flexibility under the No Child Left Behind Act and a significant increase in federal education funding.”

Throughout his testimony, Duncan made two things clear: the U.S. high school graduation rate is unacceptably low (it currently stands at about 70%) and improvements in student achievement can be obtained through innovation and accountability.

Reforming schools and increasing high school graduation rates is not easy business, and much of the work that needs to be done should occur at the middle level. “America once led the world in high school graduation, and now we’re falling behind other industrialized nations,” Duncan said. “We can’t continue down this path. We must identify students at risk of failure by the middle school years if not earlier—and target interventions to them,” he continued.

Central to school improvement efforts are quality principals and teachers. During the hearing, Duncan said that “school leadership matters,” and that he sees principals as chief executive officers. Duncan explained that any good school in Chicago has a great principal, and if a school does not have a good leadership succession plan in place, the schools’ successes will soon fall apart. Duncan also stated that a quality principal is critical to teacher retention, which he noted will be increasingly important as the generation of Baby Boomer teachers continues to retire.

During his tenure as superintendent of Chicago Public Schools, Duncan emphasized the importance of school leadership, and since 1998, three programs have been implemented in the city to develop a new cadre of principals and assistant principals. Together, these programs are helping to ensure that all schools are led by an effective instructional leader.

Holding schools accountable for results has also figured prominently in Duncan’s efforts to reform education, and at times this has meant closing down continuously low-performing schools and reopening them with new leadership and other school staff. However, staff turnover in the name of school turnaround is a strategy that NASSP believes should be avoided whenever possible.

Recognizing that literacy and numeracy are the building blocks for student success, Duncan has also demonstrated a strong commitment to improving these skills for students in all grades. As superintendent, he oversaw the initiation of a new evidence-based program incorporating literacy coaches, in which every student in every grade spends two hours each day on improving their literacy skills. Similar programs were also created for math and science.

Although at times controversial, Duncan’s efforts to improve education have borne success, and as a result, nearly two-thirds of eighth graders in Chicago are meeting or exceeding state standards (up from 40% in 2001). At the same time, greater numbers of high school students are taking college-level courses and gaining college credit.

NASSP commends President Obama on his selection of Arne Duncan for Secretary of Education, and we look forward to working with Duncan in the on-going pursuit of increased student learning.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 09:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

NASSP Executive Director Gerald N. Tirozzi issued the following statement on the nomination of Chicago Public Schools Superintendent Arne Duncan as the next secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

“We at NASSP are extremely pleased with the nomination of Arne Duncan for Secretary of Education. As the head of Chicago Public Schools, he has demonstrated a commitment to improving the education of all students and a willingness to bring educators of all stripes together in the pursuit of meaningful school reform. We are also pleased that he has called for additional flexibility under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and a significant increase in federal education funding.

“A champion of school leadership during his superintendancy, Duncan has spearheaded the implementation of several programs to develop a new cadre of principals and assistant principals. His efforts reflect NASSP’s priorities: to ensure that every school is led by an effective instructional leader.

“In addition, Duncan has demonstrated a strong commitment to improving the literacy and numeracy skills of all students in all grades. Under his watch a new evidence-based program incorporating literacy coaches was initiated in which every student in every grade spends two hours each day on improving their literacy skills. Similar programs were also created for math and science.

“An Education Department led by Duncan would emphasize the needs of urban schools. His efforts to close the achievement gap and improve high school graduation rates have resulted in nearly two-thirds of eighth graders meeting or exceeding state standards (up from 40% in 2001) and greater numbers of high school students taking college-level courses and gaining college credit.”

Adding a personal perspective, Janice Ollarvia, a former Chicago high school principal and distinguished principal of secondary school reform at NASSP, said:

“Arne Duncan has a passion for improving the educational lives of public school students, which is evident to everyone who has had an opportunity to watch him work. I have no doubt that he will bring his bold vision for public school improvement and change to the Department of Education, along with the extraordinary energy that the job will require.”

“In the coming years Duncan will face significant hurdles as Congress attempts to reauthorize NCLB,” said Tirozzi. “However we are hopeful that he will continue his open-door policy, and we look forward to working with him and other education groups towards a brighter, more prosperous future for all students.”

Gerald N. Tirozzi
NASSP Executive Director

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 01:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

For close to a decade, a little known federal program has been helping to recruit, train, and retain principals and assistant principals in high-need areas. Despite its success, the School Leadership Program has repeatedly been targeted for elimination by the outgoing President Bush Administration, and its future remains uncertain under the Obama Administration.

Strongly supported by NASSP, the School Leadership Program currently funds 22 grants in 16 states and the District of Columbia. It is the only federal program that directly addresses the difficulty of attracting and retaining high-quality candidates to the principalship in high-need school districts. While there is an allowable use of Title II funds under the No Child Left Behind Act for principal training, this funding has not been effective in ensuring that principals are included in ongoing professional development and mentoring activities.

School Leadership grants have been used to support initiatives such as Alaska’s comprehensive leadership development program focused on preparing and supporting aspiring and current principals in high-poverty and remote schools; Arizona’s URBAN-EXCEL Principal Certification and Professional Development Partnership for high-poverty rural and urban schools; and the Academy for Educational Development Middle School Leadership Project in the Bronx, NY, which focuses on assisting low-performing middle schools. (Additional information on these programs can be found at www.ed.gov/programs/leadership/index.html).

Support for the School Leadership Program is strong at the state and local levels. In 2008, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) received over 300 intents to apply for the program; however, only 22 grants were ultimately awarded due to limited funds. Over the past several years funding for this program has been stagnant at about $14 million, and ED staff has revealed that additional grants cannot be awarded until 2013 or later unless funding is significantly increased.

A big question is whether additional funds for this program will be proposed by the new Obama Administration. In his plans for education reform, Obama has declared his support for the creation and enhancement of state leadership academies and investments in professional development for school principals, both of which are types of projects funded by the School Leadership Program. However, in times of economic downturns, presidents often target small programs, such as this one, for level funding or cuts. While Obama has not made balancing the federal budget a top priority, during the campaign he called for using a “scalpel [to eliminate funding for federal] programs,” potentially putting the School Leadership Program in danger of level funding or cuts.

NASSP has been meeting with senior-level members of Obama’s education transition team, advocating for the importance of the School Leadership Program, as well as several other programs vital to middle level and high school success. For updates on the School Leadership and other programs, check back often to the Principal’s Policy Blog.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Every school day approximately five percent of teachers will be absent from school and replaced by a substitute. Over time, the costs add up and stipends for substitute teachers and associated costs amount to $4 billion annually, according to a report by the Center for American Progress. Teacher absences also take a toll on student learning. The report found that teachers are typically absent nine or ten days per year, which means that between kindergarten and 12th grade, students are taught by someone other than their regular teacher for the equivalent of two-thirds of a school year. Moreover “every 10 absences…lowers [student] mathematics achievement by the same amount as having a teacher with one year to two years of experience instead of a teacher with three years to five years of experience.”

Tales of Teacher Absence: New Research Yields Patterns that Speak to Policymakers explains that part of the negative effects on student achievement is due to the fact that substitute teachers are, on average, less qualified than regular teachers. The report points out that 37 states do not even require a bachelor’s degree for some substitutes, and only North Dakota requires them to have the same credentials as regular teachers.

Teacher absences also contribute to the achievement gap because absences tend to occur at greater rates in schools with high concentrations of students from low-income families. “Teachers in schools with high poverty rates appear to be absent about one day more per year than teachers in low-poverty schools—a factor which, while small, contributes to the achievement gap,” the report argues.

Factors Contributing to Teacher Absences
The report found that the following types of teachers tend to be absent more than others:
 Teachers with tenure
 Those who have long commutes
 Elementary school teachers
 Teachers working in larger schools
 Teachers working in high-poverty schools
 Teachers whose contracts provide them with more paid illness or personal leave.

Factors Contributing to Teacher Attendance
The following types of teachers tend to have fewer absences than others, the report found:
 Teachers working in schools with a culture promoting high attendance
 Teachers who are given bonuses for exceptionally high attendance rates
 Teachers whose districts offer to buy back unused sick leave.

The report also found that teachers tend to call out less when they are required to report their absence by phone directly to the school principal, and call out more when they are required to report through less personal means.

Policy Recommendations
To help decrease teacher absence rates, the report calls on federal policymakers to reauthorize and amend No Child Left Behind (NCLB) to include teacher absence information on the school report cards currently mandated under NCLB. “Such information could help district officials better understand local obstacles to implementing school improvement strategies,” advises the report.

However, NASSP director of program development, John Nori cautions that the report’s recommendations to include teacher absence rate information on school report cards “continues the practice of using ‘the stick’ rather than ‘the carrot’ approach to school reform.” Instead, Nori says that “policymakers would make better use of their time by: examining the factors identified in this report that contribute to teacher attendance; providing teachers with incentives to be on the job; and focusing on ways to ensure that substitute teachers are not only qualified, but receive high-quality professional development.”

To view the report, click here.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 04:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

The number of Title I schools in the restructuring phase of school improvement under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has increased by 56% since the 2006-07 school year, according to a new study by the Center on Education Policy (CEP). In addition, once schools have entered this phase, many struggle to leave it, even after taking all actions required by federal law.

A Call to Restructure Restructuring: Lessons from the No Child Left Behind Act in Five States reveals that despite the alarming increase in the number of schools in restructuring, this number is likely to increase further in the years to come.

Jack Jennings, president and CEO of CEP, explained that when NCLB was first enacted, several states back-loaded their plans to meet the 2014 deadline for getting all students to proficiency in reading and math. This meant that while schools would be allowed to make smaller gains in student proficiency in the early years, significantly larger gains would have to be made in the years just before 2014. Consequently, as the 2014 deadline approaches, a growing number of schools are missing their adequate yearly progress (AYP) targets and falling into restructuring status.

After missing AYP for five or more consecutive years, schools enter restructuring and are presented with a list of five options to turn around student performance, including:

 Replacing all or most of the school staff who are relevant to the school missing AYP

 Entering into a contract with an outside organization with a record of success and effectiveness to run the school

 Reopening the school as a charter school

 Turning over the school to the state, if the state agrees

 Undertaking any other major restructuring of the school’s governance that produces fundamental reform.

While over 90% of schools in the five states examined utilized the “any other major restructuring” option (only about 3% chose to replace the school principal), the study found that none of the five restructuring options “were associated with a greater likelihood of a school making AYP overall or in reading or math alone.” As a result of this finding, CEP advises federal policymakers to broaden, not narrow the options available for restructuring schools and consider using strategies that specifically use data to identify areas in which students are struggling, providing tutoring as needed.

On the issue of funding, CEP found that while the federal government mandates that additional monies be provided for schools in restructuring, some of this additional funding is often taken away when schools see improvements in student achievement and exit this phase.

Jennings noted that the withdrawal of these additional funds has made principals and teachers fearful that their schools may quickly slip and miss their AYP targets. This is for the simple reason that schools in restructuring used these additional resources to provide professional development for principals and teachers and targeted assistance to struggling students. Then at the very moment that these schools improve student achievement, “these funds are withdrawn and shifted to other schools that aren’t doing as well,” Jennings said.

“Schools in the restructuring phase under NCLB need the most help, but the current funding system that essentially punishes schools for improving student achievement by taking away resources is wrongheaded and completely counterproductive,” said NASSP Executive Director Gerald N. Tirozzi. “Instead, federal policy should live up to its goal of getting all students to proficiency by providing increased funding and technical assistance to struggling schools. The federal government should also work with states and districts to help schools create a culture of continuous learning and excellence that encourages students to take charge of their own education. It is only by changing pervasive beliefs and expectations that meaningful school reform can truly be accomplished,” Tirozzi continued.

To guard against creating a revolving door of school failure and success, CEP calls on states and districts to “help schools adequately plan to replace these funds and services and…continue to funnel funds and services to these schools until they are able to maintain achievement.”

As the instructional leaders of schools, principals play a central role in school improvement efforts. When asked what he thinks is the most useful role for principals in schools in restructuring, Jennings responded that it is “probably to work with the current staff to know that a serious effort has to be made to change the school. What we’ve [CEP] found to be most effective is to use data to change instruction and identify students who need tutoring, and provide that tutoring either during or after school, and bring in outside experts to improve teaching.”

Jennings also noted that replacing school staff as a strategy for improving student achievement should be avoided, and only considered as an option when three very specific conditions are in place: 1) districts have the capacity to help the school advertise and interview for open staff positions; 2) the region around the school has enough qualified candidates who might apply for open positions; 3) the district, perhaps with state assistance, can negotiate with the teachers’ union to remove potential obstacles to restaffing. Notably, Jennings explained that many of the schools studied for CEP’s report did not have these conditions in place.

NASSP believes that increasing student achievement requires a schoolwide, comprehensive approach, and rather than merely replacing school staff, schools should focus on the strategies detailed in NASSP’s Breaking Ranks series, including: the creation of professional learning communities; personalization of the school environment; empowering students to take control of their own continuous learning and development; and connecting high expectations with rigorous curriculum, instruction, and assessments.

To view CEP’s report in full, visit www.cep-dc.org. For more information on NASSP’s Breaking Ranks series, visit www.principals.org/breakingranks.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 12:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A recent evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program – the first and only federally funded private school voucher program – failed to show significant gains in student achievement, adding to the mounting evidence that vouchers are not the best path to improved student performance, and that federal funding would be better used to improve public schools.

The evaluation conducted by the U.S. Department of Education found that after two years, students participating in the program showed no statistically significant gains in either math or reading achievement. Furthermore, while parents of children who participated in the program were less likely to be worried about school safety, there was no difference in the number of dangerous activities reported by the actual students who participated in the program versus those who did not.

Similarly, although participation in the program resulted in higher parental satisfaction with their child’s school, the students themselves were no more likely to be satisfied.

NASSP opposes any proposal that would divert money away from public schools. Although voucher programs are often proposed as a means to respond to low academic achievement, this report proves there is little evidence to support that vouchers lead to a better education. In reality, vouchers serve only to detract from the goal of comprehensive public school reform.

This year, the DC voucher program, which receives nearly $15 million from Congress every year, is set to expire. Through the National Coalition for Public Education, NASSP will work hard to ensure that federal funding is redirected to the public schools that need it most. Stay tuned for updates!

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 04:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Twenty five years ago A Nation at Risk sought to change the course of education in the United States. Today, while some gains have been made, there is still far to go to meet the challenges outlined in the 1983 report.

As one example, while 9 and 13-year-olds have made steady gains in math since the 1970s, reading scores for 9, 13, and 17-year-olds have remained essentially unchanged for over 20 years, according to long-term trend data for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the “Nation’s Report Card”. 

In 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) sought to draw attention to and remedy this stagnant achievement by requiring schools to disaggregate student achievement data to pinpoint which students were succeeding, and which needed additional help. Yet six years after NCLB was enacted, the achievement gap remains, and many of the “Indicators of Risk” documented in A Nation at Risk, such as the need for remedial education for some college students and low U.S. rankings on international comparison tests, are still present, prompting us to ponder the question: what have we missed?

The 1983 report itself answered that question when it stated,

Our society and its educational institutions seem to have lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them. … That we have compromised this commitment is, upon reflection, hardly surprising, given the multitude of often conflicting demands we have placed on our Nation’s schools and colleges. They are routinely called on to provide solutions to personal, social, and political problems that the home and other institutions either will not or cannot resolve. We must understand that these demands on our schools and colleges often exact an educational cost as well as a financial one.

Public schools have unfairly taken the blame for the ills of the society that surrounds them. Unless this changes, 25 years from now, we will be pondering the same question of why students are not always adequately prepared for the challenges that await them in college and the workforce. And by then, it may truly be too late.

There is reason to be hopeful however. By encouraging states to adopt national standards, Congress and the president can make significant inroads in the reform movement. By appointing an independent, diverse group of researchers, practitioners, advocates, and experts, to develop a set of common standards and authentic, reliable assessments beginning with Language Arts and mathematics in grades K-12, the federal government can help increase transparency in cross state comparisons while simultaneously providing more equal educational opportunities for all children.

As the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act looms, NASSP is hopeful that Congress, the president, states, advocacy groups, and educators will all work together to enact education reforms that build on the lessons learned from previous efforts, and which heed the warnings of A Nation at Risk so that all students are prepared to success in college and the 21st century workforce.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 10:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Approximately 5,000 of America’s 100,000 public schools are on track for restructuring under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) by the 2009 – 10 school year, according to The Turnaround Challenge, a new report by the Mass Insight Education and Research Institute.

Schools entering the planning phase of restructuring have missed adequate yearly progress (AYP) for five consecutive years, and if AYP is missed for a sixth consecutive year, a district must take one of several drastic measures, including: replacing the school principal and other staff who are relevant to the school missing AYP; reopening the school as a public charter school; entering into a contract with a private management company with a demonstrated record of effectiveness, to operate the school; or state takeover of the school. The district may also implement “any other major restructuring of the school’s governance arrangement that makes fundamental reforms, such as significant changes in the school’s staffing and governance, to improve student academic achievement in the school and that has substantial promise of enabling the school to make adequate yearly progress.”

How do we turn around these chronically low-performing schools when past reform efforts have simply not worked? The answer, some researchers and educators are saying, can be found through innovation and entrepreneurship. Specifically, researchers at Mass Insight say that we should be looking at what practices high-performing, high-poverty (HPHP) schools have engaged in to achieve success in the face of formidable obstacles, and then attempt to replicate those same practices in other schools with similar characteristics.

In fact, for the last 5 years, NASSP has been identifying and recognizing schools that have implemented innovative programs to dramatically improve student achievement through the Breakthrough Schools Program.  According to Judith Richardson, Associate Director of School Improvement, “NASSP in partnership with MetLife Foundation is identifying schools serving large numbers of economically disadvantaged students but have demonstrated academic growth for all student groups.  These middle and high school level Breakthrough schools exemplify strategies and programs that principals can use to dramatically improve student achievement.”  

In an attempt to do just this, the authors of The Turnaround Challenge analyzed the intervention efforts of HPHP schools in ten states and four districts, and found nine strategies these schools have used to improve student achievement. These strategies are:

1) Safety, discipline, and engagement: Students feel secure and inspired to learn
2) Action against adversity: Schools directly address their students’ poverty-driven deficits
3) Close student-adult relationships: Students have positive and enduring mentor/teacher relationships
4) Shared responsibility for achievement: Staff feel deep accountability and a missionary zeal for student achievement
5) Personalization of instruction: Individualized teaching based on diagnostic assessment and adjustment time on task
6) Professional teaching culture: Continuous improvement through collaboration and job-embedded learning
7) Resource authority: School leaders can make mission-driven decisions regarding people, time, money, and program
8) Resource ingenuity: Leaders are adept at securing additional resources and leveraging partner relationships
9) Agility in the face of turbulence: Leaders, teachers, and systems are flexible and intervene in responding to constant unrest.

These strategies may seem familiar to NASSP members, as we have been advocating for many of them since 1996 through our Breaking Ranks publications and trainings.

Rather than merely replacing staff, NASSP recommends that improved student performance results when the following elements are combined in a school and community: collaborative leadership and the establishment of professional learning communities; personalization of the school environment; and building on personalized learning by connecting high expectations with rigorous curriculum, instruction, and assessments to empower students to take charge of their own continuous learning and development. NASSP details 7 Cornerstone implementation strategies (high school) or 9 Cornerstone implementation strategies (middle level) for leading effective school reform. For more information on NASSP’s Breaking Ranks series and other professional development opportunities, visit http://www.principals.org/s_nassp/sec_inside.asp?CID=1162&DID=54968.

The Turnaround Challenge argues that schools in the restructuring phase “are like organisms that have built immunity, over years of attempted intervention, to the ‘medicine’ of incremental reform. Low-expectation culture, reform-fatigued faculty, high-percentage staff turnover, inadequate leadership, and insufficient authority for fundamental change all contribute to the general lack of success.” As a result, dramatic change is needed. True turnaround efforts, the report explains, should produce significant achievement gains within two years, and position the school for further gains in the years to come.

To achieve such success, the report notes, schools and districts need to make use of the nine strategies outlined above, and suggests the creation of a “state turnaround agency” to coordinate and target reform efforts of nonprofits, businesses, institutes of higher education, and other stakeholders in districts and states. Because the report found that many of the HPHP schools are public charters, its authors also suggest that states may also want to consider creating special “turnaround zones” with charter-like authority, including greater administrator control over staff, scheduling, curriculum, and budget decisions.

As states and districts struggle to find ways to improve student achievement in chronically underperforming schools, the report provides a starting point for school leaders who are principally charged with turnaround efforts in their schools and an assessment guide that evaluates strategies currently in place. Principals and other school leaders may also want to explore the questionnaires and self assessments contained in NASSP’s own Breaking Ranks guides for middle level and high school reform, as well as our guides for improving schoolwide numeracy, and creating a culture of literacy. These publications can be accessed at http://www.principals.org/s_nassp/sec_inside.asp?CID=1162&DID=54968. NASSP’s Leadership Skills Assessment can also be found at http://www.principals.org/s_nassp/sec_inside.asp?CID=39&DID=39.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 08:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

It’s a time-honored tradition in America that states and local districts should have control over our schools. But in the age of global competitiveness and student mobility, is it time to loosen the reigns of local control in favor of something more national?

This was the question addressed in a recent report by the Center for American Progress. The report’s author, Matt Miller, a senior fellow at the Center, argues that local control of education creates several major problems, including financial inequality, inconsistent standards and inadequate data, and a lack of education research and development. Miller contends that a more national approach to education would help solve many of these problems and calls for the establishment of national standards and increasing the federal government’s share of education funding from approximately 9% to 25 – 30%, with a portion of this increased investment going toward increasing funding for education research.

Miller argues that “it is only by transcending traditional local control, and by getting serious about a new national role in standards and finance, that we can at last create genuine autonomy for local schools.” In creating this “genuine autonomy” Miller also recommends eliminating school boards, which he believes are dominated by teacher unions that heavily influence the election of board members.

Not everyone is convinced this is the correct path to follow, however. At the release of the report, Reginald Felton, director of federal relations for the National School Boards Association, urged the American people to guard against the assumption that doing away with local control of education (and school boards) would remedy decades of neglect, or that a nationalization of education would immediately result in a spike in student achievement.

“One size does not fit all” agreed former Superintendent of Schools for the Los Angeles Unified School District Roy Romer. However, he pointed out that a local school board is not able to create a national math curriculum, and later expressed his support for national standards. Romer indicated that these standards should be voluntarily adopted by states from the ground-up, instead of forced upon states by the federal government.

Earlier this year, the NASSP Board of Directors proposed a position statement on National Academic Standards in K-12 Education. In the statement, NASSP calls on Congress to “appoint an independent, diverse group of researchers, practitioners, advocates, and experts to develop a set of common national standards and authentic, reliable assessments beginning with Language Arts and mathematics in grades K-12 and examine the feasibility of national standards in other subjects.” NASSP also urges states to actively participate in the development and adoption of those standards, and for the federal government to provide grants to states to assist with the adoption and implementation of those common standards. NASSP invites members’ comments on the proposed statement through April 30, 2008.

There is little doubt that America has, and continues to be going through a period of flux. As Matt Miller concludes in his report, “Once upon a time, a national role in retirement security was anathema. Then suddenly, after the Depression, there was Social Security. Once a federal role in health care would have been damned as socialism, yet federal spending now accounts for one of every two dollars devoted to health care in the United States, with more certain to come in the years ahead. When it comes to schools, there has likewise always been a tension between the desire to improve the life chances of more children by involving higher levels of authority, and the primordial American distrust of central government. But the truth is we started down this road even on schooling a long time ago. It’s time now to finish the job.”

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 08:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In response to continued criticism and calls for reform of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and its one-size-fits-all approach to school improvement, U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings announced a new “differentiated accountability” pilot program at a press conference on March 18.

According to information available on the Department of Education’s (ED) website, “differentiated accountability will allow states to vary the intensity and type of interventions to match the academic reasons that lead to a school’s identification.”

The pilot program is limited to 10 state slots, with preference given to states with at least 20% of their Title I schools identified for improvement, and which “combine innovation with a rigorous approach to reform, and…propose to take the most significant and comprehensive interventions for the lowest-performing schools earlier in the improvement timeline.” Preference will also be given to those states whose standards and assessment system have been fully approved by ED, have an approved highly qualified teacher plan, and that provide timely and transparent information on adequate yearly progress (AYP) to the public. According to ED, “states that have had more than one non-approved occurrence of late AYP in the past two years are not eligible.”

States have until May 2, 2008, to submit their proposals for participation in the pilot program, with approval notices coming possibly before the start of the 2008-09 school year.

In addition to the new pilot program, differentiated improvement is a concept that has been gaining traction on Capitol Hill as well. Last year Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Rep. Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX) introduced the Graduation Promise Act (S. 1185/H.R. 2928), which would provide grants to states and schools to develop systems of differentiated high school improvement that will focus research and evidence-based intervention on the lowest performing high schools, and improve the capacity of these high schools to decrease dropout rates and increase student achievement.

NASSP strongly advocated for the Graduation Promise Act, and was extremely pleased to see provisions of the bill incorporated into both the House and Senate NCLB reauthorization discussion drafts.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 02:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Effective school leadership is by its nature a constant challenge. In an ongoing effort to improve student and school performance, a recent report asked if principals should be given explicit authority over school management and staffing issues, or if ambiguity in labor agreements is a better way to go?

The Leadership Limbo: Teacher Labor Agreements in America’s Fifty Largest School Districts is a preliminary study of 50 of the nation’s largest school districts conducted by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. The report found that most (30) of the districts surveyed have labor agreements that are either “somewhat flexible or somewhat restrictive, suggesting that most principals have substantial leeway to manage assertively, should they so choose.” The report’s authors argue that while such agreements are preferable to highly restrictive labor agreements, they should be more transparent and should explicitly recognize “managerial discretion as part of a twenty-first century labor agreement.”

However, the report is quick to point out that while labor agreements can act as barriers to effective school and district management, the degree to which they hamper improvement efforts in large districts may be somewhat overstated. “It appears that district and school leaders are failing to exploit gray areas in which they may be free to act. Whether this hesitancy is due to a fear of provoking conflict and violating comfortable norms, union resistance and influence, or a lack of willingness by district leaders to actively support entrepreneurial activity, it calls for reformers to both address extra-district sources of inflexibility and push district officials to provide the requisite political, legal, and material support. District officials must cease blaming ‘the contract’ for their inaction,” the report said.

A similar conclusion was found in an earlier report by the Fordham Institute (Principal’s Policy Blog, May 21). Both reports point to the importance of resourcefulness to effective leadership. A central goal of school improvement efforts is the creation of a self-sustaining culture of learning. This often requires reaching out to parents and the broader community to address the myriad extra-academic issues that impact student achievement, while also seeking out school partnerships between businesses, institutions of higher education, and nonprofit organizations to create opportunities for staff development and increased student achievement. For assistance on strategies for leading middle level and high school reform, please visit NASSP’s website for information on Breaking Ranks trainings and publications.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 09:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The average school building is more than 40 years old, and as state and local budgets continue to tighten, many are looking to the federal government for school construction and modernization projects funding. While a bill that has been introduced to Congress—America’s Better Classrooms Act—has gained much support, its future is uncertain. The bill would provide approximately $25 billion in interest-free funds to high-poverty schools for renovation and construction.

In mid-February, lawmakers held a hearing to explore the federal government’s role in school modernization. Yielding mixed results, some members of Congress stated that increased federal funding can have a significant impact on school construction; and can even positively impact student achievement, as well as student and teacher morale and health. Yet others argued that the federal government has had a virtually nonexistent role in school construction funding and should focus its efforts on adequately funding other initiatives such as Title I and the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA).

In the pro-funding camp, Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, argued that “It is common sense that substandard conditions in our schools make it harder for teachers to teach and children to learn. Research bears this out, consistently finding a relationship between facility quality and student achievement, independent of other factors.”

“As state and local tax revenues shrink, states and cities will look to make up that budget shortfall by cutting spending. Budget cutbacks will harm essential services, like education, and they will also exacerbate the economic problems we’re seeing,” Miller continued. “We can help mitigate the economic damage by investing in school construction projects that will create jobs and inject demand into the economy.”

Not all lawmakers were in agreement, however. “The fact is, any federal intervention into school construction carries with it significant burdens,” said Rep. Howard P. ‘Buck’ McKeon (R-CA), the senior Republican on the committee. “In a time of limited federal resources, many question why we would drain funds away from other critical education priorities in order to fund an inefficient construction mandate,” McKeon continued.

Neal McClusky of the Cato Institute concurred, arguing that “widespread school choice is the key to efficiently building and maintaining high-quality school facilities,” and even challenging the federal government’s constitutional authority for making education policy.

Among the several school construction and modernization bills that have been introduced in the 110th Congress, only one—the America’s Better Classrooms Act (H.R. 2470/S. 912)—has garnered broad bipartisan support. The $25 billion in interest-free funds to schools for renovation and construction would be targeted to public schools in high-poverty areas, including Empowerment Zones, Enterprise Communities, and schools in which at least 35% of the student population is eligible for the National School Lunch Program.

Despite the broad support for the bill, its fate remains unclear. With the country’s economy in trouble, many lawmakers are leery of bills that propose new spending or decrease revenue to the federal government. In such scenarios lawmakers are faced with the difficult question of whether to increase the deficit or cut funding for other programs to pay for the new spending or make up for the decreased revenue.

Regardless of whether or not lawmakers pass the America’s Better Schools Act, the question remains: Is school construction and modernization an appropriate place for increased federal funding, or should the federal government concentrate on adequately funding other programs such as Title I and IDEA?

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 04:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Following lengthy debate and negotiations this fall, the House Education and Labor Committee approved a bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act (HEA) on November 15.

The College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 (H.R. 4137) would provide 5-year competitive grants to an institution of higher education and a high-need local educational agency or other “eligible entity” for improving the preparation of prospective teachers and providing enhanced professional development for current teachers and principals.

Grant applicants would be required to include a needs assessment with respect to the preparation, ongoing training, professional development, and retention of general and special education teachers and principals. In addition, an eligible partnership would be required to provide year-long teacher mentoring opportunities and closely supervised interaction between faculty, principals, and other administrators.

H.R. 4137 also emphasizes the importance of literacy coaches and would permit the use of funds for training and professional development of principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement. Funds could also be used for developing and implementing a program to strengthen the content knowledge of secondary school literacy coaches; developing or redesigning rigorous evidence-based curricula that are aligned with challenging state content standards; and providing opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education.

Additionally, the bill would authorize the U.S. Department of Education to competitively award grants to historically or predominantly Black institutions of higher education, Tribal colleges or universities, or other predominantly minority-serving institutions of higher education that have a teacher preparation program. These funds may be used to develop and implement initiatives to promote the retention of highly qualified teachers and principals, including programs that provide teacher or principal mentoring from exemplary teachers and principals, or induction and support for teachers and principals during their first three years of employment.

Many of the provisions in H.R. 4137 are aligned with NASSP’s policy recommendations for middle level and high school reform, including: providing new principals with mentors for the first several years of their principalship; helping principals become instructional leaders by building adolescent literacy leadership; and helping create inclusive, collaborative leadership and fostering professional learning communities through increased interaction among teachers and principals. Click here to view NASSP’s Policy Recommendations for Middle Level Reform, and click here to view NASSP’s Legislative Recommendations for High School Reform.

The Senate passed its version of the HEA reauthorization bill (S. 1642) on July 24, and when Congress returns in early December both chambers expect to complete work on the reauthorization. However, the House must still pass its version and then conference with the Senate to iron out differences before a bill can be sent to the president.

Despite the desire to work on the legislation, time is running short for lawmakers who are on the brink of an election year. Will they be able to deliver on their promises to improve education? Stay tuned for updates!

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 03:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In their on-going efforts to ensure that no child is left behind, and coming on the heels of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report which found that of those eligible to receive supplemental educational services (SES), less than 20% actually receive it, lawmakers have introduced a number of bills to increase awareness and participation in SES for America’s struggling students.

Under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), when a school does not meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) for 3 or more years, the school district must offer SES to all low-income students enrolled in the school. The district must set aside 20% of their Title I funds to provide these services and transportation for students who choose to attend another school.

Introduced bills altering current SES provisions of NCLB include:
• Improving No Child Left Behind (INCLB) Act (S. 348)
• Raising Achievement through Improved Supplemental Education (RAISE) Act of 2007 (S. 1009)
• School Accountability Improvements Act (S. 1236)
• Empowering Parents through Choice Act (H.R. 1486/S. 1014)
• No Child Left Behind Reform Act (NCLBRA) (H.R. 2087/S. 1194)
• Improving Supplemental Education by Ensuring Parental Awareness Act (H.R. 2203)

Commonalities among these bills include: increasing parental awareness; improving data collection on the effectiveness of SES and parental satisfaction with services provided; reducing the time schools must wait before offering free SES after missing AYP; and targeting SES to students who are not proficient, rather than all low-income students.

While the details of the individual bills differ, the ideas and goals that they embody are largely similar. Moreover, as several hearings this year have shown, lawmakers are concerned about reports of continuing achievement gaps and stagnant student performance, and are paying serious attention to supplemental educational services, and other options to improve student achievement.

Although some of these bills contain provisions that NASSP objects to, the overarching goal of increasing student achievement and helping those in greatest need is a goal that NASSP strongly supports.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 09:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

“Our nation is facing a deficit of skilled workers and the need to get additional people in and through postsecondary education and training has never been more necessary,” according to a recently released report ("Expanding Opportunities: Postsecondary Career and Technical Education and Preparing Tomorrow's Workforce") by the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE). In addition, the Bureau of Labor Statistics states that 24 of the 30 fastest growing jobs in 2014 will require significant postsecondary education and training. Yet only 68% of high school students graduate, and only 39% enter postsecondary education and training.

In order to stem this growing problem, an approach which integrates all education levels is needed. Of particular importance are middle level and high schools that foster connections to higher education and training. “Concrete linkages must be developed between middle and high school, high school and postsecondary, and postsecondary and work,” the report said. These linkages should include postsecondary-level work for high school students. By providing this opportunity, students are able to become more confident about their ability to handle postsecondary work.

While most think of Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate when thinking about secondary to postsecondary transition programs, career and technical education (CTE) transition programs have shown to be successful in many states. For example, the report points to the Miami Valley Tech Prep Consortium, which has a 90% transition to college rate for their Tech Prep students. 

Overcoming the hurdles of secondary school and eliminating the skilled worker deficit requires a comprehensive approach; the report notes, “the availability of effective student supports can play a critical role in enrollment, persistence and completion of postsecondary credentials…All learners – secondary and postsecondary – should receive the information they need to make thoughtful decisions about choosing a career path, setting career goals, and selecting the educational options suitable to reach those goals.” Without career advice and life supports, many students drop out of school and fail to receive the information needed to succeed in a highly skilled workforce.

School leaders can help in this regard by building and maintaining a vision, direction, and focus for student learning, reinforcing partnerships with institutions of higher education, organizations and businesses to encourage real-life applications of knowledge and skills that extend learning beyond the high school campus and help students link their education to their future.

Building and reinforcing this career pipeline is not cheap. To get around this often highly prohibitive obstacle, ACTE recommends increased federal and state funding for CTE and low-income programs, and advises school leaders to work with their communities to create “synergies” and get the most out of every dollar.

There is light at the end of the tunnel. Although there is a critical deficit of skilled workers in America, national attention is growing concerning the importance of CTE, as more people begin to see it as a vital part of secondary and postsecondary education that is key to improving the American economy and increasing America’s global competitiveness.

To view the full report, visit http://www.acteonline.org/policy/legislative_issues/upload/PS_full.pdf.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 02:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A new report on urban school climate finds that administrators and teachers sometimes have differing perceptions of their educational environments. Examining such factors as expectations of success, race, professional development, parental involvement, safety and bullying, Where We Teach, a survey by the Council of Urban Boards of Education that examined approximately 4,700 teachers and 267 principals and assistant principals in 10 states, found that 94.6 % of administrators agree or strongly agree that students in their school are capable of high achievement on standardized exams, in contrast to 77.2 % of teachers who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. Further underscoring this, 85.2 % of administrators disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that “most students at this school would not be successful at a community college or university,” in contrast to 58.1 % of teachers who disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.

In other areas however, teachers and administrators do not have such divergent views. In a stark reminder of the influence that race continues to play, 51 % of teachers and 52.5 % of administrators disagreed or strongly agreed that “there are students who will be successful in this school because of their race.” Just under a quarter of teachers who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement are black, and approximately 19 % of white/non-Hispanic, Hispanic, and “other” teachers agreed or strongly agreed with this statement according to the report. Disaggregated race information was not available for administrators to answer this question.

Studies have shown that “leadership and teacher behaviors have an impact on how reforms are implemented and received in schools, and [this] in turn will impact student achievement,” according to the survey. Eighty-six percent of administrators strongly agreed or agreed that teachers their schools exercise good professional judgment. Likewise, 76.3 % of teachers strongly agree or agree that administrators trust their professional judgment. Although the majority of teachers and administrators surveyed trust each other’s judgment, the results reveal that teachers believe administrators trust them less than they actually do.

The divergent views of teachers and administrators are once again shown in the area of professional development. Of those surveyed, 93.8 % of administrators feel they actively seek opportunities to help teachers learn new instructional methods, while only 78.4 % of teachers believe there are sufficient opportunities to learn new instructional methods. Moreover, 95.3 % of administrators believe teachers would benefit from more professional development, while only 68.1 % of teachers believe they would benefit from more professional development provided by the school district.

On the timely issue of school safety, 93.5 % of administrators and 82 % of teachers believe their school is a safe place to work. However, 22.5 % of administrators and 25 % of teachers believe that some children in their school carry guns or knives. Approximately 27 % of administrators who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement are white/non-Hispanic, 19.7 % are black, and 10.8 % are Hispanic. Of the teachers who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement, 27.3 % are white/non-Hispanic, 18.6 % are black, 12.8 % are Hispanic, and 61.2 % are other ethnicities.

This study serves as a reminder of the multiplicity of factors that make up school climate; highlighting optimism in some areas, while pointing out causes for concern in others, and all the while illuminating the different roles and perceptions played and held by administrators and teachers.

“School reform must include a thorough examination of school climate. The culture of a school cannot be transformed without also changing its climate. Innovative school leaders carry out reform efforts on both these fronts to create personalized environments where all students feel safe, engaged and ready to achieve,” said Gerald N. Tirozzi, NASSP executive director.

Where We Teach is the second school climate survey conducted by the National School Boards Association’s Council of Urban Boards of Education (CUBE). The report’s recommendations are the product of collaboration between CUBE and a number of other education organizations, including the American Federation of Teachers, the National Education Association, the National Association of Elementary School Principals, and NASSP.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 12:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Reacting to reports that the United States has fallen in global competitiveness and warnings that jobs may be lost overseas if significant investments in science and math education are not made, last week the House of Representatives and the Senate each passed bills that aim to attract more individuals into science and engineering careers. The House passed the 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship Act (H.R. 362), and the Senate passed the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (COMPETES) Act (S. 761). Although NASSP has not taken a position on the comprehensive bills, the Association supports a number of the bills’ provisions to enhance elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education.

Both bills would authorize a competitive grant program for states to better align elementary and secondary education with the knowledge and skills necessary for students to succeed in higher education, the 21st century workforce, and the armed forces. States should use the grants to establish statewide preK–16 longitudinal data systems that will improve the rigor and quality of education requirements and assessments. Grants could also be used for developing extensive professional development for teachers, principals, and school administrators to enrich instruction and instructional support mechanisms.

The America COMPETES Act would address teacher quality by expanding internship programs for elementary and secondary school teachers at the Department of Energy’s National Laboratories and the National Science Foundation. In addition, both bills include grants to integrate programs of study for undergraduate students majoring in math, engineering, science, or a “critical” foreign language with education training so they can obtain a bachelor’s degree that leads to teacher certification. The Senate bill could extend this provision to master’s degree programs. The bills would also expand the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program by increasing the minimum scholarship awarded to undergraduate math and science majors from $7,500 to $10,000.

The Senate bill would authorize an initiative proposed by President Bush in his 2006 State of the Union Address, the Math Now for Elementary School Students and Math Now for Middle School Students programs. Under the programs, grants would be provided for school districts to improve math instruction for elementary and middle level students and to make targeted assistance available for students struggling with math. Grants would also be used to provide professional development for teachers, administrators, and other school staff members to improve their mathematical content knowledge and the use of effective instructional practices. NASSP was very pleased to see the Math Now program included in the legislation because passage of this provision was one of the recommendations for NCLB reauthorization that NASSP and several other education associations sent to lawmakers in April.

NASSP also was very pleased to see in both bills an emphasis on AP and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses in high-need middle level and high schools, a recommendation included in the NASSP Legislative Recommendations for High School Reform (http://www.principals.org/s_nassp/bin.asp?CID=1201&DID=49743&DOC=FILE.PDF). In particular, the Senate bill would increase by 70,000 over four years the number of teachers serving in high-need schools who are qualified to teach AP or IB courses in math, science, and critical foreign languages and would increase by 700,000 per year the number of students taking these courses.

President Bush has expressed “serious concern” over these bills. Bush pointed to the authorization levels for new and existing education programs, adding that these bills would overstep the federal government’s role in education. “The Administration also strongly objects to the provision of the [House] bill that creates a pilot program that would fund construction and maintenance of high school science laboratories, an activity that is not an appropriate role of the Federal government,” Bush said in a statement. In light of these reservations, the president has not threatened a veto on either bill.

A House and Senate conference committee will now meet to work out differences in the two bills, with compromise possible in the coming weeks.

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 10:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) introduced the Striving Readers Act (S. 958) to provide grants to states and districts to create literacy programs specifically for middle and high school students.  The legislation will help ensure that students at risk of dropping out because they read below grade level receive the literacy interventions they need to earn a high school diploma. The National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) is very pleased with this move, having advocated for additional funding for literacy programs for some time now.

“The Striving Readers Act marks an important and urgent investment in the older student,” said Senator Sessions, who until this year served as a member of the Senate’s Education Committee, said.  “In my state, the Alabama Reading Initiative has been improving literacy skills of secondary students since 1999.  In Alabama, we’re helping older kids read and write well, and it is time for this effective statewide program to be a model for the nation.  Striving Readers can make this a reality for all states. 

“We must not risk squandering the investments Congress has already made through the important Reading First program for younger students.  But, with 70 percent of our high school students reading below grade level, we know we must continue our support with ongoing programs that reflect the needs of the older student for more advanced vocabulary and comprehension skills.   All students, throughout their K-12 educational experience, deserve adequate support to ensure on-time graduation with appropriate skills and knowledge that meet the demands of the 21^st century.”

“A successful school wide literacy program must be a collaborative effort among teachers and administrators, but the reality is that many middle level and high school personnel lack the necessary training and skills," said Dr. Gerald N. Tirozzi, executive director of the National Association of Secondary School Principals. "I am so pleased that the Striving Readers Act will provide districts with the resources to provide professional development in adolescent literacy for teachers in core academic subjects, and training for school leaders to administer high quality literacy plans.”

Striving Readers was first piloted in 2004 as a Title I demonstration program funded solely through the appropriations process.  Last year’s funding was $29.7 million, which was enough for only eight competitive grants.  The bill introduced today authorizes $200 million in FY2007, with increasing funding to FY2011, which would allow expansion of Striving Readers to every state.

Specifically, the bill would:

• Help states create statewide literacy initiatives, share data on student progress to parents and the public, and improve teacher training and professional development in literacy so that all students receive high quality instruction.

• Help districts and schools create plans to improve literacy, develop top notch assessments, train teachers in every subject area in literacy strategies, and use regular data to improve teaching and learning.

• Allow districts and schools to hire and place literacy coaches, train parents to support the literacy development of their child, or connect learning inside the classroom with learning that takes place outside the classroom.

• Require states, districts, and schools to participate in a rigorous evaluation that demonstrates student progress.

• Require the federal government to complete an overall evaluation of the program to determine its impact on the nation’s middle and high schools.

In 2005, the NASSP released, Creating a Culture of Literacy: A Guide for Middle and High School Principals. The guide was written for principals to use as they team with their staff to assess student literacy strengths and weaknesses and create the atmosphere and practices that will lead professional development plans that will result in more highly effective teaching.  NASSP distributed free copies to every middle level and high school principal in the country with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Carnegie Foundation.

Posted by Shana Kemp at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Posted by Mark Ames, NASSP Gov't Relations Mgr at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 04:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The essential structure of the high school day and year remains relatively unchanged despite decades of school reform efforts: students attend school only half the days of the year and only about 6½ hours a day, according to a recent report from the Center for American Progress.

Expanding Learning Time in High Schools examines schools that have implemented an extended learning day as part of the required educational program for all students. Some of the strategies include in-school extended time models, either changing the use of time within the existing school day or adding more time to the school day; an extended school year; out-of-school extended time models that allow students to learn through internships, community service, and college partnership programs; allowing students to take three, four, or five years to complete school; and extending learning time through the use of technology. All of the schools’ and programs’ efforts were successful as measured by high levels of student achievement, retention, and graduation rates.

The report offers the following best practices for extending learning time at the high school level:

·        Pay attention to the transition between the middle level and high school

·        Organize school days to allow expanded time for core academic subjects

·        Devote extra time to helping students stay on track

·        Offer opportunities for accelerated advancement

·        Pay attention to performance standards for college and work and focus on preparing students for life after high school

·        Use technology for distance learning and customized instruction and feedback

·        Expand opportunities to learn outside the classroom

·        Offer opportunities to earn money and college credit

·        Involve teachers and other educators in students’ external learning

·        Use senior year differently by allowing students to pursue accelerated academic learning, college experience, and work exposure.

As part of the NASSP policy recommendations for middle level and high school reform, NASSP urges policymakers to align the core curriculum across grades and schools and to map efforts that address the academic, developmental, social, and personal needs of students, especially at crucial transition periods. NASSP also encourages extended school-based instructional time through after-school and summer school programs for low-performing students, support for dual-enrollment programs that encourage students to take college-level courses while in high school, and schedules flexible enough to accommodate teaching strategies consistent with the ways students learn most effectively.

To read the full report, go to www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/10/learning_time.html.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 01:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The U.S. Department of Education (ED) this week awarded $42.1 million for 16 grants under the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF). The new program aims to improve student achievement by increasing teacher and principal effectiveness, reforming compensation systems to reward teachers and principals for increases in student achievement, recruiting effective teachers to the neediest schools for hard-to-staff subjects like math and science, and creating sustainable performance-based compensation systems.

In rewarding the grants, Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings stated, “Nothing helps a child learn as much as a great teacher—and research shows that rewarding teachers for results can improve student performance. Great teachers who work in schools where they are badly needed deserve more than our thanks. I am pleased to announce these Teacher Incentive Fund grants, which will encourage and reward more experienced teachers for working at high-poverty schools where they can make a real difference in raising student achievement.”

A number of grants were awarded to school districts partnering with New Leaders for New Schools, a nonprofit organization that trains individuals to become school principals in urban areas. In particular, the District of Columbia grant will allow high-performing principals and teachers to share their instructional methods with peers across the country. New Leaders for New Schools says the DC grant is just one element of a larger Effective Practice Incentive Fund that will operate in other localities. A full list of grantees and their 2006 awards follows:

Grant Recipient                                                                                       

D.C. Public Schools/New Leaders for New Schools - $3,036,837

Chicago Public Schools (IL) - $131,273

Denver Schools District (CO) - $5,747,869

Memphis, TN City Schools/New Leaders for New Schools - $3,109,944

Mare Island Technical Academy (CA) - $417,428

Houston Independent School District (TX) - $3,991,330

Guilford County Schools (NC) - $1,790,060

New Leaders for New Schools – national network of charter schools - $4,921,435

Chugach School District (AK) - $1,278,773

South Carolina Department of Education - $4,750,305

Dallas Independent School District (TX) - $126,139

School District of Philadelphia - $1,443,017

Ohio Department of Education - $5,510,860

Eagle County School District (CO) - $1,562,129

Weld County School District (CO) - $937,040

ED will reward the remaining $43.1 million next spring. Those applicants not approved in the first cycle will be eligible for technical assistance from the department before those grants are awarded. For more information, go to: www.ed.gov/programs/teacherincentive/faq.html.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 01:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Launched in 2001 by New Visions for Public Schools, the New Century High Schools Initiative (NCHSI) was envisioned to transform secondary education in New York City by establishing high-quality small high schools in place of large “failing” schools. The ultimate goal is to demonstrate “that 100 high schools, serving poor and minority students, can achieve, sustain, and eventually exceed 80 percent graduation and 92 percent attendance rates.”

Halfway through the 10-year initiative, New York City has closed or is in the process of phasing out some of the city’s lowest-performing high schools, and 83 New Century high schools have been opened in their place. The new schools are required to implement a 4-year course of study for inquiry-based learning, literacy, and numeracy; ensure effective supports for English language learners and students with disabilities; and provide high quality professional development. In addition, each school must have a community partner to assist in governance, curriculum, professional development, and/or services to students.

Preliminary evaluations of the first 14 schools show promising results: 78% of the 2006 student cohort graduated on time, and NCHSI schools achieved an average attendance rate of 85% during the 2005-06 school year. According to a report issued by Policy Studies Associates, Inc., “Available data show that students educated in [New Century] schools in 2004-05 were better prepared for graduation than comparable students in traditional schools. All precursors—attendance rates, credit accumulation, promotion rates, and the number of Regents exams passed—pointed in the right direction.”

During the next five years of the initiative, the focus will shift away from creating new schools to ensuring that established schools meet the “80/92” goal with an emphasis on community partnerships, improving teaching and learning, personalized learning environments and youth development, and leadership development. To ensure that New Century schools have effective leadership, New Visions for Public Schools currently leads principal mentoring, principal-to-principal learning and school-based leadership development. All NCHSI principals receive mentoring to help them use research-based strategies to solve problems and identify and test promising practices in their schools. New Visions for Public Schools has also collaborated with Baruch College to implement an apprenticeship program that prepares new candidates for the principalship and builds leadership capacity through the work of school improvement.

In general, the New Century High Schools Initiative reflects many of the reform strategies outlined in NASSP’s Breaking Ranks II: Strategies for Leading High School Reform. Our specific recommendations support increased academic rigor that reflects the integration of curriculum, instruction, and assessment; personalized instruction and learning that is based on the academic needs of individual students; schoolwide initiatives to improve reading and writing literacy skills; targeted strategies to raise achievement scores of low-performing students to grade-level proficiency; multiple assessments that are aligned with state standards and include performance-based measures; collaborative, inclusive leadership and the strategic use of data; improved subject area competency and content pedagogy of current and incoming faculty; and technical assistance for high schools identified as “in need of improvement.”

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 08:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

According to a report released last month by the American Youth Policy Forum (AYPF), only 70% of all U.S. students graduate from high school; and of that amount, only 53% attend college directly after high school and 35% earn a degree. The College Ladder: Linking Secondary and Postsecondary Education for Success for All Students analyzed programs that allow students to take college-level courses and earn college credit, in hopes of reversing this trend.

The study reviewed dual enrollment programs, which included AP coursework; Tech Prep; middle and early college high schools; programs specifically geared to disadvantaged youth; and college access programs. In general, students participating in these secondary-postsecondary learning options (SPLOs) performed better than their peers on standardized tests, had higher attendance and lower dropout rates, were more likely to attend college, and performed as well as or better than traditional college students. The report concludes that programs linking secondary and postsecondary education are successful “because they provide many of the important elements that have been missing from high school for most students: challenge, engagement, access to the adult world, and support.”

AYPF urges policymakers to ensure that secondary schools and colleges are adequately compensated for the services they provide through SPLOs, and that low-income students are able to participate. The report also proposes “an alignment of curricula, expectations, and supports” between high schools and college, which reinforces NASSP’s recommendation that Congress encourage all schools to increase academic rigor by increasing funding for AP and IB courses and supporting dual reenrollment programs. Finally, states are encouraged to fund longitudinal data systems that link K-12 and postsecondary education. These systems should be able to disaggregate student demographic data and would therefore provide a better measurement of the program’s success.

To read the full report, go to: www.aypf.org/projects/LuminaProjectonSPLOs.htm. NASSP’s Legislative Recommendations for High School Reform can be viewed on our Web site at www.principals.org.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 09:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A twelve-point plan to reduce the school dropout rate was announced by the National Education Association (NEA) last week, but NASSP has been calling for a number of these recommendations to reform public education for years.

Under the NEA proposal, students would receive more individualized attention through smaller learning communities, smaller class size, and supplemental tutoring after school and during summer vacations. NASSP urges Congress to help schools develop personal academic and graduation plans for each student when they enter the middle level and make the transition to high school. Our Policy Recommendation for Middle Level Reform and Legislative Recommendations for High School Reform also request additional funding for the federal Smaller Learning Communities program and extended instructional time for low-performing students.

NEA calls upon educators to monitor students’ academic progress through a variety of measures during the school year that provide a full picture of students’ learning, a request supported by NASSP. We also believe that states should be allowed to use multiple assessments that are aligned with state standards and performance based measures, including end of course exams and performance based measures.

Emphasizing early action, the NEA plan advocates for universal preschool, full-day kindergarten, and strong programs in elementary and middle school. Although NASSP does not take a position on early childhood education, we feel that the middle grades should be recognized and supported as a unique developmental stage apart from the elementary and high school grades. In addition, schools should be encouraged to teach a rigorous and developmentally responsive curriculum with instructional strategies that reflect current research about how students learn and best practices in middle level education.

NASSP and NEA urge Congress to make high school graduation a national priority by gathering accurate data for key student groups, establishing benchmarks in each state for eliminating dropouts, and adopting the standardized reporting method developed by the National Governors Association. Both organizations also request federal funding for professional development programs that focus on the needs of diverse students and the use of date to improve student achievement.

Finally, the NEA plan urges states to make high school graduation or its equivalency compulsory for all students below the age of 21, establish high school graduation centers for students 19-21 to receive specialized instruction and counseling, expand career education and workforce readiness programs in schools, and involve parents and the entire community in dropout prevention programs.

To read more about NEA’s Plan for Reducing School Dropouts, go to www.nea.org/presscenter/actionplan1.html. All of NASSP’s recommendations for public school reform can be found on the Advocacy pages of our Web site at www.principals.org.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 10:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 08:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

According to an issue brief released this month by the Alliance for Education (AEE), the United States stands to lose $3.7 billion each year because high school students are not receiving the skills they need to succeed in college or the workforce. Of this amount, $1.4 billion is spent on remedial education in community colleges and universities and $2.3 billion is the estimated loss in potential earnings for those students who leave college without a degree.

Stressing the need for comprehensive school reform, AEE argues that high school coursework should be aligned with the skills and knowledge necessary for higher education and the increasingly global economy. The issue brief also recommends statewide performance standards for college admission that would enable educators to assess student progress and college readiness, and convey “clear expectations” to students, parents, and schools regarding student performance. For the full issue brief, go to http://www.all4ed.org/.

In February 2005, NASSP released its legislative recommendations for high school reform, which reflect the strategies outlined in Breaking Ranks II: Strategies for Leading High School Reform, a hands-on guide to high school reform designed for principals and their leadership team. The recommendations are intended to produce and support high-performing high schools in which all students achieve at high levels.

NASSP encourages policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels to increase academic rigor for all students by supporting dual enrollment programs that encourage students to take college level courses while in high school; increasing funding for Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses; and expanding the State Scholars program, which supports states that choose to require high school students to take at least three years of math and science, three and one-half years of social studies, four years of English, and two years of foreign language courses to be academically prepared for postsecondary education and the workplace.

We also recommend that Congress restructure the Smaller Learning Communities program to allow high schools to develop personal academic and graduation plans for each student when they enter high school that correspond to his or her academic and future employment goals.

Regarding the use of assessments to measure student performance, NASSP feels that states should be allowed to use multiple assessments that are aligned with state standards and include performance based measures, including end of course exams; portfolios, performance tasks, and other examples of a student’s accomplishments; standardized tests, including state assessments; comprehensive personal academic and graduation plans; senior projects; and college entrance exams.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 07:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The 38^th annual Phi Delta Kappa (PDK)/Gallup Poll of the Public’s Attitude toward the Public Schools found that a majority of Americans (71%) believe that school improvement efforts should come through the existing public school system rather than through an alternative system, a view consistent with NASSP’s recommendations for middle level and high school reform.

In addition to a vote of confidence for the existing school system, the poll finds that there is strong public support for local schools–49% of those surveyed give the schools in their community A’s or B’s–and that level of support increases to 56% when respondents are public school parents.

When asked about challenges facing our nation’s schools, lack of financial support topped the list at 24% with overcrowded schools (13%) and lack of discipline (11%) coming in second and third. Currently, the federal investment in education hovers around eight percent, but most of that funding is appropriated to elementary schools and postsecondary institutions. NASSP has consistently advocated for additional federal funding and support for middle level and high schools, believing that the success of our secondary school students must be a national priority.

Respondents expressed concern regarding the achievement gap and high dropout rates among minority and low-income students—of those surveyed, 77% blamed societal factors and only 16% faulted the performance of schools. The poll indicated strong support for improving the school curriculum, with 56% favoring a college-preparatory curriculum for all high school students, a recommendation included in NASSP’s Breaking Ranks II and Breaking Ranks in the Middle.

The public is also concerned about the number of teachers who leave the profession in the first five years of teaching. Lack of support from parents (96%), lack of support from administrators (93%), and working conditions in the public schools (92%) top the list of reasons why the public believes teachers leave the profession. In order to address the potential teacher shortage, NASSP has recommended the creation of meaningful teacher mentoring programs, new teacher induction programs, and ongoing, job embedded professional development.

With regard to the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), 60% of those Americans familiar with the law believe it has had no effect on U.S. schools or has actually harmed them. The poll found that two-thirds of respondents oppose measuring school success by the percentage of students passing a single statewide test, and 81% prefer measuring the improvements make during the year. NASSP’s NCLB Legislative Recommendations urge Congress to calculate adequate yearly progress (AYP) for each student subgroup on the basis of state-developed growth formulas that calculate growth in individual student achievement from year to year. The recommendations also state that AYP should be based on the results of multiple assessments and multiple opportunities to retake the test.

Sixty percent of Americans oppose the use of public funds for children to attend private schools, a proposal that has gained momentum in Congress under the guise of the America’s Opportunity Scholarships for Kids Act. NASSP opposes any proposal that would divert money away from public schools. Although voucher programs are often proposed as a means to respond to low academic achievement, there is little evidence to support this theory. In reality, vouchers serve only to detract from the goal of comprehensive public school reform. 

To read more about NASSP’s recommendations for school reform and NCLB reauthorization, visit the advocacy pages of our Web site at www.principals.org. You can also use the Principal’s Legislative Action Center (www.principals.org/plac) to express your views on these and other issues affecting your school.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 04:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and its role in high school reform was the topic of a roundtable discussion held last week by the Aspen Institute’s bipartisan Commission on No Child Left Behind.

Former West Virginia Governor and President of the College Board Gaston Caperton stressed the importance of academic rigor and high expectations, noting that when students are expected to perform at high levels and are taught by quality teachers “miracles happen.” He argued that a school leader is “critically important” because they know how to find great teachers. Caperton offered a number of suggestions for improving teacher quality: increasing teacher salaries by 20-50%, making teaching a “revered profession” as it is in other countries, encouraging multiple pathways into the teaching profession, closing the diversity gap, and recruiting math and science professionals.

Bob Wise, also a former West Virginia governor and current president of the Alliance for Excellent Education, said that NCLB “does not meet the needs” of the nation’s 14 million high school students because there is no requirement for states to improve graduation rates. He also pointed out flaws in the law’s sanctions because high schools already receive a very small percentage of Title I funds and 75% of school districts only have one high school, which leaves few options for parents who would like to send their child to another school. Wise argued that Congress should focus “on every piece of the education pipeline” by providing new funding for high school reform, making investments in adolescent literacy, and improving the 12^th grade National Assessment for Education Progress (NAEP).

Asserting that high schools “were an afterthought” when Congress passed NCLB, Robert Balfanz, an associate research scientist at the Center for Organization of Schools at Johns Hopkins University, explained that many high schools are meeting adequate yearly progress (AYP) even though they have declining graduation rates. He also noted that some states have more rigorous assessments and graduation requirements, which “robs the legitimacy of NCLB.” Looking ahead to the law’s reauthorization, Balfanz urged Congress to link academic achievement to college and work readiness, disaggregate graduation data by student subgroups, and adopt the National Governors Association’s Compact on State Graduation Data.

Posted by Amanda Karhuse at 02:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)