[Senate Hearing 110-295]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-295
NCLB REAUTHORIZATION: STRATEGIES THAT PROMOTE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
=======================================================================
HEARING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
LABOR, AND PENSIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXAMINING THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT REAUTHORIZATION, FOCUSING ON
STRATEGIES THAT PROMOTE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
__________
FEBRUARY 8, 2007
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
senate
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
33-366 WASHINGTON : 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming,
TOM HARKIN, Iowa JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
PATTY MURRAY, Washington JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
JACK REED, Rhode Island LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
BARACK OBAMA, Illinois PAT ROBERTS, Kansas
BERNARD SANDERS (I), Vermont WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma
J. Michael Myers, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Katherine Brunett McGuire, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
__________
STATEMENTS
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2007
Page
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., Chairman, Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions, opening statement.............. 1
Enzi, Hon. Michael B., a U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming,
opening statement.............................................. 3
Barber, Martha, Alabama Reading Initiative Regional Principal
Coach, Birmingham, AL.......................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Brandon, Yvonne, Ed.D., Associate Superintendent for Instruction
and Accountability, Richmond Public Schools, Richmond, VA...... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Coleman, Richard, Director, An Achievable Dream Academy, Newport
News, VA....................................................... 13
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Flanagan, Michael P., State Superintendent of Instruction, State
of Michigan.................................................... 18
Prepared statement........................................... 20
Mahaley-Johnson, Hosanna, Executive Officer, Office of New
Schools, Chicago Public Schools, Chicago, IL................... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Johnson, Kimberly, Principal, Briggs Chaney Middle School, Silver
Spring, MD..................................................... 27
Turner, Alana Dale, Teacher, Easton High School, Easton, MD...... 29
Prepared statement........................................... 31
Reville, Paul, President, Rennie Center for Education Research
and Policy, Cambridge, MA...................................... 33
Prepared statement........................................... 35
(iii)
NCLB REAUTHORIZATION: STRATEGIES THAT PROMOTE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
----------
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
Room SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Edward M.
Kennedy, chairman of the committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Kennedy, Reed, Obama, Brown, Enzi,
Alexander, Burr, Murkowski, Roberts, and Allard.
Opening Statement of Senator Kennedy
The Chairman. We'll come to order. I trust this microphone
is on. Is it on? There we go. We'll come to order. I want to
welcome all of our witnesses here this morning and at the
outset, we've adopted Senator Enzi's roundtable concept about
how to better inform the members of our committee on some of
these important public policy issues and it's, I find, a very
effective way to highlight the information that we're seeking.
We also rely on good written testimony for more details on some
of these ideas that are talked about during the course of our
hearing which gives our staffs opportunities to develop these
concepts in greater detail as we are legislating. We have a
very impressive panel this morning and we are very grateful to
all of them and I welcome all of our participants in the first
of several roundtable discussions on the reauthorization of the
No Child Left Behind Act. I'm especially grateful to Senator
Enzi for his help and the help of his staff as well as Senator
Dodd and Senator Alexander's staff in putting together this
roundtable. We look forward to continuing the bipartisan
partnership on these issues.
Our public schools today are more indispensable than ever
in giving all students the opportunity they need and deserve in
life. We all agree upon the importance of the Nation's future,
strengthening and supporting our schools. Reauthorizing the No
Child Left Behind Act this year is a high priority for Congress
and the American people. The law enacted 5 years ago was a
defining moment for Federal support of public education and was
intended to respond to the many challenges facing our schools
in today's rapidly changing world. We know that schools have
faced many difficulties in implementing the act, the most
serious of which has been the lack of adequate funding. But
we've also learned a great deal over the past 5 years about
what's working well in the law and what needs to be changed.
Our goal this year will be to work across party lines to
enact a strong reauthorization that builds on the positive
aspects of the law and answers the widespread concerns about
implementation.
Today our focus is on ideas and strategies needed to turn
around struggling schools identified by the laws accountability
provisions. The act appropriately ensures that accountability
is guided by realistic data on every child in every State. No
Child means no child. The act is a promise to students and
parents alike that regardless of their background and language
and income or disability, every student counts in school
reform.
The initial results of the act's accountability provision
show that States have focused primarily on standards,
assessments and measurements in building their framework for
accountability but much more remains to be done after that
essential first step, especially in schools that haven't met
the challenge and are wrestling with improvement. The Federal
role in assisting these schools may be our greatest challenge
and is top priority for this reauthorization.
Over 9,000 low-income schools have been identified by the
act for improvement, corrective action or restructuring. Some
of these schools are in the early stage of changing their
curriculums or beginning tutoring. Others are in later stages
of replacing staff or reforming their overall approach to
teaching and learning. Thousands of schools are waiting for
technical assistance and support to develop and implement their
improvement plans as required by law in order to avoid the
later stages required in restructuring. In fact, only 34
percent of the schools needing improvement--one in three--have
received outside help or support. Developing the ability to do
so is a major challenge at all levels. Obviously, we must do
better. Fortunately, we know we can.
Today, we'll hear about some of the successful solutions
that States, school districts and individual schools have
adopted to make their improvement efforts successful. We'll
hear how teachers and principals have concentrated on data on
each child to produce results. We'll hear how outside experts
and coaches have made a substantial difference in improving the
quality of teaching and we'll hear how schools have partnered
to learn from each other to achieve improvement.
We know it can be done and today is our opportunity to
consider how best to shape policies and allocate Federal
resources to achieve the greatest impact in these high-priority
schools. We look forward to your insights. We're grateful to
you for your being part of this immensely important task. We've
chosen, as I mentioned, a roundtable format for today's hearing
so we can hear from more people and to facilitate an
interactive discussion among the panelists on this important
issue.
I'll first turn to my friend, Senator Enzi, for opening
remarks and then we'll open up the discussion by asking each of
our witnesses to describe two or three of their most important
interventions or strategies they used to turn around school
performance and achieve results and also the greatest obstacles
or challenges they encountered in the process.
Opening Statement of Senator Enzi
Senator Enzi. Well, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for
getting us busy on this most important issue that we're going
to be covering, getting it started right away and allowing our
staffs to work together to put together such a great panel of
experts that can give us ideas and help us gain real knowledge
before we write the bill. Getting started on this review is
extremely critical and this is an outstanding panel to do that.
I look forward to the several other panels that we'll have
before we actually do No Child Left Behind as well as
opportunities to get into our districts and see what the people
there are thinking.
There are many good things happening in our schools today
but that's not what we focus on when we talk about schools.
Just as our schools vary in size and student population,
effective approaches to school improvement vary widely.
What we have not done effectively is getting the word out,
getting the word out about what we know are the most effective
improvement interventions--in other words, what works and that
is what this roundtable is about. School districts in Wyoming
are using a variety of strategies for schools designated as in
need of improvement under the adequate yearly progress
structure. In Cheyenne, our largest school district in Wyoming,
Superintendent Dan Stephan has put in place professional
learning communities that focus on three goals. First,
increased achievement on math and problem solving skills.
Second, the utilization of writing skills across the
curriculum. And third, increasing the graduation rate.
Superintendent Stephan is changing the culture of the school
district from one of a teaching district to a learning district
and firmly believes that failure is not an option.
Superintendent Kevin Mitchell, of Big Horn County School
District Number 1, believes that an increased focus on reading
instruction and effective leadership are two key indicators of
increasing student academic achievement as part of school
improvement. His experiences show that an effective leader who
can not only pinpoint the problem but also execute a strategy
to fix the problem, is the key to school success.
Both of these district leaders also said that they need
help. They need to know what strategies other districts, with
similar characteristics, are using to improve student
achievement outcomes. They need technical assistance to
implement school improvement plans and to analyze data to
determine where interventions are most needed. Finally, they
need assistance to provide training to staff on interventions
that have been successfully improving student achievement
levels.
Now, each of you have coped with similar needs. I'm very
pleased that we are able to hold this roundtable to learn from
each of you the strategies that have been effective and the
obstacles you've faced in implementing these strategies. No
Child Left Behind has given us a strong framework and good data
to learn where schools are faltering. The next step is to learn
how we can help schools that are faltering improve and increase
student academic achievement.
The topic of school improvement isn't a new one. In 1979,
Ron Edmonds, an expert on high-performing, high-poverty
schools, identified what he called the most tangible and
indispensable characteristics of effective schools. He found
six key characteristics: strong administrative leadership, high
expectations for all students, an orderly and quiet atmosphere,
clear focus on academics, readiness to divert energy and
resources to academics, and the frequent monitoring of student
progress. A similar study was published in 2000, which found
very similar traits. The only big addition was the use of
master teachers.
We know what makes a good school. What we don't know is how
to make a low-performing school into a high-performing school.
Many of you here today have done just exactly that. The key is
how do we duplicate the successes you've had in other schools
across the country?
The Federal Government, through No Child Left Behind, can
assist with a number of the issues and problems each of you
have encountered. First, we need to learn more about what's
working. Schools are working very hard to increase the academic
achievement levels of their students and that effort needs to
be recognized and successes need to be disseminated.
I believe it is important that everyone--school leaders,
teachers and especially parents, have access to school
improvement activities and interventions that have been proven
to be successful in both schools and school districts.
Superintendents, principals and teachers should be able to
adapt these interventions to their school environment so that
they work for their students.
Second, I believe that Congress should support school
improvement activities as they are authorized under No Child
Left Behind. Schools and districts now have the data and
information they need to determine where they need help but
often don't have the resources needed to implement strategies
to achieve improved student performance.
Finally, I believe we can work within the current No Child
Left Behind structure to improve teacher training and
professional development and focus on strategies that increase
student academic achievement. Teachers are a necessary and
vital factor in the school improvement process.
That said, there is no silver bullet when it comes to
school improvement. Every school and school district in this
country is unique and has different areas in need of
improvement. We have to focus on strategies that couple
effective interventions, such as aligning curriculum and
professional development, with State standards.
I look forward to working with all of you as work
progresses on the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind.
The Chairman. Well, thank you very much, Senator Enzi. I'll
introduce our panelists and then we'll move ahead and hear from
each of them.
Dr. Martha Barber, of the Alabama Reading Initiative. We're
delighted to have you here. Martha is a Reading Initiative
Regional Principal Coach in Birmingham, Alabama and has led the
effort to pair 36 low-performing elementary schools with higher
performers. Dr. Barber will focus on the importance of strong
leadership and strategies to teach principals and staff how to
work as a team to develop solutions and improve data driven
instruction. As a principal, Dr. Barber found that many
students were coming to elementary school without any prior
school experience. She worked with the community to create
their own early education program in order for systemic school
reform to work. We welcome you.
Dr. Yvonne Brandon is Associate Superintendent, Richmond
Public Schools, and has led district-wide improvement efforts
to use data to improve instruction and support research-based
reading interventions. Dr. Brandon will focus on the challenges
her district faced in developing a curriculum and standards for
all their schools to follow and the importance of constant
monitoring and intervention to support schools before they
begin to fail. Last year, 88 percent of the district schools
met AYP and met the Virginia State standards. They've used
assessment data to improve instruction, not just to label
schools as failing. We're delighted to have you.
Richard Coleman is the director of the Achievable Dream
Academy, in Newport News, Virginia. He is a principal at a
predominately poor minority school that is extended day and
year. Here, a focus on data-driven instruction turned around a
chronically failing public school. Dr. Coleman has received
financial support from local businesses and higher education
communities. Strong community and parental involvement has been
critical in the success of the school and the school provides
health and other comprehensive services to students to improve
their social development and academic achievement.
Alana Dale Turner is a teacher at Easton High School in
Easton, Maryland. Nominated by the NEA to participate, she will
focus on the importance of high quality, professional
development using data to improve instruction, tutoring and
extra help for students and the need for more funding. We'll
look forward to hearing the role of the teachers in this whole
process.
Michael Flanagan, we welcome you. Your colleagues from all
of our States have extended a word of welcome to all of you. I
wanted to give a special welcome as well from Debbie Stabenow.
Michael Flanagan, Michigan State Superintendent of Instruction,
led statewide efforts to intervene in struggling schools. The
State developed new rigorous high school course requirements,
rigorous elementary and middle school standards, and research-
based school improvements. The State has supported high need
schools for the establishment of principal academies, follow-up
coaching and support, school monitoring teams, targeting funds
to schools in subgroups that need it the most.
Kimberly Johnson, good morning. She is the principal of
Briggs Chaney Middle School in Silver Spring, Maryland, who led
successful school improvement efforts at a high-poverty middle
school, particularly successful with disabled students. Ninety-
two percent of the classes in the schools are taught by highly
qualified teachers and strong professional development has
helped staff improve instruction for every student.
Hosanna Mahaley-Johnson, good morning. She is Executive
Officer, Office of the New Schools, Chicago Public Schools. She
has implemented successful programs to close low-performing
schools and reopen as a school providing intensive clinical
experience for new teachers entering the field. Teachers
participate in a year-long residency program where they learn
skills to be strong classroom teachers. The program supports
them for the first 3 months with mentoring. These teachers go
on to provide a highly qualified, stable source of teachers for
schools. Very interesting.
Paul Reville is President of the Rennie Center for
Education Research. Paul, good morning.
Mr. Reville. Good morning, Senator.
The Chairman. My constituent here has had a long history in
education. It's good to see you. He is President of the Rennie
Center for Education Research and Policy, author of the new
blueprint for the State role in improving low-performing
schools. Paul Reville will focus on the importance of building
State's capacity to provide needed support to schools and
districts in need of improvement. States also face challenges
in developing standards and assessments that are competitive in
line with the demands for the 21st century and he's done a good
deal of work with that.
So we have a very interesting and broad group of presenters
this morning from very much different backgrounds and
experience but with a common theme and that is that you've been
creative, innovative and successful and that's what we're
interested in as we draft this legislation and as we set out
different kinds of criteria, we want to understand underneath,
how we can set the standard to have the kind of successes that
I think all of you had coming at this from your own particular
life's experience but with important lessons for us to hear
about.
So, I'm going to ask each of you, if you'll take the two or
three most important interventions or strategies and we'll go
through the whole line and then we'll open this up to
conversations and get some interaction between the particular
witnesses.
Dr. Barber, we'll start with you, if we could.
STATEMENT OF MARTHA BARBER, ALABAMA READING INITIATIVE REGIONAL
PRINCIPAL COACH, BIRMINGHAM, AL
Ms. Barber. Thank you. First of all, thanks for this
opportunity to share strategies that have proven to be
successful in schools that have been struggling. I've been a
principal, I've been an assistant principal and I've supervised
schools and now I work with the Alabama Reading Initiative for
the State Department of Education and I work with principals,
trying to replicate those practices that have proven to be
successful in schools that are beating the odds. And as I think
back over those practices that have been successful in most
schools, I began work in effective leadership. Leadership is
the key. If you have an effective leader, that leadership would
have a vision for success. That leader serves as a point guard
to make sure all the other stakeholders are in place and that
they have the appropriate resources and the appropriate support
that is needed to ensure that success is accomplished.
Too often, we have leaders in place who don't have that
support. We give them mandates, we give them directives and a
lot of times, our principals come to school when they're
selected; they have no preparation. Our higher education
programs are sometimes limited in providing them with the
training and some principals come straight from the classroom
but it is different being a principal than being a classroom
teacher. The principal is going to guide the success, is going
to determine the direction of that school.
In my capacity with 36 schools, I make the comment that if
I have a failing school, I have a principal who is in need of
some support. The principal sets the tone, the principal
determines the climate. The principal determines the culture of
their school and the culture is what is in the school. A true
leader can make almost anything happen in a school. A true
leader can guide the people in that school to believe that they
can do all--do anything that they set their heart to. Our
students come to us with needs and with issues sometimes and
are struggling with situations but the parent has sent to us
the best that she or he can.
If public education is to do its job, then we have to
ensure that those students are going to obtain a quality
education and the principal will be the key to making that
happen, to setting beliefs in place, asking--getting teachers
to challenge their own belief system, to challenge our value
system and the principal has to set the tone so that the
teachers can believe that they can teach those students. Our
beliefs become our actions. If that belief is not in place then
our actions are going to be in such a way that the kids are not
going to be successful.
The culture of that school is important. You have to set a
culture that embraces learning for all students. It doesn't
matter whether the student is special ed or a minority or any
of those factors but that student is a child and we have the
responsibility for taking that child from where he is to where
he needs to be, making that part of the culture. That belief
system is part of the culture.
And professional development--I started at a school with
marginal teachers, low-achievement schools. Within 3 years, I
only changed two staff members but the data in that school
almost doubled in that time because of the professional
development that we put in place for those teachers and it was
a high-poverty, inner-city school. But nothing changed. The
teachers were the same, the students were the same. What
changed was the culture. What changed was the belief system and
what changed was the professional development that took those
teachers who were not--who were failing. That's what changed
and when that changed, then everything else changed. The
students started learning. The school became a place of safe
haven for all students. The teachers were comfortable. Their
reward was in the fact that they started believing in
themselves and once they believed in themselves, they started
believing in the students and that has trickled down and once
that occurred, then the students started learning because they
felt comfortable in that situation.
The Chairman. Just quickly, you had this tie-in between
low-performing schools and higher performing schools. Could you
just comment quickly on that, if you would? It's rather
interesting how you tied the high-performing with the low-
performing out of that work.
Ms. Barber. I think all schools can be high-performing
schools. As a principle, I went to high-performing schools. I
went to schools that did not look like my school. I went to
schools that were a different race, different socio-economic
standard. I wanted to see what the utopia could be because I
felt that my students deserved that. I took those things that I
saw that were working. I wanted to build a culture in that
school of high expectations. My students came to me from homes
that were not always what it should have been. So when they
crossed the threshold--when they walked in, they should have
felt the warmth, before anybody spoke. They should have felt
that they were loved, that they were cared for. They should
have walked into a building that was student-centered where
they were the center of everything, where everything was print
rich. Books everywhere, those things that we value and we made
that our standard, even before No Child Left Behind, before
Federal accountability. We made that our standard and we made
it happen according to what we could do as a faculty and as a
staff because all schools can be there and I wanted my staff to
know that if one school was doing it, regardless of the factors
that were in place, then we could do it. So I use them as--I
use those type of schools as our standard and we partner with
those schools and we reach for that goal.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Barber follows:]
Prepared Statement of Martha S. Barber
I would like to express gratitude and thanks to Senator Kennedy,
Senator Enzi, and the members of the Health, Education, Labor and
Pensions Committee for allowing me to share and discuss my school
improvement efforts and experiences. As each of you know, sessions of
this type can help in identifying practices that are successful in
schools that are improving the academic achievement of poor, minority,
and disenfranchised students.
It has always been my philosophy that public schools serve as a
haven for all students. Furthermore, it is my strong belief that we can
impact student learning regardless of what they bring or don't bring to
the table. Having been a child of poverty has also influenced my school
improvement efforts.
The seminal work done at Tuggle Elementary School in the Birmingham
City School System actually preceded the inception of NCLB by just a
few years. However, the underlying premise in NCLB is the same
fundamental premise of the school improvement efforts implemented at
Tuggle Elementary School: that is all children can learn, and it's our
responsibility as educational caregivers to make learning happen. In
order for school improvement efforts to be successful, the leader must
have a vision. My vision was to build a culture that embraced student
learning and teacher learning as the primary outcomes for the school.
Engaging all stakeholders in this vision became my task. Additionally,
I wanted to implement a schoolwide program that would allow all
stakeholders to reach such levels of success that learning and student
achievement would occur at unprecedented levels.
Several strategies and behaviors served as the catalyst for our
school improvement efforts. We had a clear sense of purpose. Our only
purpose for being at Tuggle was to be successful with all of our
students. We focused strictly on student learning. Moreover, we focused
on learning at high levels for all students. The goal of student
learning became the parameter under which we operated.
We focused on developing a positive and collaborative culture at
Tuggle. Culture in itself is defined as ``what is in the school.'' We
worked toward developing a culture that was warm, inviting, and student
centered. All students were embraced and made to feel special. In
developing a collaborative culture, teachers and other staff members
were given quality time for meetings. These meetings were designed to
focus on teacher effectiveness as well as student achievement. During
the meetings, data was analyzed, students were discussed, and
intervention plans were developed for students not making appropriate
and adequate growth.
The staff at Tuggle became highly effective. We finally realized
that if our students were going to learn at high levels, we, too, had
to learn at high levels. We had to increase our content knowledge.
Research is very clear, ``good teachers make good schools.'' We began
to seek means of learning for ourselves. Participating in job-embedded
professional development became the norm. Staff development was based
on student needs and teacher needs. We no longer attended workshops
that were not related to our needs. Initially, we held our workshops at
our school using in-house staff. To enhance our professional growth,
the staff decided to become a part of the Alabama Reading Initiative
(ART). This research-based project is a process that uses the
scientific research on reading to guide the teaching of reading.
We focused on results as part of our efforts. The staff used data
to determine the effectiveness of all of our efforts. We looked at
quantitative as well as qualitative data. This analysis showed us
whether students were learning as well as whether our classroom
instruction needed adjustments.
Having a strong principal was also instrumental to the success of
our school improvement efforts. Principals are key to successful
schools. Effective principals empower teachers to excel.
Tuggle developed a school-wide theme: ``Don't be caught dead
without a book.'' As a result of ARI, reading became our theme. Our
efforts were designed to increase volume of reading by our students. To
this end, we organized around the concept of using every available
minute for reading.
In my current position as ARI Regional Principal Coach, I coach 36
principals in the State of Alabama. The school improvement strategies
that have proven to be successful are the ones discussed above. As a
principal coach, it is my goal to coach principals and central office
staff on connecting leadership to instruction. As part of this process,
we have identified practices and behaviors that will maximize our
school efforts. Some of these were mentioned in the earlier part of
this response. Successful schools have leadership teams led by the
principal who learn these strategies and behaviors and then replicate
them in the building. Thus, successful schools go from structures to
processes. These processes become a natural part of the school culture.
As a result of the school improvement efforts at Tuggle, the staff
transformed. Teachers changed their instructional behaviors and
developed a sense of efficacy. They adopted a ``can do'' attitude and
started to believe that their students could learn. The teachers also
began to believe that it was their responsibility to teach their
students. Students also developed that ``can do'' attitude. The
students' confidence increased. Behavior problems decreased. Test
scores increased in all three tested grades. The school also received
the following awards and recognitions: National Distinguished Title One
School, ARI School (member of the sweet 16), International Reading
Association Exemplary Reading Program Award, and Blue Ribbon School for
Alabama.
Several issues emerged that had to be addressed during our school
improvement efforts. Some teachers resisted the change. If success is
to occur, you have to stay focused and committed to your goals. We kept
the goals front and center in every conversation. We reminded everyone
of our purpose and tried not to lose focus.
Our students were not participating in pre-school programs. As a
result, students entered our school with limited or little prior
knowledge. We had to invite the community into our doors. We had to
work with area daycares. Using Title One funds, we operated summer
programs for incoming kindergarten students and reading academies for
all other students during the summer.
Parent involvement was initially an issue. We needed parents on the
team if growth was to be sustained. A Title One Parent Involvement Aide
provided workshops and other trainings. Additionally, parents were
encouraged to participate in the daily operations of the school. They
were also trained on providing academic support to their children. We
included parents on our school leadership team.
The Chairman. Thanks.
Dr. Brandon.
STATEMENT OF YVONNE BRANDON, ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENT FOR
INSTRUCTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY, RICHMOND PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
RICHMOND, VA
Ms. Brandon. Good morning. I would like to thank Chairman
Kennedy, Senator Enzi and the members of this committee, the
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, for allowing
me the opportunity to speak to you about school improvement
with respect to No Child Left Behind. I am very honored and
grateful for this opportunity.
For us in Richmond City Public Schools, right down the road
in Richmond, Virginia, it was more of a district focus. We had
schools that were excelling but they were pockets of
excellence. We wanted a district of excellence. So therefore,
it required having not only district support but State support
as well. Our Governor, Mark Warner, had the PASS Initiative,
which is Partnerships for Achieving Successful Schools, which
had a similar pairing of high-performing schools with low-
performing schools. Those schools invested time and effort in
visiting our schools and giving tips about how we could involve
and incorporate their strategies into our schools.
Additionally, we had to look at ourselves with a critical
view. We had to accept the brutal facts that our district was
extremely low performing. It was the second lowest performing
district in the Commonwealth of Virginia. That was not a good
place to be and none of us wanted to accept that. It was
neither acceptable nor were we willing to allow it to continue.
So we had to make a concerted effort between our governance
arm, that is our school board, our administration, our
teachers, our principals, and our central administration. We
were going to do better than that.
We had the Council of Chief State School Officers come in
and do a strategic study of our district--I'm sorry but I'm
kind of nervous--strategic study of our district and they gave
us a lot of important topics to look at. It was not comfortable
but we had to engage ourselves and make sure that we got over
that uncomfortable feeling and started to make strategies to do
what was right.
We also invested in curriculum revision, curriculum
alignment, professional development, not only professional
development from the principal standpoint but we also invested
a lot of time and effort into our classroom teachers because we
knew that that was the most important investment that we could
make. Our teachers learn how to use data, how to collect the
data first and how to analyze it and apply those data points to
improve instruction.
We also decided that we could select all kinds of reading
programs, all kinds of math programs but when the door closed
on that classroom, we needed to know if there was fidelity to
implementation. So our central office developed a strategy of
internal monitoring called, Charting the Course and we go out
each October and visit each school. Everybody except our
superintendent, who is with me today, goes out to those
schools. We sit with the principals. We talk about their trend
data. We set targets and we monitor. We also have teacher
leaders around the table to talk to us about what happened the
year before and what their strategies are. And we use that
information to develop their school improvement plans.
We then go back each month, sometimes twice a month,
depending on the status of those schools. And it is a means of
providing resources, both human as well as fiscal resources to
those schools to help.
We also have engaged tutors and coaches. As we visit, we
find out where the areas of need are and we send tutors and
coaches to those schools. Our central office instructional
staff go to those schools. So we have a lot of resources
directed toward the areas of need.
This is a year-to-year process for us, which is a challenge
because as soon as that last State assessment is collected, we
have to start all over again with a new group of students, a
new group of teachers. We lose some of our teachers to our
surrounding area because they become attracted to less
strenuous circumstances than the urban district that they are
currently working. So professional development is an ongoing
process and we have to make sure that we are dealing with it on
a year-to-year basis with the same intensity. We cannot let up.
We also recognize the value of early childhood education in
scaffolding the learning. So we focus a lot on pre-k through
2nd grade and making sure that those skills are developed in
those children who come to us with different levels of need. We
have kids who come in who are reading in pre-kindergarten or at
least they can recognize sounds. Then we have kids who come in
who don't have a clue. So we have to make sure that we are
providing them with the same resources.
The data is what we use to identify those skill deficits in
the students and we employ a variety of instructional
strategies to support it. We look for textbooks, resource
materials--everything we do is based on the data that we
receive so we don't haphazardly teach. We teach by blending the
art of teaching and the science of teaching together. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Brandon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Yvonne W. Brandon, Ed.D.
Good morning. I would like to thank Chairman Kennedy, Senator Enzi
and members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee for
the opportunity to testify on No Child Left Behind Reauthorization:
Strategies that Promote School Improvement. I am Yvonne Wallace
Brandon. I am the Associate Superintendent for Instruction and
Accountability of Richmond City Public Schools in Richmond, Virginia
and I am accompanied by Superintendent Dr. Deborah Jewell-Sherman.
The goal of Richmond City Public Schools is to provide students
with a world-class education. The vision is for Richmond Public Schools
to be the premier learning community that is the first choice for ALL
in Richmond and is recognized nationally for student excellence. For
that reason, student achievement is the focus for every initiative,
program and partnership undertaken by the Richmond City School Board
and the district community.
Approximately 25,000 students attend public schools in Richmond. Of
that number, 89.19 percent are African-American. We also provide a
variety of educational services for the 19 percent of our student
population who have disabilities. In the past few years, we have seen a
steady increase in our ESL student population, with Hispanic students
representing the fastest growing segment of that population.
Additionally, nearly 70 percent of our students qualify for free and/or
reduced lunch. And, a significant number of our students come from
single-parent homes and reside in low-income housing. In other words,
Richmond Public Schools includes all of the characteristics of urban
school districts across this Nation.
What is not so typical is that the Commonwealth of Virginia
implemented its Standards of Learning (SOL) initiative in 1999, a high-
stakes testing program that required every local school district to
meet achievement benchmarks in all four core academic subject areas. To
become fully accredited, 70 percent of a school's student population
must pass the tests. In year one, only two of Richmond's schools earned
full accreditation. In 2002, that number reached 10. The progress was
neither expedient nor acceptable.
A change in culture of the entire district was necessary. Under the
leadership of our new superintendent, Dr. Deborah Jewell-Sherman, we
started charting our course to excellence. We had to create a culture
of continuous commitment to student success. The vision provided the
foundation for excuse-free education and high expectations for all. We
committed being on board, on purpose, and on message. We also vowed to
show that our students would excel not in spite of who they were or
where they lived but because of who we are.
Our journey was multifaceted expanding from Governor Mark Warner's
PASS (Partnership for Achieving Successful Schools) Initiative to the
local governance arm down to each classroom. We took a critical view of
ourselves and in the words of Jim Collins; we faced our ``brutal
facts.'' Our district was suffering from low student self-confidence,
sinking staff morale, school board frustration and parent and community
dissatisfaction. We were reverberating from site-based management--
multiple reading programs, textbooks, supplemental materials and other
resources within the district. This alone proved to be disastrous for
students in a district that experienced an estimated 40 percent
mobility.
We embraced Jim Collins' work from Good To Great, applying business
principles to our work. Realizing that our profitability was measured
by student achievement, we embraced a managed instruction theory of
action. We developed a district-wide curriculum that was aligned to
State standards and assessments and a district-wide instructional
model. We created instructional tools for the classroom teachers called
the RPS Treasure Chest. This resource included a pacing guide, lesson
plans for each standard, sample activities, technology integration,
essential knowledge, vocabulary, and sample assessments.
Another facet of our work was to blend the art of teaching with the
science of teaching. We developed benchmark and other formative
measures to collect data, analyze it and utilize the information to
drive all of our decisions. The application of the data was used to
deploy central office assistance to schools and classrooms, to develop
remediation and intervention plans, for professional development, to
select textbooks and supplemental materials, to develop school
improvement plans and finally to allocate fiscal and human resources.
The belief that consistent and thorough monitoring is necessary to
assure fidelity to implementation was the guiding principle behind the
development of our internal accountability system called ``Charting the
Course.'' This process requires that central office administrators and
instructional staff make monthly visits to schools. The initial visits
are conducted to review trend data, set yearly targets, observe
teachers and provide immediate feedback and recommendations to
principals. The frequency of subsequent visits was determined by the
schools ability to reach AYP and accreditation for multiple years.
Last, we infused another business model, `The Balanced Scorecard,''
into our work to provide transparent accountability and to guide us.
The BSC provides feedback on internal instructional and business
processes and external outcomes (i.e., student achievement and customer
satisfaction) in order to continuously improve results.
Our progress has been noted in local, State and national
publications. Richmond Public Schools is no longer the second lowest
performing school district in Virginia. In 2003, we more than doubled
our number of fully accredited schools, moving from 10 to 23 or 44
percent; in 2004, 39 or 76 percent schools; in 2005, 45 or 90 percent
schools; and in 2006, 44 or 88 percent. In meeting the Federal
benchmark, Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), our students have shown a
similar pattern of progress. In 2003, 12 or 23 percent of our schools
made AYP; in 2004, 27 or 53 percent schools; 2005 41 or 82 percent and
in 2006, 40 or 88 percent of our schools. In fall 2006, one of our
schools was named a Blue Ribbon School, our first.
While the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act provided a springboard
for our school district to take a bold look at our instructional
program, it must also be noted that Richmond Public Schools did not shy
away from the challenges that accompanied the implementation of the
NCLB Act. We know that our greatest asset is our teachers. They make
the difference between a successful and memorable educational
experience and one that is forgettable. The concentration of efforts at
the classroom level is an investment in the future of every child who
walks into our doors. The commitment to fidelity of implementation is
critical to the success of any program or strategy and requires the
allocation of time, effort and support at the classroom level.
Are we there, yet? No. We face many challenges as we progress. The
investment in professional development is an on going process. We
sometimes lose our investment as surrounding school districts, without
urban challenges, become more attractive. When teachers leave us, they
leave with experience and a tool box of strategies and resources. Our
quest to change the culture is not complete. As we progress, we have
the challenge of balancing flexibility and accountability. In the past
we have focused on the upper elementary grades in our assessment and
accountability system. By analyzing data, we know that pre-school-
second grade education is extremely important to the success of
students as well as necessary to close achievement gaps. The balance of
developmental instructional strategies with academic strategies is also
a challenge. These aforementioned challenges may impact our ability to
build and maintain the capacity for excellence in each school, but they
do not impact our resolve. For us, failure was not, is not and never
shall be an option for Richmond Public Schools.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Coleman.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD COLEMAN, DIRECTOR,
AN ACHIEVABLE DREAM ACADEMY, NEWPORT NEWS, VA
Mr. Coleman. Senator Enzi and other Senators here, thank
you, first of all, for inviting me to represent An Achievable
Dream, which is in Newport News, Virginia. I, like my
colleagues, I think we focus on many of the same things and I'm
proud to subscribe certainly to many of the principles that
they subscribe to as well.
An Achievable Dream Academy and I'm going to give you a
prospective from a building level. I'm the Director of An
Achievable Dream, which is a K-12 program. I happen to have
been the principal of the school for 5 years and the assistant
principal for 3 years and over the years, we've subscribed to
three strategies that have been effective with us.
First and foremost, we have high expectations and I know
that in schools that have high-minority, low-income clientele,
high expectations are one of those elements that have to be
implemented if we're going to have our children succeed.
At An Achievable Dream Academy, we have a selection
process. We're not a magnet school nor are we a charter school.
We're a unique partnership with the School Board, the Newport
News School Division and the city of Newport News and in that
partnership, every year we select children that come into our
school. There are three factors that we use to select the
children. We use a point system.
First, those children that are on free or reduced lunch--
you have to be eligible for free or reduced lunch to be
eligible to come to our school. So consequently, 96 percent of
the kids that are at our school are on free or reduced lunch.
You get additional points if you live in public housing versus
private housing. You get additional points if you live with
surrogate parents or grandparents as opposed to living in a
two-parent family.
So basically, we look for those kids that are socially and
economically deprived and those are the students that are at An
Achievable Dream Academy from grades kindergarten through
grades 12.
We focus, as I mentioned, on high expectations but we also
have to focus on the data that has been mentioned and data is
so critical; it becomes such a common phrase and terminology
that it is critical, as has been mentioned already, that we
teach our teachers how to take a look at data and then feedback
the data to our teachers and to our children so that they have
it in digestible sound bites. What I mean by that is the
strands of information that our children do not do well in, we
have our teachers focus on those areas. So we are working on
the interventions on the areas that they've not mastered as
opposed to trying to review everything that we've taught
already. We do that in a number of ways, but the data--and
looking at the data is the critical piece that our teachers
have learned to use to be able to accommodate our children.
In addition to that, we believe in a framework that we call
social, academic and moral. In academic, we all understand
academic is for children that come to school every day
expecting to get an education. But we also feel that socially,
we have to prepare our children to be prepared for life and to
be lifelong learners but also to be prominent citizens and
productive citizens when they get out of school. So every child
that comes to our school every morning receives a firm
handshake and a good morning by the principal and other members
of the school community as they come into the building.
That's important because the first part of their day
sometimes makes a difference in how the rest of their day will
be. As they go into their classrooms, as well, they are given a
firm handshake by their teacher, a good morning but also eye
contact. Typically, low-income minority children will look down
instead of looking up so we teach our children to have eye
contact with those they are confronted with.
So the strategies that are most important are looking at
data, making sure that our instructional program is solid,
making sure that our children have the social skills that they
need. Every morning, we have children that go through a social
program. It's called the Morning Program but also we have kids
that go through what we call our Morning Rotations. We have a
conflict resolution class. We have something called Speaking
Green and that's where our children are taught to border
cross--they're taught that it's okay to speak slang from the
neighborhood but when you come to school, when you go to a
public environment, when you're applying for a job, you have to
speak proper business English. So we have signs around our
school that say, Only Proper Business English is Spoken Here.
Understanding the backgrounds of our children; sometimes
that can be an insult culturally but we teach our children that
it's okay to--the defense mechanism and the language that they
use in their community is okay but again, if we want them to be
productive citizens, they have to speak business English and
they have to speak it properly.
We have an etiquette class where we teach our children also
how to conduct themselves when they go to a restaurant, how to
conduct themselves when they are in the public, when they are
talking to people. These factors become very important, not
only for their academic education but for their social
education.
Morally, we focus on the belief system. How do we believe?
We believe all children really can learn. Sometimes your body
language will indicate whether or not you really care about
children and we also want our children to believe that they are
capable of learning. We want them to believe that they are
someone special and in the morning program, we enforce those
kinds of guidelines and rules every day by them saying what we
call the banners every morning.
Another strategy that we think is critical to the success
of our children is we are a year-round school. I also represent
the National Association of Year-Round Education and we believe
that our children must have a balanced calendar. Eight weeks of
summer vacation is just a bit much for our children in our
community because we recognize that that muscle called the
brain, if it's not used for 10 weeks, sometimes it makes it
very difficult when they get back to school in September. So
our kids have a 5-week summer break. Our teachers have a 4-week
summer break and we go through 9 weeks of instruction and then
we have 2 weeks of what we call an intersession. During that
intersession, we look at the data. We determine where our kids
are deficit and then we focus on those strands, as I mentioned
earlier, that our kids need--I mean, where we need to improve
on.
So teachers are taught how to look at data and take that
data and use it to re-teach not the entire 9-week curriculum
but just those areas where our kids have been deficit. It's
been proven for us to be successful.
We also have a longer day. We have an extended day. Our
children arrive at school at 8:15 every day and they go home at
4:30. Not only do we provide time for additional character
development, because we think that's important but we want to
provide additional instructional time as well.
See, we recognize that all children don't process at the
same speeds. So those kids that need more time, we provide them
additional time and that's why we have the longer day and
that's why we have that balanced year-round calendar with the
mandatory intersession. So consequently, our kids are in school
for 205 days a year as opposed to 180 days a year and it makes
a difference. The longer children are with us, the better they
have a tendency to do.
Our middle school kids; their test scores in the Virginia
Standards of Learning are sometimes--very often in the last 3
years, far exceed those of any school in our district. We
usually have the strongest writers and readers and for those of
you that know the background of minority children and their
writing skills, typically we don't do very well. But we have
the strongest writers in our school district just based on the
Virginia Standards of Learning and we're very proud of that
because we teach our children that writing is critical and when
we teach them to speak correctly; when they hear it correctly,
very often they'll write it correctly. So we look at that as a
very important strategy. Reading is the key to the success in
their life and we know how important that is.
So those are three strategies, the focus on instruction,
the focus on their framework, providing more time for our
children to learn with the longer day and providing additional
time on a year-round basis. We also have 26 weeks of Saturday
School. So those children that need additional time, from 9
a.m. to 12 p.m. on Saturdays, we provide Saturday School and
typically, we have, out of 1,200 kids in our population, we
have about 250 kids that are in Saturday School because they
need the additional time. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Coleman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard Coleman
An Achievable Dream--``Breaking the Cycle of Poverty Through Social,
Academic and Moral Education''
An Achievable Dream (AAD) is a collaboration of public and private
organizations that runs a comprehensive K-12 public school program.
Newport News Public Schools provides the instructional and support
elements common to all schools in the city, including curriculum,
student services, basic staffing, transportation, food service, and
maintenance. The private arm, through the mechanism of the nonprofit An
Achievable Dream, Inc., raises funds for and operates all the
additional components that contribute significantly to the program's
effectiveness: the extended school day, longer school year, uniforms,
tennis equipment and instruction, curriculum enrichments, technology,
parent involvement activities, and program evaluation. At present, AAD
operates a K-8 Academy with students in grades 9-12 continuing in the
program while attending a comprehensive high school in the district.
Beginning with the 2007-2008 school year, AAD will operate its own
Middle and High School Academy so that students have full access to the
array of AAD services through their primary and secondary school years.
an achievable dream specific strategies
An Achievable Dream's selection and integration of specific design
elements is based on available evidence of strategies that are
effective at promoting the educational success of minority and low-
income students. (Note: Among 1,000+ An Achievable Dream students, 100
percent qualify for free or reduced lunch and 98 percent are African-
American.) Among those that have the most influence on program design
are:
Evidence that in urban schools, minority and low-income
students are more likely to achieve at lower levels, need remedial
services, be retained, and drop out and less likely to take advanced
courses or apply to college. They are less likely to receive health
care and more likely to become involved in the justice system, bear
children during adolescence, and, as adults, be unemployed or
underemployed and depend on public assistance. Equally compelling is
evidence that with appropriate supports and high expectations, they can
achieve and succeed at levels consistent with those of white and
affluent students. At An Achievable Dream, expectations are uniformly
high, clearly articulated, and consistently reinforced by teachers,
staff and volunteers.
Evidence that students lose academic ground in the summer.
An Achievable Dream is a year-round school, with its extra 30 days
organized into three mandatory intercessions between regular quarters.
Evidence that extended instructional time can yield
results in student achievement. An Achievable Dream's day is 2\1/4\
hours longer than the city norm and the year 30 days longer. This
schedule makes time available for more intensive instruction in basics,
as well as for curriculum enrichments (foreign language, technology
education, the arts) and special offerings like the positive conflict
resolution program, etiquette and Speaking Green (proper business
English).
program evaluation
An Achievable Dream believes that evaluation is essential both to
identify areas in which modifications are needed to strengthen the
program and to demonstrate its effectiveness to other communities
seeking evidence-based strategies for serving inner-city youth.
Outcome evaluation focuses on two areas: educational achievement,
as measured largely by standardized testing and college acceptance, and
behavioral performance, as measured by the incidence of infractions of
school policies (ranging from cheating, lying, and insubordination to
those involving weapons, alcohol, and drugs).
The program has contracted with the School of Education at the
College of William and Mary for continuing, objective, and systematic
evaluation. In assessing outcomes, Achievable Dream students are
compared to a control group of students matched by age, gender,
socioeconomic level, and academic status. William and Mary also
assesses parent satisfaction through focus groups, individual
interviews, and surveys.
The key findings from a 2-year study by William and Mary, issued
July 2006:
Compared with the match group, An Achievable Dream
students in grades 3 and 5 scored higher on every portion of the
Standards of Learning academic tests and on a standardized reading
test.
The number of disciplinary referrals for Achievable Dream
students was less than half that for the match group. Dreamers miss
less school.
Parents involved in the program are extremely satisfied
with their children's learning, the performance of teachers,
communication and relations with the school, and the school
environment.
The most significant finding is that An Achievable Dream
is effective at closing the gap between white and black students. On
statewide tests, Dreamers--98 percent of whom are African-American and
all of whom are eligible for free or reduced price lunches--outperform
other minority students in the city. They pass the Virginia tests at
rates approaching or identical to the rates for white students. On some
tests and grades, they closed the racial gap typical in most schools
and on other tests narrowed it to only a few percentage points,
compared to the 15-30 percentage point gap between black and white
students in the city, the State and the Nation as a whole.
Advancing the principles of positive youth development
An Achievable Dream does this through:
Surrounding children with high, clearly articulated, and
consistently reinforced expectations. It is blatantly clear: these
children are preparing for college, for careers, and to become
contributing members of their families and communities. These
expectations are reinforced in daily morning character development
exercises, classroom discussions and proclaimed from banners in the
hallways.
A strong and pervasive character education program that
helps children develop critical values--honesty, respect,
responsibility, loyalty, courage, self-discipline, integrity, and
patriotism.
Equipping children for the world of success through
programs like etiquette classes and the ``Speaking Green'' program,
which fosters poise, public speaking skills, and fluency in standard
English. The ``Peaceful Conflict Resolution'' program teaches
nonviolent ways to resolve disputes.
Fostering a sense of identity with a positive group that
is an antidote to the lure of street gangs. From the earliest years,
students identify themselves as Dreamers, an identity that is bolstered
by uniforms, and the distinction of attending a school that has a high
profile in the community.
Requiring and supporting the involvement of parents, one
of the strongest weapons in the quest to develop strong children. All
parents must sign a pledge to volunteer in the school and make
education a priority at home. They review children's binders daily and
can take a variety of classes in the parents' night school.
The program incorporates services to prevent and treat
health needs and promote students' well-being. An on-site health clinic
serves students and their families, and the ``Healthy Living''
curriculum emphasizes healthy habits and living, including nutrition,
exercise, hygiene, and healthy daily schedules.
district strategies
Newport News Public Schools, like many urban districts, is working
to assist a number of schools that have been identified for improvement
under the No Child Left Behind Act, specifically schools that did not
meet Annual Yearly Progress Determinations (AYP) for two or more
consecutive years. One school improvement strategy the district has
pursued is the closure of Briarfield Elementary School, whereby
Briarfield's students (with similar demographics to AAD students) were
absorbed into AAD's elementary and middle school programs, while
Briarfield's campus is to be converted to the new An Achievable Dream
Middle and High School.
While no district likes to think about closing schools, this
public/private partnership has demonstrated how a bad situation can be
turned into a win-win for the district, students, parents and the
community.
challenge #1
With Newport News Public Schools, An Achievable Dream operates a K-
8 Academy. Historically, when they graduate from the 8th grade, AAD
students attend a comprehensive public high school (Heritage High
School), a school in year 2 of improvement, where the current high
school ``culture'' does not share the academic expectations and the
disciplined structure to which AAD students have grown accustomed. The
social pressure at this 1,800+ student high school to not achieve is a
grave concern, and has had a negative impact on AAD students in terms
of academic achievement.
Research shows that in the mid-1990s, high schools began receiving
better-
prepared students, after numerous reform efforts focused on elementary
and middle schools, but achievement remained flat at the high school
level. One of the problems is size: Many of today's high schools have
enrollments of 2,000, 3,000, even 4,000 students which make it
difficult, if not impossible to govern and emphasize the academic part
of the curriculum. Further research shows that students drop out of
school because they are bored or do not think material learned in high
school applied to real life. Specific research on An Achievable Dream
high school students supports the findings that achieving academic
success in a large high school is a challenge.
solution
This year, alongside Heritage High School, An Achievable Dream is
building its own dedicated 500-student middle and high school. Where it
has closed the achievement gap, An Achievable Dream will now be able to
close the ambition gap by giving students future goals to work toward.
An Achievable Dream, working as a laboratory school, is developing and
will test new ways to excite students to keep them in school, and to
motivate them to graduate and pursue college, further career training,
or the military. The campus is an innovative partnership of An
Achievable Dream, Newport News Public Schools, the city of Newport
News, regional corporations and regional universities.
The enriched academic program will prepare students for successful
careers by allowing them to explore and plan for intended vocations.
Students will be exposed to 12 primary career paths, including:
college, the military, police and fire, medical technology and nursing,
shipbuilding, computer technology and other 21st century careers.
Enrichment classes in math, science and technology will be offered in
partnership with Virginia Modeling Analysis Simulation Center and
Northrop Grumman Newport News. Medical careers will be directed by
Riverside Health System, homeland security (police and fire) through
the city of Newport News, and entrepreneurship through Ferguson
Enterprises.
challenge #2
One of the national education community's and An Achievable Dream's
greatest challenges is teacher recruitment and retention, specifically
in urban schools. The national average tenure of urban teachers is 2-3
years. While An Achievable Dream has been fortunate to find and hire
many committed, long-term teachers, it is increasingly more difficult
to fill teaching positions when they do come open.
solution
Old Dominion University (ODU), in nearby Norfolk, Virginia, will
establish the Center for Urban Teacher Training, Education and Research
(CUTTER) on An Achievable Dream's new middle and high school campus.
The Center will initially focus on preparing AAD teachers to staff the
new 6-12 campus. Later, the Center will open its doors to teachers from
districts within the region and beyond. The Center will become a
national model for urban teacher professional development, education
and research.
The Center will invite K-12 teachers and administrators and higher
education faculty from communities across the globe to join ODU in
improving teaching and learning. In order to improve teaching and
learning at scale, universities and schools must join forces with the
community to strengthen its instructional core by increasing teachers'
skills and knowledge in combining instruction and assessment; enable
students to be active agents for their own learning; enable teachers
and higher education faculty to serve as ``coresearchers;'' and ensure
that the curriculum challenges the students academically.
Getting assessment ``right'' is more important than ever for
African-American children as we near 2014 when all children must meet
NCLB requirements. With a growing knowledge of how people learn, it is
critical to develop assessments that help teachers diagnose students'
comprehension more precisely and accurately.
In essence, the Center moves school improvement to the university
and teacher development to the urban classroom.
The Chairman. Mr. Flanagan, we're grateful to you for being
here. We had our colleagues from Michigan that wanted to make
sure we extend a warm welcome to you. Nice to have you. Thank
you.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL P. FLANAGAN, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF
INSTRUCTION, STATE OF MICHIGAN
Mr. Flanagan. Thank you very much, Chairman Kennedy and
Senator Enzi and the rest of the Senators for taking time to
listen to this panel. I've learned a few things already myself
so we've got a good start.
I've been a lifelong educator but have only been the State
Superintendent of Schools for about a year and a half in
Michigan and I need to tell you just straight out that No Child
Left Behind is really the spirit behind what drove our change
in Michigan. I think there was reluctance to accept some of the
No Child Left Behind specifics in the beginning but here's what
No Child Left Behind did for us.
It finally focused us in Michigan on all children. In the
system, we've been kind of well-intentioned hypocrites up until
No Child Left Behind. We've said things like all kids can
learn. We've said it for decades but we have numbers that don't
demonstrate that. So one of the things, when I was able to come
to this position and Governor Granholm and a bipartisan State
board worked extremely well together, as we said we've got to
change the cultural learning in our State.
We had a perfect storm. We still have a perfect storm in
Michigan. We've got an auto industry that's kind of a little
shaky if you haven't heard, although they're coming back. And I
think my job is more to take kind of a Model T system that we
have in place and modernize it the way our car industry is
doing.
But we have this perfect storm of the auto industry which
is shaky and the cultural learning that you could actually be a
high school dropout in Michigan and earn a great living. I grew
up in New York. When I first came to Michigan, my wife's
cousin--who is smarter than me, who clearly was intelligent--
was driving a Lincoln and I was driving a Pinto. He had a place
up north, a cottage. I didn't know what up north meant at the
time but it's where people in Michigan go. And he was a high
school dropout. And I couldn't figure out what's going on. I
had worked through the system and had a couple of degrees and
it's because we rewarded, in Michigan, high paying auto
industry jobs without an education and we're still dealing with
this. It's in the water.
So we finally decided last year, with the Governor's
support, bipartisan State board, we're going to put in the
highest rigor in high school graduation requirements, learning
from what other States have done and we've done that. That's
the first step because it will get us to the spirit of all
means all. You know, once and for all, all means all.
The beauty of No Child Left Behind is that it has helped
us--it's helped us see our faults. If you look--when you have
to look at subgroups, you have to look in the mirror and say,
this isn't all hunky dory.
I was a local superintendent in the late eighties and early
nineties outside of Detroit and we had three very poor schools
bordering Detroit. But in general, our aggregate scores were
all great so we all kind of felt everything was great, when in
fact, our poor schools, which isn't a race issue, by the way.
In Michigan, this sometimes is mistaken for race when really,
it's a poverty issue and kids with high, free and reduced
lunch. Now we have to measure under No Child Left Behind and
I'm glad about it. I think it has made all the difference.
So we're finally getting to a point where we're going to
try imagine our State with 2 million kids in our State, all
achieving at high levels, something we've never accomplished
before, getting off this auto industry mindset that you can
make a good living without an education. When I first came into
this position, we surveyed districts and only a third of them
required Algebra I. I mean, how do you do well at all if you
kind of wink and believe that some kids don't need to learn
Algebra? So we've actually got requirements that now have all
kids exposed to Algebra II.
And some of that, for example, may be a career tech
sequence, where you're learning the pathagorium theorem in a
building trades course. You don't need to learn it in an
algebra course. And we've changed our mindset from courses to
credits. As long as you can demonstrate mastery, we don't
really care about the seat time. And this has all been driven
by the spirit of No Child Left Behind, which I thank you for
and we have been a supporter from the beginning of this.
You mentioned, Senator, our principle academies and some of
those specific strategies we've used that is in detail in our
testimony so I won't belabor that. What I would say if I had to
mention a few, just a few things that might strengthen No
Child--one, my colleagues in the Council of Chief State School
Officials. They are called commissioners in some States. I'm
called a superintendent and one of the highlights, I think,
that Senator Kennedy has dreamed about from the beginning of
this legislation was that we would have proper resources and I
think there is a place to strengthen some of the resources
there, although frankly, we're going to do it with or without
it.
But I think there are some places--for instance, you really
can't do the tutoring part of this if you're not financing the
tutoring part. But putting that aside, the only other thing I
would kind of highlight would be the fact that there seems to
be some inconsistencies with what is approved between States.
You know, Arizona has been approved for some things when it
comes to ELL students that we weren't able to get approval on
and these are hardworking people in the Department, by the way.
This isn't a criticism of the Department. I find them to be
very helpful. I think it has more to do with some of the ways
that we could improve on No Child Left Behind law.
It's an honor to be here today.
The Chairman. Just before you leave, you had 163 schools
that moved off of State warning lists. Just talk about that
quickly and then we'll move on.
Mr. Flanagan. Senator, what this comes down to--I'm glad
you have such a diverse panel because one thing you'll find is,
it's not about people like me. We have something to do with the
system. It's ultimately about teachers in the classroom. How do
you support the teachers in the classroom? We have trained
turn-around specialists. So we have people that we use in what
we call our intermediate school districts. These are county
systems with consultants and teams that go in and turn around a
school in terms of academic achievement and we only focus on
what we call our high-priority schools. Frankly, we're not
going to spend any time in Grosse Point. They're doing fine.
But we're going to spend time in the schools that need the most
help and those are the schools that got turned around and it
had to do with coaches academies, it had to do with principals
academies because of the leadership comment that the good
doctor mentioned earlier but most importantly, it was to give
strategies to teachers on how you deal in the classroom on a
day-to-day basis and care about all kids and work toward their
academic achievement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Flanagan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael P. Flanagan
Chairman Kennedy, Senator Enzi, and distinguished members of the
Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, I am extremely
honored and pleased to participate in your kick-off round table
discussion on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, and specifically the amendments that were made to it in
2001 with the passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.
On behalf of Governor Jennifer M. Granholm and Michigan's State
Board of Education, I thank you for providing the Michigan Department
of Education this special opportunity to testify here today on the
successes the State of Michigan has experienced with the implementation
of NCLB as well as sharing the challenges we have encountered that make
it difficult to provide a fair and reasonable accounting of all schools
and almost 2 million students in Michigan.
I applaud the committee's interest in hearing from those of us who
have worked diligently throughout the country to implement this
groundbreaking legislation. As the Superintendent of Public Instruction
of the State of Michigan for just the last 18 months, although always
an NCLB advocate, I have had literally a crash course in understanding
that the critical role of States is in providing the direction and
leadership necessary to assist schools and districts in meeting the
goals of the No Child Left Behind Act.
Michigan chose to immediately embrace the new law--viewing it as an
opportunity to create a statewide focus on school improvement and
student achievement for every child. Michigan was one of only a dozen
or so States that already had begun to determine Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP), as prescribed in the Improving America's Schools Act of
1994. As a result, many of our highest-need schools began the NCLB era
further down the Federal ``sanctions'' path than similar schools in
other States. As such, Michigan has helped blaze a trail for NCLB and
stands as an innovator and model for other States to follow.
Michigan has embraced the moral imperative of NCLB that schools
must provide the highest quality education for every child, regardless
of race, culture, background, or learning ability. And I mean every
child--ALL means ALL. Clearly, NCLB has served as a catalyst for reform
focusing on the importance of instructional excellence and student
achievement, and brought attention to every child in the classroom.
Initially, I want to embrace the recommendations developed by the
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) that include positions
and strategies leading us as a Nation from ``No Child Left Behind to
`Every Child a Graduate'.''
Michigan has made tremendous strides in increasing student
achievement and re-tooling its K-12 education system over the past 3
years.
Michigan has implemented among the most rigorous high school
graduation requirements in the Nation; developed grade-level standards
in math and reading that have resulted in statewide increases on our
State assessment scores in grades 3-8; instituted a strong support
system for our High Priority Schools that has resulted in 163 schools
coming off the Federal sanctions list last year; and will administer a
new high school test this spring that will help drive more students
into postsecondary education.
Michigan also has begun to intensely focus on improving teacher
preparation programs in Michigan to ensure that we have educators who
will deliver instruction to our students in innovative and relevant
measure for our 21st Century learners.
Michigan's formula for building success in our schools has been
steady and growing. In 2002, we were one of the first States to adopt
the Reading First program. Today, Reading First is in 168 schools in
high need geographic areas; encompasses 2,000 teachers and 40,000
students; and has resulted in significant increase in the percentage of
students reading at grade level each year.
We have developed a School Improvement Framework--A research-based
model of the proven components of school improvement that now serves as
the blueprint to be used to develop improvement plans in our High
Priority Schools (those schools not making AYP).
The Michigan Department of Education also has provided direct
intervention and support strategies for our High Priority Schools,
including: Principals' Academies; Coaches' Institutes; and School
Support Teams assigned to the most critical schools.
These School Support Teams represent a collaboration with the
Michigan Department of Education, the State's Intermediate School
Districts, and the school accrediting organization North Central
Association. The teams conduct Comprehensive School Audits to
investigate why a specific school is not making AYP, and assist the
schools with developing an improvement plan based on audit findings.
Michigan's NCLB system of AYP sanctions has been established as
``Phases,'' where after 2 consecutive years of not making AYP, a school
goes into Phase 1 (school choice and transportation); after 3
consecutive years, Phase 2 (Supplemental Educational Services, plus
school choice and transportation); and so on, through the Federal
requirements for sanctions.
Michigan's Phase 1 and 2 schools are provided with training and
their own nationally-recognized MI-MAP Kit. Developed by educators for
educators, MI-MAP provides over 300 practical strategies and activities
to shape, support, and sustain systemic reform and academic
achievement.
For schools in Phases 3-5, in collaboration with the College of
Education at Michigan State University, we developed a Coaches'
Institute and trained 93 turn-around specialists to work with
principals and school improvement teams as an alternative governance
option.
Michigan has schools in NCLB Phases 6 and 7 that are placed on a
``critical list.'' For these schools, we administer a comprehensive
school audit, and turn-around specialists are assigned. This year,
we're collaborating with the North Central Association to identify
audit teams from their cadre of ambassadors.
Creating this kind of statewide capacity requires solid
partnerships with our intermediate school districts (education service
agencies), the professional education organizations, and universities.
As Michigan has led the way in meeting the requirements of NCLB, we
have recognized and understood that it is a complex and comprehensive
law that has been a true work-in-progress. Through the first few years
of setting rules, regulations, and guidance, adjustments and amendments
have had to be made at the Federal, State, and local levels.
NCLB was fostered with the intent of transparency and
accountability on the Nation's public schools. Yet as my colleagues at
CCSSO have agreed, each State is allowed different standards by which
to determine AYP and each State has had different experiences in having
their State plans for accountability approved.
By and large, the USED has been helpful to us as we have tried and
tested; discovered what works and what doesn't work; what is fair and
what is not fair for all schools; and continued to improve our State
plan of implementation. However, like all things, there is room for
improvement.
Michigan has urged the U.S. Department of Education to allow
English Language Learners to be proficient in English before being
tested, only to be denied. Our efforts to allow students to take 5
years to complete high school in some cases, in order to reflect the
realities of today's evolving high school models, also have been
rebuffed.
Michigan needs to be able to assess less severely cognitively
impaired students with ``in between'' assessments that are rigorous but
not necessarily tied to our grade level standards. These less severely
impaired students should not be measured by regular State assessments
and are not likely to achieve regular grade level standards. Yet they
are not so severely impaired as to be eligible for the lower-level
alternate assessments currently in place for ``severely cognitively
impaired.''
Supplemental Education Services (SES), or tutoring, should be the
first provision required on the Federal sanctions list, rather than the
second phase; and States should be provided adequate resources to
administer and monitor these services. SES providers also should meet
the same highly-qualified standard in their subjects as classroom
teachers.
SES is an expensive, time consuming, and administrative-heavy
option. In Michigan's successful experience, clear learning
expectations, improved classroom instruction and effective school
leadership has had a much greater impact in turning around achievement
than SES or choice and/or transportation. We would like to see the
Regional Assistance Centers playing a more significant and increasing
role in helping States with monitoring and evaluating SES providers.
Again, I would like to echo my colleagues in a call to strengthen
resources to fully recognize the increased roles and responsibilities
of States and the ever-increasing challenges for districts to meet the
NCLB requirements.
Every reform initiative has its challenges. NCLB is no exception.
However, in Michigan we are encouraged by our results and believe that
this endeavor will have a positive impact on our State for generations
to come. Thank you for affording us this opportunity to share our
experiences.
The Chairman. Hosanna Johnson. Again, comes to us from the
Chicago Public Schools. We thank you.
STATEMENT OF HOSANNA MAHALEY-JOHNSON, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, OFFICE
OF NEW SCHOOLS, CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, CHICAGO, IL
Ms. Mahaley-Johnson. Good morning, Senator Kennedy, Senator
Enzi and the other Senators who have taken time out of your
busy schedules to be here today. As an educator, it means a lot
for me to be here and to see you here as well.
By way of introduction, I am a graduate of public schools
and when we talk about under performing schools, I know them
well because I attended them. So when I talk about what we're
doing, I know it firsthand because I lived it as a student.
In Chicago, we are employing a Fresh Start strategy. We're
doing a number of other things that my colleagues have
discussed but I want to focus on our Fresh Start strategy and
that is where we have made the decision to close some of our
chronically under-
performing schools and re-open them. It's a very drastic
measure and one may ask, why would we do that?
We did it because in 2002, we looked at our student data
across the city and in Chicago. We have 50 communities and we
found that half of them--in 25 of them, over 75 percent of the
children there were attending chronically under-performing
schools. Over 200,000 children were attending chronically
under-performing schools. When we looked at the data, we knew
that our investments in additional staff and smaller class size
and curriculum--we knew that those things were making a
difference but it was gradual and for those children, we felt
that gradualism wasn't enough. These are children who couldn't
afford to wait 5 to 10 years for the reform efforts to take
hold so we decided to do something to accelerate progress.
In 2002, we closed three schools. Two of them are widely
known in Chicago. One is Dodge and one is William. They are
widely known because we reopened them. When we made those
decisions, it was a wake-up call for us, the parents and all of
the adults. Public outcry was significant. We spent time having
community meetings and talking to others and one of the
questions we would always ask the adults, is that 20 years from
now, would you be able to look these children in the eye and
tell them that you did the best that you could? And if not,
then we need to take a new approach.
So results. When we decided to close Dodge--I'll use
Williams. When we decided to close Williams Elementary School
in 2002, 15 percent of the students were meeting State
standards. It was closed for 1 year. Last year, in 2006, 64
percent of the students are achieving--are meeting State
standards, a 50-point increase.
Dodge is another example. A different part of town. When we
closed, 24 percent were meeting State standards in reading.
Last year, 57 percent, almost a 35-point increase in 3 years.
So is this a strategy for all situations? No. But for
children who can't afford to wait, we do think it's
appropriate. In 2004, we took the strategy to scale and set a
public commitment to open 100 new schools over the next 5 to 6
years and today, we've opened almost 50. They are fairly new so
some performance data is not available but there are some signs
that show that the strategy is taking effect.
When we look at the mobility rate of the schools, it is
half of the mobility rate for the district. We look at the
graduation rate of the high schools that have been open longer.
It's 15 percentage points higher than the district. When we
look at attendance, it's 5 percent higher than the district
average. We conducted teacher surveys in all of our schools.
The teachers in the new schools felt more collective
responsibility, innovation and program coherence. I could go on
and on but there's lots of evidence that says that this is
working for those communities.
You asked about challenges. One of the challenges we faced
was public perception. Some felt that closing a school was a
draconian measure and when we closed them, there was some
student mobility and we recognized that the student mobility
was not positive and that many parents preferred to keep their
children in schools in the neighborhood because it was more
convenient for them.
Last year, we launched a new strategy called a Turnaround
School and I think I've heard some of my colleagues refer to
that. The Turnaround School that we had, all of the children
stayed but a new team of adults came in. It was not just a new
team of adults but 25 percent of them are nationally board
certified. Twenty-five percent of them have a record of
effective teaching. And how did we incite them to come into the
school? We did offer a bonus to them. So those 25 percent of
teachers are receiving an additional $10,000 every year and we
expect them to teach. We expect them to share best practices
and mentor the younger teachers. Also in that model, we partner
with an organization called the Academy of Urban School
Leadership. It's an organization that trains mid-
career professionals to come into struggling, under-performing
schools.
So just in summary, in Chicago, one of the strategies we're
using is a Fresh Start. We've gotten great results and our
challenges are public perception and also the charter cap. We
have one charter left in the city of Chicago.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Mahaley-Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hosanna Mahaley-Johnson
strategy
Question 1. What specific strategies, programs or polices have been
effective in addressing your process of school improvement?
Answer 1. The Chicago Public Schools have employed a variety of
school improvement strategies over the past 10 years. Efforts have
ranged from curricular reform and increased professional development to
full scale turnarounds. The Illinois General Assembly 60 charter
schools for the State. Thirty were given to Chicago, twenty-nine have
been used, and there is only one left.
The student achievement, increased demand, and strong parent
satisfaction in charter schools set the stage for the Renaissance 2010
initiative, announced in June 2004. Renaissance 2010 calls for 100 new
schools by 2010. This bold plan closes chronically under-performing
schools and sets up a competitive, community-based selection process to
determine the best school operator for each site. These schools are
held accountable for performance through 5-year contracts while being
given autonomy to create innovative learning environments using one of
the following governance structures: charter, contract, or performance.
The vision of Renaissance 2010 is to:
Provide diverse education options for parents and
students,
Serve chronically underserved communities throughout
Chicago, and
Act as a catalyst for new education strategies in the
district.
outcomes & performance
Question 2. What outcomes or progress have been made as a result of
these strategies?
Answer 2. Starting fresh has been a way for CPS to successfully
turnaround schools. We are fortunate in Chicago to have Office of New
Schools that has nurtured and partnered with a number of local
education management organizations with proven ability to run schools.
Such partner organizations have the ability to leverage outside
resources and foster innovations that as a large district, it is hard
for us to do.
Case Study
In 2002, the Chicago Public Schools took the unfathomable step of
actually closing chronically failing schools. That year three schools
were closed and a year later, two new schools opened under brand new
management with renovated faculties. The two schools, Dodge and
Williams, are models of what our system has done right.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reading Reading Math Math
2002 2006 2002 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dodge............................... 23.6 57 28.3 67.2
Williams............................ 14.6 53.8 15.9 69.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Although the 2002 and 2006 tests were different, the scores have been
equated.
Indicators
There are indicators that new and charter schools are accelerating
academic achievement. The Office of New Schools currently manages 83
new schools which include 24 pre-Renaissance 2010 charter schools, 54
Renaissance 2010 schools, and 5 professional development schools
(professional development portion only). Below are a few highlights of
new schools:
Over 1,700 Renaissance 2010 students are new to CPS
(kindergarteners were not included).
19 school leaders are alumni of New Leaders for New
Schools.
Nearly 300 community members have served on Transition
Advisory Councils (TACs).
Over 800 individuals subscribe to the Renaissance 2010
Report.
89 percent of Renaissance 2010 students reside in primary
or surrounding community of the school they attend.
Students are transferring out of Renaissance 2010 schools
at nearly half the rate of the district (7.7 percent vs. 14.1 percent).
New schools have a higher graduation rate than the
district (89.9 percent vs. 73.4 percent).
Charter school students have a higher attendance rate
(Elementary schools: 94.6 percent vs. 94.4 percent and High school:
93.1 percent vs. 86.0 percent).
Charter schools are making upward progress in ISAT
composite scores and closing the achievement gap across students that
meet State standards.
Teachers in new schools feel like they have more
collective responsibility, innovation, and program coherence in their
schools.
High school students tend to feel more supported, safer,
and have higher expectations in new schools.
Over 4 years, high schools' students experienced an 8
percentage point gain in PSAE scores compared to 4 points made by the
district.
New schools rank top 5 in all but one category for the CPS
High School Score Card.
public perception
Question 3. What challenges did you encounter in your improvement
efforts and how did you address those challenges?
Answer 3. School closings and investment in new schools creates
push back from the community. There is a history of distrust that
creates a barrier with the community and many feel new school
development is part of a larger plan of gentrification. There is also a
belief that the students being served are not from the community and
the schools are handpicking the best students. However, we have found
that 89 percent of Renaissance 2010 students in formerly closed schools
reside in the primary or surrounding community.
Transition Advisory Councils (TACs) were created to serve as
liaisons between Chicago Public Schools and communities. Representing
the voice of the community, a TAC works to ensure that new schools
offer high quality educational options that reflect the community's
needs and interests. Through TACs, some of our most vocal opponents
have become our most vocal supporters. TACs collaborate with CPS in the
following ways:
Meet regularly to discuss and determine the community
needs in the new school;
Conduct community outreach activities and collect citizen
input;
Network and host public forums with community leaders,
groups and organizations; and
Make recommendations to CPS about the new school
proposals.
charter cap
CPS welcomes opportunities to provide students and parents with
educational choices, including charter schools. CPS has had significant
success with charter schools and generally supports efforts to expand
the number of charters available to the district. We believe that
Illinois should ideally raise the charter cap on its own. In the
meantime, however, no one's child should be ``trapped'' in a failing
school. If the State will not raise the cap, we welcome the Federal
Government's willingness to ``step up'' on behalf of the children and
support parental choice. We support charters for chronically under-
performing schools and legislation that gives the district the broadest
range of options to meet our restructuring needs. We also note and
support this provision of the reauthorization of the NCLB Act.
student displacement
The drawback to closing and re-opening schools is the displacement
of students. Acknowledging that student mobility can disrupt academic
performance in some situations, we found a way around it by closing
Sherman Elementary School in June 2006 and re-opening it the following
fall. We call it our NCLB Turnaround School because it had not made AYP
in 5 years. The school is a collaboration of the Academy for Urban
School Leadership (AUSL), the Joyce Foundation, and the Chicago Public
Education Fund. The students stayed and a new team of adults came in to
lead the school. CPS asked that AUSL to recruit one quarter National
Board Certified or Golden Apple-award winning teachers. In this way,
CPS has delivered the most effective teachers to the students who need
them the most. Students were not displaced and the parents are pleased
with the new education program and improved school environment.
Enrollment has increased from 425 to over 600.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Senator Brown has to go
preside in just a few minutes for an hour or so and will miss
the time so he wanted to make--he had a couple questions.
Senator Brown. Thank you, Senator Kennedy, Mr. Chairman.
Just one question.
Dr. Flanagan--and I appreciate all of you. This has been
very enlightening and I hope to take some of these ideas back
to Ohio. I very much appreciate that.
The problem that I hear so often and generally, I think
it's more a function of income than race, whether it's White
Appalachia, Ohio or inner-city East Cleveland--is the movement
of students in and out of school during the same school year
and I know, Dr. Coleman, your comments may have addressed some
of that but I guess, Dr. Flanagan, if you would--what did you
do to address the issue of parents who were more mobile, that
have to move, that they may lose their apartment, they may find
a job somewhere else. The student is in one school in the
Detroit schools and then maybe in Hamtramck and then back in
another school in Detroit. How do you address the continuity of
learning in that way?
Mr. Flanagan. That's a great question. We accepted the
reality of that and didn't use it as an excuse anymore. We've
kind of used it as an excuse. They're mobile, we can't move
those kids. So what we did was have what are called Grade Level
Content Expectations for K-8. They're exactly the same through
the State so whether you're in Marquette in the Upper Peninsula
or in Detroit, you will, at the same time and even allow the
art and craft of teaching to be unique in a 2nd grade classroom
but the grade level content expectations are the same. If they
move from Marquette in 2nd grade to go to Detroit for 3rd
grade, it's the same. After this year, we've finally gotten
course content expectations for high school to be exactly the
same, tied in with our new high school requirements. So it
doesn't matter where you live. You still have the uniqueness of
developing your own materials and your own approaches in an
individual district but we needed to have a standard for
exactly the reason you're bringing up.
Senator Brown. Dr. Brandon.
Ms. Brandon. I'd like to just add from a district
perspective, we have about 40 percent mobility in Richmond City
Public Schools.
Senator Brown. In the course of 1 year?
Ms. Brandon. In the course of 1 year and they're moving
across town, from one place to the other or from one community
right next to each other but still going to different schools.
So our approach was to have a district-wide curriculum,
district-wide teacher resources, district-wide textbooks,
district-wide resources, so that if a child moves from one
school to the other, he or she will not have to overcome the
gap in the learning curve for those items.
We also developed pacing guides. We developed assessments,
sample assessments so if he moves in October from one school,
he should be in the same place in his instruction when he goes
to the next school.
Senator Brown. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Kimberly Johnson.
STATEMENT OF KIMBERLY JOHNSON, PRINCIPAL, BRIGGS CHANEY MIDDLE
SCHOOL, SILVER SPRING, MD
Ms. Johnson. Hi, good morning.
The Chairman. The principal of the Briggs Chaney Middle
School in Silver Spring.
Ms. Johnson. Yes and good morning, Senator Kennedy and
Senator Enzi and other Senators that are here as well. I would
also--I know Senator Brown had to leave but I also wanted to
reference the mobility piece as I begin to speak.
We have adopted the VSC as our primary curriculum, which is
the Voluntary State Curriculum, which is created by Maryland.
Montgomery County, for a long time, did not want to adopt State
standards but they understood under No Child Left Behind that
is how we would be scored. So a student may move from area to
area but not often out of the State and that is something that
the State has provided to us as measured indicators and our
curriculums are based on those. So that's how we address
mobility.
I would like to focus my presentation on what it means for
students and I've heard a lot from my colleagues as to what it
means from the leadership standpoint and how students should
feel in a school that is high achieving. But I consider myself
not only a principal but a principal teacher of all of my
children. The vision of my school is One Vision, One Voice,
Everyone Achieves and that is the bottom line for me. Failure
is no longer an option and that is what No Child Left Behind
has done.
Three pieces that you wanted us to mention. One will be my
speaking on full inclusion and the access of special education
students to the general rigorous curriculum. Two, what it truly
means for a student to fall in more than one subgroup because
they don't just hit the African-American subgroup. You can be
African-American, poor, and special education all at the same
time and all three of those have a different, profound effect
on your education. And third, with the staff development, which
I've also heard much about as to how do you move a school and
how do you lead a school so that they understand data analysis
and they understand the importance of using it in order to move
students ahead.
Over the last 3 years, with full inclusion, we have
transcended or had a paradigm shift in terms of how we treat
students with disabilities. We have, at this point, unlocked
their IEPs or Individual Education Plans, unlocked that to find
out exactly what they need to be served. Often times, we see or
hear disabled and we think, they can't do. That is absolutely
untrue. We need to provide these students the opportunity to
see whether or not they can be successful with the rigorous
curriculum and measure their results as well.
I think we said that there was a hypocrisy whereas the
special education students weren't measured before. They were
included in a larger picture and forgotten. So now, we have to
measure their success as well and that is why they need the
access to the general curriculum and they need to be in the
classrooms with other students, depending upon disability.
So it's gotten teachers to understand more fully what it
means to be disabled. When we think about adults, we probably
can look around the room or even reflect personally and know
that we may have had a reading disability or a math disability
or a speech deficit or any of those types of things but it did
not dictate where you learned or it should not have.
So that is what No Child Left Behind has done for special
education students in my school. They are fully immersed in the
program and accepted--and they accept now their special
education status, their accommodations. They advocate for
themselves. The teachers understand that these students deserve
to learn, that they must master as well. So that would be my
first point.
The second point, as to what it truly means to fall in one
or more subgroups. We go back and forth as educators to whether
or not it is race or whether or not it's poverty. Well, often
times, it's both and that, as I shared earlier, has a
significant impact on a child's education, meaning if we tell a
child to go home and study for that evening, they may not be
able to or they may have to watch two and three children at
home while their parents are away working. So they don't have
the quiet space and they are also on free and reduced meals, so
they may not have much in their cupboards to eat. So there are
a lot of different areas that focusing in on all eight
subgroups that you really understand the full child and the
impact of all of the social aspects of being a child in America
today.
The third point would be the staff development and this is
where teachers need to constantly refine their pedagogy in
terms of--I have only been out of college, I would say, about
11 years but with that said, 11 years ago, we weren't learning
about No Child Left Behind. We weren't learning about data
analysis. We weren't learning about disaggregating data to
understand and pull and push each individual child. It was okay
if 95 percent of the students overall did well because that 5
percent could represent 100 kids and that was okay. They just
didn't perform but 95 did. So the paradigm shift in education,
I think, within the building, within the teaching profession
and also, hopefully, at the university level so that teachers
come out better prepared to understand what they are dealing
with.
The other piece and I've heard a lot today about the data
analysis. That is what drives every decision in a school
because of No Child Left Behind. You look at the student data.
You look at the overall class data. You look at the year data.
You look at the content data. And that is how decisions are
made. That was not so a few years ago. We had different data
sources but they were not consistent. They were not accurate.
They were not measurable and they were not given to us in a
timely manner. So No Child Left Behind, having the data in
front of us to make decisions based on actually what we need
and not what we think we need has really allowed many schools
to move forward because No Child Left Behind really focuses on
each individual child. And I think sometimes when we think
about it, that kind of gets lost, that each individual child
deserves to learn and the data and the legislation brings it
down to each individual child.
I think that sums up my position.
The Chairman. Just quickly, on the special needs children
and the 3 percent that we have out there, could you just
address that? You know, that's the limit--that's the regulation
in the No Child Left Behind Act. How have you been able to deal
with that? I mean, the way you express this is so uplifting,
but how have you been able to deal with that kind of limitation
in the legislation, working with the disabled children, special
needs children?
Ms. Johnson. That would not apply to many of my students.
We're only talking about 2 to 3 percent at any given time but
the other special needs students still need to be given the
access to the rigorous curriculum.
Further, how do we go about categorizing those particular
students that then don't deserve to be in those classes? So
that's segregating them and taking them backwards because of a
disability when we haven't given them the opportunity to show
us what they're made of. And a disability can be speech. It can
be anything and then you think about why is a child disabled?
And the over coating of different minority groups, different
socio-economic groups. So there are a lot of things that go
into why a student is special ed, what are their actual needs
and No Child Left Behind with the testing, can actually have a
student moved out because they can demonstrate for you,
proficiency and they no longer need those special ed services.
But if we don't give them the opportunity, we'll never know.
The Chairman. Alana Turner is a teacher in Easton,
Maryland.
STATEMENT OF ALANA DALE TURNER, TEACHER, EASTON HIGH SCHOOL,
EASTON, MD
Ms. Turner. Good morning, Chairman and the rest of the
committee members. I have been a teacher for 30 years.
The Chairman. Put the mic up just a little closer.
Ms. Turner. Is that coming out louder? I've taught for 30
years. I've been teaching mathematics. The key to any new No
Child Left Behind or any teaching is the students themselves.
You have to get the student engaged. Without the student buying
into his education, it's very hard to get them to learn
anything.
What we've done in Talbot County is started a one-to-one
laptop initiative. Last year was the first year we did this, in
2005, and every 9th grader was issued a laptop computer. This
year we added the 10th graders so that ninth and tenth now have
laptop computers. We plan to do this for the next 2 years, so
at the end of that time, all of our students will have a laptop
computer to use.
The benefit from that is they really get to see what's
going on in the outside world. They're not limited to a
textbook. They're not limited to the four walls. They get to go
out and use it as the Webquest. They get to have virtual field
trips. They get to really bring everything that's out there
into the classroom.
We also have used it to improve our math scores because we
have the Carnegie Learning Cognitive Tutor Program. That's for
the Bridges to Algebra of Algebra I, for geometry. They can
then do that in the classroom. Forty percent of the classroom
time but it's on their laptop. They can also do it at home.
They can do it at other places in the building. We've had
wireless put in so it's very easy and very assessable for them
to make use of it. They're not just sitting there with a
textbook and paper and pencil anymore. So it gets them engaged.
They get excited. It's almost more like the games that they're
going to do on their Playstations and so forth but it's
technology and they're really interested and involved in that.
Other people have addressed the special education, the
special needs children. We have started a collaborative
teaching process in which we do have a special education
teacher and a content teacher working together at the same time
in the same classroom. And with that process, the teachers plan
together. The special education teacher presents some of the
content. The content teacher works with the special ed
students. It's like two for one and you can't really tell if
there is that much difference between the two teachers. All
students benefit from it. Anybody that is in the classroom gets
the extra help that they need and they just feel more
comfortable. They're not the outsider or they don't feel
embarrassed to be there. They really enjoy the classes.
We also, because of this, have a lot of staff development
going on. The teachers have to be instructed on how to use this
new technology. They had to be willing to use it. It doesn't do
any good if the teachers are sitting there with a laptop and
they're closed. So the teachers do get training in that and
they are very open to it. They're very successful with it. Out
of the Governor's Academies that Maryland has offered, we've
had 16 of our teachers attend just last summer and they brought
back to the others, teachers in the department, what they
learned--shared the activities, shared how to use the computers
and all the technology that is out there.
With that, our attendance rate has really improved. We're
up--at a high school, our attendance rate is 94.7 percent,
which is very good. The graduation rate is 90.85 percent, which
is increasing at all times. So between the computers, teachers
working together, the new schedule--we have a four-by-four
block that is 90-minute classes so teachers could teach 90
minutes and really get their attention, get them focused. They
wouldn't have to leave after 40 minutes so that helped. This
year, we did go to a hybrid schedule and some of the classes
are 90 minutes while some are 60 minutes and the 60-minute
classes go all year and that focuses on our high school
assessment classes, so again, students who learn at a different
rate anyway, get more time and can focus on that material.
As for the data, we started using Performance Matters. That
puts all the data from our classes and I can access my
students, how they've performed on the math, how they did on
the English, what they've done in other classes. Just turn on
the computer, analyze it, see how that is going to help me see
where their strengths are, see where their weaknesses are.
We've also put in Parent Connect, which is a way for
parents to contact the school and look at their grades and
their discipline records and their improvement and what's
lacking and so many times a parent will call and say, ``Well I
see Johnny got a zero in such and such. What happened? Why did
he do it?'' So the students know the parents can check it a lot
faster, get back to the teachers and therefore that keeps them
on task. They are more engaged and wanting to get the
information done.
So the major thing with the laptops is engagement, so that
we can have the students involved because they all do learn at
different rates. They're not carbon copies and they have
different interests. However, the challenges are keeping the
teachers there because there is so much work they have to do,
the retention rate is not very good. So we have to encourage
them and give them mentors, give them ways to stay in the
profession and learn all the technology along with the
students.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Turner follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alana Dale Turner
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for inviting
me to speak with you today. It's with great pride that I tell you I
have been a classroom teacher of mathematics for 30 years, and I
currently teach geometry at Easton High School in Easton, Maryland. I
graduated from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville Campus, with a
Bachelor of Science in Education and hold an Advanced Professional
Certificate in general science and mathematics for grades 5 through 12.
I am pleased to be with you here today to discuss some school
improvement strategies that have worked at my school, including student
engagement, intensive professional development, after-school hours for
extra help, and the school's one-to-one laptop initiative (every 9th
and 10th grader is given a laptop). In addition, it is important to
recognize that every student is different and that teachers have to
make content relevant to all of them--they are not robots, they can't
be taught in the same way.
I was asked to focus my comments on two areas of questioning, as
follows:
Question 1. What specific strategies, programs or policies have
been effective in addressing the progress of school improvement? What
outcomes or progress have been made as a result of these strategies?
Answer 1. Easton High School in Talbot County, Maryland, has
implemented the one-to-one laptop initiative. We are using the Carnegie
Learning Cognitive Tutor Programs for Bridges to Algebra, Algebra I and
Geometry. The laptop initiative allows students to access these
programs at any time rather than just during math class time. So,
students who need help can go online anytime, anywhere and access the
tutoring programs in these math subjects. What I've seen with the
laptop initiative is amazing--the students are more engaged in their
education because they're using tools that are part of their daily
lives outside of school. The world has changed, so we as educators need
to change to respond to the needs of our students. One of the most
critical aspects of helping any student, particularly one who is
struggling, is to find innovative and creative ways to make the content
come alive for that student. Keeping them interested and engaged is one
of the most important things we do in the classroom--and it's an
essential ingredient in increasing student learning and achievement.
Educators need the support to make lesson plans and individualized
instructions more relevant to every student. That's a key element to
success for every child.
We have also established an extra help class for identified
students so they may get extra help and time on algebra within the
school day. We have also implemented a pullout and after-school
intervention program to help students prepare for the High School
Assessments (HSA). These supports are offered to ensure that every
child has access to the tools they need to succeed in school. The use
of technology to help students stay focused on academics during out-of-
school time is beneficial. The other after-school initiative is that
all teachers have after-school hours, so that students can drop in
anytime for extra help.
We have aligned our curriculum to the Voluntary State Curriculum
and there has been significant growth in the enrollment of our Advanced
Placement (AP) courses. Maryland School Assessments (MSA), Scholastic
Assessment Tests (SAT) and AP data show appropriate services are in
place for Gifted and Talented students.
We undertook these strategies because it is paramount that the
curriculum is aligned with State standards and that assessments be
aligned with the curriculum and instruction provided to students. We
know that all students should have access to a rigorous, comprehensive
education that includes critical thinking, problem solving, high-level
communication and literacy skills, and a deep understanding of content.
Curriculum must be aligned with standards and assessments, and should
include more than what can be assessed on a paper and pencil multiple
choice test.
At Easton, we know that high-quality staff development is critical
to keep pace with the increased academic standards. Sixteen teachers
attended the HSA Governor's Academies. There is continual mandatory
professional development given on the use of technology in the
classroom. In addition, more teachers are taking AP Training. The
higher standards are meeting more of our students' needs. Our
attendance rate has improved to 94.7 percent and is above the State
targets. Our graduation rate has increased to 90.85 percent, which
exceeds the Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) of 80.99 percent.
While these results are impressive, we are not resting on our
laurels because there is more work to do. Academic standards are
updated periodically and educators need to keep pace with developments
in education that will help us do our jobs better. In addition, I
believe there should be federally funded salary incentives for teachers
who achieve National Board Certification, with additional compensation
for teachers with specific knowledge and skills who take on new roles
to assist their colleagues. Furthermore, we should expand opportunities
for education support professionals to broaden and enhance their skills
and knowledge, including compensation for taking additional courses or
doing course work for advanced degrees.
At Easton, special education services are delivered in the
inclusive setting of the regular classroom using a collaborative
teaching model. All schools in Talbot County met Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) for this population. Our English Language Learners (ELL)
have additional teacher time for direct instruction. We have a full-
time ESOL-trained teacher in the building. The MSA and HSA performance
of our ELL students is generally improving. These results show what can
be done with a commitment to improvements as well as the necessary
resources to meet goals. Providing adequate funding to develop and
improve appropriate assessments for students with disabilities and
English Language Learner students is imperative.
We have moved from the 4 x 4 block schedule to a hybrid schedule
having 45-minute, 60-minute, and 90-minute classes. The 60-minute
classes are year-long and are mainly the HSA subjects. This gives
students more time to learn and absorb the material covered. The school
will then only need to give the HSAs once a year instead of twice a
year so less class time is disrupted.
During the 2005-2006 school year, Talbot County implemented
Performance Matters, an online data management system for
administrators and teachers. The program will integrate local
assessment data with MSA data and local benchmarks so administrators
and teachers will be able to monitor the progress of their students.
Once teachers learn the program, it will be a very beneficial tool for
teachers and help save them time. In other words, the time for
``assessment literacy'' has come, with educators and parents needing to
know about some of the details of assessments so that they can ensure
that students have the requisite knowledge as they prepare for
assessments.
Parents can use ParentConnect to check their student's progress in
any class, their attendance, and their discipline record. They can also
e-mail teachers directly with the program. With more parent involvement
and support, students are challenged to do better work. In addition, we
encourage parents to get involved in other aspects of the school, with
the goal of having programs and resources for the school to become the
hub of the community. To smooth the transition to a parental
involvement model, we recommend that as a requirement for professional
development programs funded through ESEA, educators receive training in
the skills and knowledge needed for effective parental and family
communication and engagement strategies.
Question 2. What challenges did you encounter in your school
improvement efforts, and how did you address those challenges?
Answer. 2. The number one challenge is funding. Improving the level
of technology available--wireless, projectors, laptops--is expensive.
Providing ongoing training for teachers is mandatory and expensive.
Upkeep of such an elaborate system is expensive. We do get some funding
for the Board of Education through the City Council and from business
partners, but it's not enough to meet our needs.
I'm proud to be a member of an association that has put together
such a comprehensive, positive agenda for reauthorizing the ESEA law.
That agenda is very clear: educators, like you Mr. Chairman, believe
full funding of ESEA programs is essential for improving our schools.
In addition, if we truly are going to demonstrate our commitment to
school improvement, the budget should reflect that goal by establishing
a separate ESEA funding stream for school improvement programs to
assist districts and schools, and adequate funds so that students have
the benefit of assessments that measure higher order thinking skills.
The new demands on teachers are becoming astronomical. This causes
frustration, burnout, and low retention rates. Besides teaching,
teachers have extra pressure on them to get every child to meet high
standards on one assessment (humanly impossible ones in some cases).
They have to learn and use new technology, which involves time and
equipment. They have to keep extensive data to show progress at all
times, which takes time. They are held accountable for their students'
results. They have to continually earn credits to maintain their
certificate, which again takes time and money. With more demands being
put on teachers, we do not have a high retention rate. A lot of
educators leave the field within 5 years. That increases the size of
classes and the demands for those remaining, which in turn adds to the
frustration and burnout rate.
Keys to turning this situation around include:
Providing States and school districts with the resources
and technical assistance to create an effective program of professional
development and professional accountability for all employees;
Providing Federal grants that encourage districts and
schools to assist new teachers by pairing them with an experienced
mentor teacher in a shared classroom;
Providing financial incentives--both direct Federal
subsidies and tax credits--for retention, relocation, and housing for
teachers and support professionals who work in schools identified as
``in need of improvement'' or high-poverty schools, and stay in such
schools for at least 5 years; and
Providing hard-to-staff schools with an adequate number of
well-trained administrators and support professionals, including
education support professionals, counselors, social workers, school
nurses, psychologists, and clerical support.
It is not easy to turn around schools that are struggling to meet
their goals; however, our students deserve no less. Working
collaboratively, policymakers, educators, and administrators can
implement strategies that will help schools become better so that
students reach their full potential.
The Chairman. Paul. Paul Reville.
STATEMENT OF PAUL REVILLE, PRESIDENT, RENNIE CENTER FOR
EDUCATION RESEARCH AND POLICY, CAMBRIDGE, MA
Mr. Reville. Thank you, Chairman Kennedy and Senator Enzi
and members of the committee. I'm grateful for the opportunity
to have a chance to talk with you today. There are a variety of
issues that merit attention in the reauthorization of No Child
Left Behind, among them fixes to the accountability system,
improvements in the way in which we measure progress and
success, coherent strategies for the improvement of teaching,
more focus on early childhood education and other prevention
strategies and extended learning time for both teachers and
students but the specific focus of my testimony today is to
focus on this issue of State capacity to meet the needs of the
growing number of districts and schools who have been declared
in need of improvement, corrective action or reconstitution.
These State agencies are a step removed from the testimony
we've been hearing today but after all, the intermediate unit
that exists between the Federal Government and the schools and
districts that we've been hearing about this morning are sorely
in need of attention.
I think the imposition of an accountability system in
public education then creates sort of moral imperative as well
as an educational imperative that if we are going to point out
and call to public attention matters of under performance in
schools, we need at the same time, then to have the capacity to
help rectify that situation of under performance. My colleague
at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, Dick Elmarr, calls
it reciprocal accountability. For each additional element of
expectation we add to a school system, we have to provide a
concurrent element of growth in their capacity to meet that new
standard or the accountability system really isn't genuine.
This is a tall order when we think of State education
agencies because historically, they've been compliance
agencies. They are relatively modest in size. They have no
political constituency in most of our State that promote State
education agencies. But under standards-based reform, there are
responsibilities that are arguably tripled. They have to set
the standards. They have to develop assessments and
accountability systems and at the same time, they are now being
looked to provide support in matters of school improvement.
Yet at the same time, they lack the resources, the
personnel and often the expertise to carry out their critical
support and technical assistance functions.
We looked at this matter in Massachusetts, the Rennie
Center, a couple of years back, the State education agencies
were all in intervention and Massachusetts is a fairly high
reform, high performance State in terms of standards-based
school reform and still, we found some significant issues.
For example, in 2004, we had 376 of roughly 1,400 schools
identified for performance deficits and the State was capable
of providing review to roughly 16 of those schools. There were
132 districts so identified. The State was able to provide
review and support services to 17. Now in 2006, our numbers
have gone up to 629 schools identified, a jump from 420 in 2005
and we've had no concurrent increase in State capacity to meet
these needs and there are other States who have far more
schools and districts as a percentage classified than we do.
In our study, we asked our superintendents what they need
from the State in order to realize the ambition of education
reform, which is, after all, all students of proficiency and
not surprisingly, they referenced the kinds of things that
you've been hearing from other members of the panel today. More
help on curriculum and instruction. More professional
development. More help in developing leaders and a pipeline of
leadership for public schools and increased learning time for
both teachers and students.
Again, a tall order for a State where the State education
agency staff is roughly half of what it was in the mid-1980s,
when again, their responsibilities have roughly tripled. The
State education agencies' budget, which is a share of all State
spending, is now less than one quarter of 1 percent. So there
isn't a substantial commitment there. Indeed, the Boston Public
Schools, it serves 6.5 percent of all the students in the
Commonwealth and has an administrative staff that is larger
than that of the State Department of Education.
So as I say, Massachusetts is simply an illustration of a
broader, larger problem. We've done some national survey work
on this and again, the needs that emerge from schools and
districts, the needs that they articulate for help from State
education agencies have to do with strengthening the support
and assistance in the area of planning and implementation,
helping to develop leadership and pipelines for new leaders,
providing better, more thorough, more timely, usable data on
student performance, helping to develop curriculum and identify
promising curriculum and instructional supports, providing
meaningful, quality embedded professional development at school
sites and focus on building the capacity of districts as the
intermediate agencies between the State and the school to
develop their own internal district capacity to help in school
improvement.
So by way of conclusion, in 2005 and 2006, when we look out
there on the school improvement landscape, 26 percent of the
Nation's schools are now not meeting AYP. Fourteen percent are
in need of improvement, three percent more in corrective
action. We're moving toward a goal in 2014 of 100 percent at
proficiency so we can expect the number of schools and
districts in need to grow exponentially. So it is crucial that
State education agencies receive the support that they need to
assist schools with identified performance problems.
No Child Left Behind's aspirations are in jeopardy without
attention to the issues of limited SEA capacity that I've
described. We are now trying to do a new job in public
education. We once did a job where it was okay for just a few
students to reach proficiency. We've now declared our goal to
be all students at proficiency and we're getting serious about
that but we can't do it by raising the bar alone. We've got to
provide the support, the technical assistance, the guidance and
direction that educators need if they are to realize this
incredibly ambitious goal in education, which serves all our
children. So I thank you for your time and attention and I urge
you to attend to this issue of the resources needed to build
State education agency capacity.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Reville follows:]
Prepared Statement of Paul Reville
The Challenges of Building State Capacity
introduction
The context in which State education agencies (SEAs) operate has
changed significantly in the last 5 years. Once focused primarily on
compliance monitoring, SEA's, as a result of No Child Left Behind and a
variety of State-level initiatives, have been thrust into a new leading
role in the implementation of standards-based reform. SEA's now set
standards, design and implement systems of assessment and
accountability, and attempt to provide support and capacity building
services for improvement efforts in schools and districts throughout
their States. While this unprecedented shift in direction from
compliance to service provider might seem sufficiently challenging in
itself, State departments of education have to grapple with the
realities of meeting the needs of a growing number of schools while
being woefully under-resourced, under-staffed and generally unprepared
to meet these new challenges.
the context
State education agencies are sailing in uncharted waters. The logic
of standards-based accountability systems has changed the environment,
calling for schools and districts to be held accountable for getting
all students to higher levels of proficiency, necessitating that robust
support services be provided to enable ``underperforming'' schools to
reach the mandated standards. Thus, SEAs, having designed these
accountability systems, are now responsible for providing resources and
support to local schools and districts and for leading school
improvement efforts. The problem is that SEAs, generally, have
relatively little historical knowledge or skill in school improvement.
In addition, little research has been done on State and district
supports or interventions in low-performing schools, so these SEAs have
virtually no place to turn to build their knowledge and skills.
SEAs and districts are also operating in an environment with
diminished resources where funding levels have not kept pace with the
increasing demands. States simply have not adequately funded their
departments of education to meet these growing needs. This lack of
resources also relates to human resources. State department of
education staff members, with their history of monitoring compliance,
often do not possess the skills necessary to provide support and
guidance for improving schools and districts. In addition, the salaries
and working conditions for SEA employees are often far below market
value, leading to a dearth of qualified applicants for SEA positions.
Finally, the size of the State department of education staff is often
significantly lower than the number required to adequately serve all
the schools and districts in need of improvement.
Compounding the challenge, NCLB accountability measures are
identifying an increased number of low-performing schools and districts
and these numbers will likely continue to grow, along with the speed
with which improvements must be made. According to the Center on
Education Policy, in school year 2005-2006, 26 percent of schools in
the Nation were not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) with 14
percent of schools deemed in need of improvement and 3 percent in
corrective action. As the AYP targets continue to increase toward the
goal of 100 percent proficiency for all students in reading and math by
2014, the number of schools deemed in need of improvement and thus in
need of support and resources is certain to steadily rise.
At the same time, school districts are struggling with their own
capacity issues. At the district level, leaders are working to create a
culture focused on results and committed to instructional improvement
that can be sustained over time. District leaders are striving to align
critical policies to guide practice, support improvement and provide
the appropriate resources to implement the needed reforms. Districts
are increasingly striving to use data and evidence to drive decisions
and revise strategies. Clear expectations about classroom practice are
another area of focus along with complementary supports for teacher
learning and adequate investments in professional development. Finally,
districts are struggling to develop communities of practice in the
central office and in schools so that the entire staff shares a common
vision of good practice and beliefs about teaching and learning. (The
Education Alliance, 2005).
In this new context, both SEAs and districts are faced with
challenges and choices when it comes to allocating resources in ways
that are appropriate to the level of need. Both also struggle to
determine the intensity and duration of support required by each school
under their supervision.
reaching capacity: massachusetts case study
In 2005, the Rennie Center undertook a modest research project to
analyze the status of the State's capacity to meet the growing needs of
schools in need of improvement. The key research question was: What
components are needed in a State system to support low-performing
schools & districts? We conducted interviews with superintendents,
principals, State DOE & policymakers and talked with leaders in other
States and internationally as well as performing a literature & web
review. From this research, we proposed recommendations for
improvements to the current system and carried out a cost analysis of
the impact of the proposed changes.
We found that while 376 schools had been identified for performance
deficits in school year 2003-2004, only 16 schools had been reviewed by
the State. One hundred thirty-two districts had been identified, but
only seventeen were reviewed. The State simply does not have the
resources to review the number of schools identified for improvement
and, to compound the problem, the number of these schools continues to
grow. In 2006, 629 schools were identified as compared with 420 in 2005
and 376 in 2004.
When we asked superintendents what services they would need to add,
expand or improve to get all students to proficiency, almost all
superintendents interviewed cited professional development and
curriculum support as areas of need. Support in data and assessment and
increased time on learning were close seconds.
We asked superintendents to report on the degree to which they
found the budget crisis to be an obstacle to improvement. Seventy-nine
percent of those interviewed cited the budget crisis as a problem.
This case study also analyzed Massachusetts' total education budget
versus the DOE budget and found that the DOE's percent of the total
budget had decreased from .44 percent of the total in 1994 to .24
percent of the total in 2004. Instead of receiving more resources
commensurate with an increased role, the DOE has received a diminished
proportion of resources from the State and a reduction in its capacity
to meet a growing set of demands.
Next, we looked at the size of the staff at the DOE and found that
in 1980, the DOE had 990 employees, and in 2005 the DOE employed 510
staff. Although the DOE's responsibilities had arguably doubled over
that time period, the staffing had been reduced by nearly half. As a
comparison, the Boston Public Schools central office employs 548
administrators to oversee a district of approximately 60,000 students
or 6.5 percent of the State's student enrollment.
Finally, our case study examined the median annual salary of DOE
employees as compared with public school teachers and administrators
and found that the median salary for DOE specialists, coordinators, and
managers was nearly $10,000/year below the median salary of a teacher
and nearly $25,000/year below the median salary of principals.
Based on our research and interviews with those in the field, we
made a set of recommendations for building the State's capacity to
support districts and schools in need of improvement. We recommended
that the State provide curriculum & professional development by
increasing its leadership and guidance in helping districts select
curricular programs and professional development providers. We also
recommended that the State increase its role in the area of data and
assessment, providing districts with data and help in analyzing it.
Leadership and strategic planning was another critical area in which we
recommended that State increase its role--especially in terms of
building administrative capacity and developing a pipeline of new
leaders. Last, we recommended that the State seriously consider funding
additional learning time for both teachers and students as an added
resource for schools and districts seeking to improve.
We concluded our report with recommendations for the State
department of education's infrastructure. We suggested refining and
improving the State's intervention process to make it more of a service
for schools and districts. This also implies that the DOE adopt a
``service-mentality'' where they listen and respond to the needs of
schools and districts. We advised that the SEA focus on improving the
quality of staffing by addressing the inequities of the pay scale and
reducing bureaucratic hurdles in the hiring process. We also encouraged
the DOE to foster more capacity-building efforts at the regional level
by exploring partnerships with educational collaboratives and local
education funds. Finally, we recommended that the department create a
research mechanism to support State-level decisionmaking.
key components of an effective statewide system of support
Through our work in Massachusetts and a more recent national survey
of State initiatives, we have developed a list of key components for
statewide systems of support. These components provide a model for SEAs
as they seek to meet the diverse needs of schools and districts.
It is important to note that before States develop key components
of an effective system of support, they must develop a coherent
strategy designed to achieve critical and well-defined goals. SEAs must
have in place a ``theory of action''--a collective belief about causal
relationships between action and desired outcomes--to guide their work
and ensure that it is focused and directly tied to the needs of schools
(Public Education Leadership Project at Harvard University).
As mandated in the NCLB legislation, the first key component of any
statewide system of support is planning and implementation. In this
phase, the SEA works with schools and districts to help them identify
root causes and develop and implement action steps to effectively
address challenges. A critical aspect of this phase is differentiating
the level of support provided to each school/district based on their
individual needs rather than creating a ``one-size-fits-all'' approach
to school improvement.
Leadership support is another critical component and includes
building instructional leadership that is focused on results, as well
as developing ``professional learning communities'' among all school/
district staff, and addressing the supply of new leaders. Leadership
support might take the form of leadership coaches, mentor principals or
a program that creates a pipeline of new leaders.
Schools and districts are also in need of better access to and use
of data--especially at the school level--so that data can be used to
inform instruction. SEAs must provide systems that produce timely and
useable data and must support schools in the use of that data to drive
decisions and instructional strategies. This might include developing
formative and benchmark assessments tied to State standards, providing
professional development in classroom-based analysis of student data
for instructional improvement or developing State assessments based on
growth.
Curriculum and instructional support are other critical areas of
support. This type of support includes providing guidance in curriculum
selection and content area professional development. States must also
play a role in providing support for improving teachers' practice and
pedagogy so that they receive support in both the content and the
skills necessary to teach that content well.
A related component is professional development, which includes
supporting the development of communities of practice and ongoing,
embedded professional development focused on improving instruction and
increasing student achievement. The State might provide guidance on
professional development providers as well as providing incentives for
schools to make time for regular professional development for teachers.
SEAs also need to provide assistance to districts by focusing on
building district-level capacity. The State can assist in building
district leadership to support school- and classroom-level improvement
through professional development focused on student achievement for
superintendents and other central office leaders, assistance in
developing district improvement plans based on meeting diverse needs of
individual schools, and conducting central office reviews.
conclusion
It is crucial that State departments of education receive the
support needed to assist schools in need of improvement. Without urgent
attention to limited capacity issues at the State level, the promise of
education reform that is at the heart of No Child Left Behind is in
jeopardy. Standards-based accountability asks educators to reach higher
than they have ever reached to bring not just some, but ALL students to
proficiency. With these increased expectations comes an obligation to
provide the resources and support to realize these new goals. As States
are being asked to do more with less, the future of our Nation's youth
hangs in the balance. We know that these laudable goals are within
reach, now we must provide the capacity building assistance to make
them reality.
The Chairman. Well, thank you very much. Marvelous panel,
covering a wide variety of different subject matters but I
think we are all impressed about the quality of the people that
have testified. We can see at least why you're such leaders in
your community and why you're such successes.
Well, we've got a participation here but we're limited to 5
minutes so people get a chance to ask just a couple of
questions.
Paul, to help and assist the States, we had 4 percent
allocation of title I. If the title I was going to expand, 22
States but the title I has gone down so the States aren't
getting that resource. And then there was the authorization for
school improvement, which has never been funded and the
continuing resolution now is $125 million on the school
improvement.
Maybe at some time, you might have some recommendations,
specific recommendations of how we might--whether those are
satisfactory ways of trying to help the States do the kinds of
things that you've outlined here and that have been mentioned
here. If those aren't the ways to do it, if you have other
suggestions, just very, very quickly.
Mr. Reville. Yes, I'd be happy to work on the specifics of
that. I think the State education agencies would welcome any
increased commitment of resources and support. I was talking
with Gene Willhoyt, the Executive Director of the Chief's Day
School Officers, Mike's colleagues, this morning and the Chiefs
nationally, are very concerned about this and very eager to
work with you on outlining an approach to providing the kind of
additional support in key areas that I've talked about.
The Chairman. Mr. Coleman, you've mentioned about your
Saturdays, 25 Saturdays. You talk about your extended day.
We've done that in Massachusetts. We've had really important
success in Richmond programs where that extra hour or hour and
a half--we've got a number of different schools, graduation
rates, promotion rates and all the rest. What has been the
reaction? Give us the reaction to the Saturdays, the extended
times. Give us the reaction from the students, from the
teachers and from the parents and from the community, just
quickly, if you would, please. And the results, too, quickly.
Mr. Coleman. The reactions have been interesting. One of
the things we've taught our children and I talked earlier about
the social structure, the academic and the moral and the belief
system. We've taught our children to believe how important
education is so when we talk about coming to Saturday School
and they come from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., our children typically
wear uniforms but they're allowed to wear their regular clothes
on Saturdays and we've taught them that it's important to
extend their learning and we've tried to motivate them to get
excited about coming to Saturday School, just so they can
master the work. So self integrity, looking at their future,
being visionaries--Saturday School supports that kind of a
theme.
From our parents, certainly our parents have been very
supportive of Saturday School because it takes the kids out of
the house.
[Laughter.]
We have busses that--I mean, there is a cost factor. We
have the school busses that pick the children up to come to
Saturday School but when we have an environment where children
enjoy learning and they're taught that the culture of the
building is positive, we find--what I've found over the years,
particularly when I was principal of the school, when I was
handing the letters to children that were going to Saturday
School, the ones that were not invited were sometimes insulted.
So that's the kind of culture that we've tried to establish
with the extended learning.
One of our challenges has been when our kids leave 8th
grade and go into high school, they go to one of our local high
schools and they are not--the expectations have changed and we
don't have the extended learning. We don't have the extended--
the longer day. We don't have the Saturday School. We don't
have the intersessions. We've seen significant changes in
student performance.
Student performance with our children in grades
kindergarten through 8th grade have been significantly higher
than the children in the rest of our school district because of
the additional extended learning time. Ninety-six percent of
our kids, as I mentioned earlier, are on free or reduced lunch.
Ninety-seven percent of them are African-American children and
we've out-performed the other kids in the district. We've
closed the achievement gap because of the amount of time on
task.
Now, more time, if we're not using strong strategies, more
time and money really doesn't help us. But using money
effectively and using our time and resources based on the data,
it has had a significant impact on our test scores. We've made
adequate yearly progress, of course, every year and we've been
fully accredited. So it makes a significant difference for our
children and our parents.
The Chairman. Fifteen seconds, Paul and then I'll yield to
the Senator.
Mr. Reville. Mr. Chairman, once when I was a member of the
State Board of Education in Massachusetts, I had the
opportunity to chair the Massachusetts Commission on Time and
Learning and it seems to me, a central business of education
reform now and the reauthorization is to reconsider this time
paradigm in education. The notion that we can get all students
to proficiency when they begin at such very different levels,
by providing everybody the same amount of time and the same
educational treatment is an illusion we can't afford any
longer. So I think one of the last frontiers of education
reform has got to be breaking the time barrier and giving
children the amount of time and the kind of instruction they
need to get to proficiency.
The Chairman. Excellent.
Senator Enzi.
Senator Enzi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and I really want to
thank all of you for participating in this and I hope that you
will continue to participate in our process. We always
encourage Senators to submit written questions. Sometimes those
are more detailed than they want to ask in a public situation.
You've been a wealth of information and I have a whole bunch of
questions here that I'd like to get a little bit more
specificity from you on them so that I can understand it better
as we go through this process.
It's easy to see why the schools that you work with are
successful. I appreciate the ideas and your willingness to
share them so that we can make sure that all the kids in the
country have the opportunity to succeed. It's very exciting to
listen to this.
Ms. Mahaley-Johnson, the turnaround schools. I've got a
whole bunch of questions, but I did note that you're paying 25
percent more to teachers who are national board-certified and
have a record of excellence. That's outstanding. We're trying
to get more nationally board-certified teachers in Wyoming and
there is kind of a competition across the country to see who
can get the highest percentage of those teachers. But a 25
percent bonus for teachers teaching in the schools that need it
the most equals a bonus of $10,000. I'm disappointed that the
Omnibus appropriations bill that we're going to be dealing with
in a few days, has eliminated funding for teacher incentive
pay. So we'll have to see if we can do something to re-
institute that money.
Ms. Turner, I'm going to have to get more information from
you on the Carnegie Tutor Program on math that works on a
laptop and has helped these kids. I'm sure there are a lot of
programs out there that we don't even know about and this
concept of having a laptop for each of the kids over a period
of 4 years, that has to put quite a stress on resources.
Ms. Turner. Yes, it does, but we have a lot of community
support. We have businesses supporting us. We have the City
Council. They finally bought into it after the long talk of our
superintendent. They had background support that it was really
good work but it really engages the students and it helps them
do it at their own pace. Like they were saying, everybody
doesn't learn at the same rate. But they can use it on their
own time, use it in the classroom, use it with other teachers.
So it's really been good. It's through Carnegie Learning, is
the one we use. But as you mentioned, there are others out
there that are available.
Senator Enzi. I'll have to get some more information on
that, too and I hadn't realized until Ms. Kimberly Johnson
mentioned that teachers, as part of the curriculums, are going
through the school year and don't get their students' data
analysis. They may now but I can tell from all of your
testimony how important being able to analyze what the kids are
doing is for improving instruction.
Mr. Coleman, I'll give you a specific question, here. You
were mentioning this increased school day from 8:15 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. and 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Saturdays. I assume that the
compensation covers the extra days and extra hours?
Mr. Coleman. Yes, it does. We pay teachers about $4,000
more per year for the extended day. They get paid by the hour
for Saturday School. During these intersessions that I
mentioned in this year-round or balanced calendar, they are
also paid by the hour to come in and teach. So we have to have
committed teachers that understand what the mission is.
Senator Enzi. How does that set with the rest of the
district?
Mr. Coleman. Well, there was one other school in our
district that had a balanced calendar also and many places, we
find that--many people have come into public education because
people think we have our summers off and we go home at 3
o'clock and that's just not the case. What we're finding is
that teachers need to be compensated for the additional hours
because in many cases, they're in the school. What we do is
provide the opportunities for the teachers and the children to
be at the school at the same time so that they can get the
extended day. For our teachers that come on Saturday, sometimes
we have teachers from our building. Other times, we have
teachers from neighboring schools or school districts that come
and work on Saturdays as well.
I think that for the most part, teachers understand that
again, children do not process at the same speeds and because
of the clientele that we have coming to our school, we
recognize that we need the additional time and so it's just
part of our mission and we've gained agreement in capacity
within those adults in our district that it's something that is
necessary and something that our district has--the new school
district has supported. It's part of a partnership that was
established when An Achievable Dream was established.
Senator Enzi. Thank you very much. As I said, I've got just
a bunch of questions for all of you. I come from a mining
community so I'm going to try and mine this wealth of knowledge
that you have and make use of it. We have several other people
that are here that would like to ask questions, so I'll yield.
The Chairman. Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
Senator Enzi and thank you for a very informative presentation
by the panelists.
Ms. Johnson, one of the--we're working on the No Child Left
Behind Act but it tends to intersect with other provisions and
other acts and one was the Higher Education Act. I understand
Chicago has an Urban Teaching Residency Program.
Ms. Johnson. We do.
Senator Reed. Which is, as I understand, a mentoring model
based upon the, sort of roughly, internships like they do for
medical professionals. Can you comment upon that? How
successful is it? How much has it contributed to enhanced
professional development?
Ms. Johnson. Yes. Well, it's been incredibly successful and
I'm happy to see Senator Obama here and I notice--he knows a
lot about the program. So it's been around for several years,
at least 5 and we have lots of data that shows that the
individuals who have gone through that mentorship program, that
training program, are making a difference. What is unique about
it is that the teachers are specifically trained to go into
challenged communities and unlike schools of education, the
individuals who are participating are mid-career professionals
who often come with other talents and skills and a level of
maturity that you don't necessarily find from recent graduates.
So we have lots of data, which I could share with you on the
effectiveness of the program. But we do use it in our
Turnaround Schools.
Senator Reed. And you collaborate with postsecondary,
higher education institutions?
Ms. Johnson. Yes. So there is a partnership with National
Lewis University. The way it works is that the individuals
apply for this program. There are several hundred who apply
every year and about 30 are accepted. They are given a $30,000
stipend for participating in the program and the Academy of
Urban School Leadership is partnered with National Lewis
University so they also leave with a Masters Degree and
Certification. One other aspect is that they get two
experiences. They work in a school in one of our--I would say
wealthier communities in Chicago. They spend half their time
there and then they spend half their time in a more challenging
neighborhood.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much.
Ms. Johnson. You're welcome.
Senator Reed. Let me follow up with Ms. Johnson, the issue
of professional development and Senator Enzi alluded to the
national board certification issues--Kimberly Johnson. I've got
my--I'm confusing myself, forgive me.
Kimberly, how many teachers in your school do you have
pursing the national board certification?
Ms. Johnson. I currently have three.
Senator Reed. Out of, I'm told, 115?
Ms. Johnson. Total staff, professional staff, about 75.
Senator Reed. Seventy-five. And how can we get more
teachers to do this? Do you have any ideas or alternatively,
why are those three teachers pursuing this credential?
Ms. Johnson. To be very honest with you, with all of the
data analysis and all of the standards and all of the
expectations on making highly qualified status, teachers are
overwhelmed. And there are a lot of pieces that go into
teaching students on a daily basis whereas you no longer have a
classroom of 30 students. You have a classroom of 30 students
that fit into subgroups that then have special needs and other
outside factors. So it's no longer the profession of teaching
just 30 and as you said, going home at 3 o'clock. It's just--
teachers are overwhelmed. I would think that you would need to
provide an incentive for compensation, Senator Enzi just
mentioned. But they are doing the after-school programs,
they're doing the Saturday School programs. They are working to
capacity at this point.
Senator Reed. So those three are just, for their own
reasons, want to go on to----
Ms. Johnson. Professional development, additional. They
have Masters degrees and they don't want to go into
administration.
Senator Reed. Yes, very good. Just in general, can you
comment on the environment of professional development in your
school, Kimberly? It's so central to what I think we all want
to do. That's the great lever, I think, in terms of making
this--going from where we are with No Child Left Behind
forward.
Ms. Johnson. Definitely and I actually review data on a
monthly basis, if not sooner. We receive reports on all
benchmarks within curriculum so that before we get to State
testing, we should know how a student is performing. We also
use data analysis and all of the data analysis comes by way of
professional development. There is a process that my staff
developer teaches the content area teachers to look at their
data because essentially, to some, it's just numbers on a page
whereas to me, it's like opening the bible and reading from
there and understanding why life is the way it is. So teachers
do get that professional development and using the data but the
data that they use has to be every day, all day and they have
to be supported by a staff developer. We have a full time staff
developer who is fully released to work with teachers and using
data. That would be our primary focus through the lens of their
particular content.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. Very interesting.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really
appreciate the comments from the panelists. When I first looked
at where everyone was from, I was concerned that this was going
to be a real urban perspective and coming from a largely rural
State, perhaps I wouldn't be gaining much from it. But I have
to tell you, I'm walking away with great pearls of wisdom that
I'm going to take north with me.
I'm very curious about the Urban Teacher Residency Program.
We've got challenges in the State where we have teachers who
are fully prepared to come and teach in a normal classroom and
they get out to a very remote village, different issues facing
them, not the least of which are their teaching challenges. But
perhaps if we could have some kind of an urban residency
teacher program that some from the more rural States could
collaborate on, that might give us some ideas.
I want to ask you and anybody may speak up on this. One of
the challenges that we have faced in Alaska with our teacher
retention issue is we'll get bright young energetic individuals
ready to come and then within their first 2 years, they decide,
``I'm not being paid enough. This isn't what I thought it was
going to be.'' And it really has affected our ability to retain
good teachers in the State. We have recently focused on a
mentoring program that allows for a pairing between a new
teacher and a sucessful, experienced teacher at least through
those first 3 years when teachers are making that decision
whether or not to stay within the teaching profession as a
career.
Can you speak to me or give me some ideas as to what you
are doing with specific mentoring within your schools that you
have seen to be productive or useful that you can share?
Dr. Brandon.
Ms. Brandon. Yes. We have developed a partnership with our
business community, for one, that provides incentives for our
new teachers to remain in----
Senator Murkowski. Financial incentives?
Ms. Brandon. Not financial but by way of low-interest loans
on cars, mortgage, some of the apartment owners have provided
reduced rental rates. We have a business partner who provides a
social atmosphere for our new teachers so that they can get to
know each other and bond and develop a support system because a
lot of our teachers come from outside of Richmond, outside of
the State.
With the shortages in mathematics, science and special
education, we've had to recruit from as far away as Jamaica. We
have a teacher who came to us from France. So we've expanded
our recruitment efforts. We also have an external and internal
mentoring program. We use retired teachers from the external
side. We use teachers within that same school from the internal
side to walk with the teachers, to support them. There are a
lot of challenges within the classroom and someone who is right
out of college, it's a matter of time management, balancing
what's important and then learning everything there is about
teaching. It's not like it was when I started 5 years ago. I
know I'm telling a tale--29 years ago. It wasn't like that. We
came in. We had the ability to teach a lot of things that we
felt that we were comfortable with. Now we're asking teachers
to expand beyond their level of comfort. Our elementary school
teachers are not very comfortable teaching math and science so
we have to engage them through professional development
activities and provide the content for those teachers and help
walk them through it, hold their hands, give them as much
support within a classroom as we possibly can.
Senator Murkowski. Anybody else? Mr. Flanagan.
Mr. Flanagan. Thank you, Senator. I want to bring into the
conversation about this, the university system, at least in
Michigan. We have 32 universities and college that produce
teachers and as a new State superintendent, a year ago, I asked
the deans to meet and we decided that--we have some leverage
with them on renewing their opportunity to do teacher education
and what we're working toward with them right now, to be blunt,
is they won't be renewed if they don't help us with this
mentoring issue. Parents pay 4 or 5 years tuition, sometimes 8
or 9 years tuition. My daughter is a first year high school
teacher right now, got out of what I think by even Ed Week and
others acclaim, that Michigan State is pretty much the top
teacher ed institution in the country. She's struggling. And we
still have a 50 percent--in effect, drop out rate, I think, in
our State and I bet most States are like that, that in 5 years,
most--about half the teachers leave. And she's been to this
excellent school, which it is, but without the follow up
mentoring that I think the universities are in a position to
help us with, we're going to have this same failure rate.
Senator Murkowski. So you haven't put into place yet, then,
where the university is assisting with the mentoring. You're
doing that currently, is that correct?
Mr. Flanagan. We're doing that currently but with the
result, they know that will be in place if they don't help us
make gains in that respect, we wouldn't renew them as teacher
ed institutions. And they're stepping up. I mean, I'm working
with a small panel of the deans right now but there is
tremendous--the reason I bring this up isn't so much a carrot--
it sounds more like the stick but the carrot is that
universities have tremendous resources in terms of people. I
mean, people that really get this and a lot of them have fine
mentor programs. But when you get the districts trying to
support their own with all the other work that we all require--
State agencies do, certainly No Child--appropriate work. It's
just a natural place that I would invite the committee to think
about in terms of trying to solve that problem, would be our
excellent universities.
Senator Murkowski. Ms. Turner, are you a mentor?
Ms. Turner. Yes.
Senator Murkowski. You are mentoring?
Ms. Turner. Yes, I'm a mentor for a math teacher. We
usually keep it in the department but it doesn't have to be and
I've helped the new teachers with the I Can Do It Program,
which is good for the first- to 5-year teacher. They go through
the program and they get to work with others. They get programs
that we follow and it's really been helpful. I think a lot of
the colleges need to improve on what they prepare the teachers
for because they're not really ready for the classroom when
they come out of college. So we need to work at that level.
The Chairman. If I could, we're told that we're going to
vote--probably, we were going to be at noon time but I think
it's going to be backed up a little bit. So we've got three
more Senators, if it's all right? Then we'll come back, if
that's okay?
Senator Murkowski. I appreciate it. I know that Dr. Barber
had wanted to just speak up.
The Chairman. Oh, well, please.
Ms. Barber. And probably causes what I do in my current
job--I'm a principal coach, which is a mentor. I coach
principals. In the State of Alabama, Reading Initiative and
with the Reading First grant, we have infused all of our
schools with onsite reading coaches. And these reading coaches
provide direct professional development to teachers and they
target those teachers who are new and who are at need. They
provide explicit--they model. They do the modeling for the
teachers and then they do the side-by-side with the teachers.
So those teachers are more comfortable because they have
somebody there, right there and they are working in the
environment in which we are expected to perform. It's not as
though they're going out somewhere. It's job embedded. And that
has proved to be a positive for us in the State of Alabama and
we've taken it to another level. They have hired 25 principal
coaches and we work with those principals on connecting the
instructional piece to the leadership piece. And working with
them on implementing those strategies--that's going to help
them move those teachers. When teachers are--and we don't do
the--not a lot of the tangible rewards but we feel that we take
them back to their original reason for going into education, to
make a difference in the lives of students. So when we're there
with them and they see the results--even before they change the
way--before they change their belief system. If we can get them
to change their behaviors and give it a chance that this
strategy might work. Once they change their behaviors and then
something works, then they start changing their beliefs. OK.
This is gratifying. I can do this. I can move these kids to
where they need to be. So throughout the State, we do--we have
a coaching process in place on all levels.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Obama.
Senator Obama. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
everybody here but I have to make a special commendation to Ms.
Mahaley-Johnson and the great work that is being done in
Chicago. I'm very familiar with some of the work that has been
done, Mr. Chairman, at the Teachers Academies in Chicago in
matching mentors to new teachers in the classroom and it's
working terrifically well.
I'll be very brief. It strikes me that part of the struggle
that Mr. Flanagan was referring to with his daughter--my sister
is a teacher, so she went through the same thing--is needing
that mentor. There are some other elements as well. Making sure
that teachers have some flexibility in the classroom. Providing
opportunities for professional development that are built into
the school day. An ongoing complaint and concern that I'm
hearing is the issue of assessment and making sure that even as
teachers are held to a high standard, that we have good tools
to define what teachers are performing well and which ones need
more help.
The interesting thing is I think there is pretty good
anecdotal information. If you poll teachers inside a school,
you'd probably get a pretty good sense of those who folks
consider to be good teachers and those that need some
assistance. But I think a lot of teachers tend to be skeptical
as to whether those are fully reflected in test scores alone,
so I'd first be interested in anybody's comments about either
how we can more effectively structure the school days and
curriculum to help retain and develop excellent teachers and
second, have any of you been doing work on the assessment side
so that you're able to identify the teachers that are doing
really well and support them and identify those teachers that
are having problems that may not show up on test scores but
nevertheless, would determine how you might intervene or
provide them more help.
Ms. Johnson. Senator Obama.
Senator Obama. Go ahead.
Ms. Johnson. If I can speak. Montgomery County, Maryland is
the forerunner, I think, in staff development, in having it
embedded within the school day. There are several levels that a
teacher can participate. That would be the original staff
development that is school-based. They also receive a
consulting teacher when they are new to the classroom that
comes out and observes them. There is also the Peer Assistance
and Review process, whereas a teacher who is not doing well,
they go before a panel and the principal presents the data,
based on their instructional practices and the teacher is then
given a year to improve with additional support. So it's a
process that is supported by their colleagues and by
administrators in the county.
As to teachers coming out of college, one of my teachers
made a comment that they came out of college wanting to be a
teacher and now they've turned into a statistician. So it's a
very huge disconnect with, I think, what they're taught and
what they're actually asked to do and I think that's where you
get the apathy or you get the decline in teachers wanting to
return to the profession. So I think it's a combination of
making sure that teachers are well prepared to come out and hit
the ground running in the classroom with all of the standards
that we are now being held to and then also, the support that
is embedded in the classroom and outside, county level and also
district level or State level.
Mr. Reville. There were two parts of your question, Senator
that on the first part, we have a 53 percent attrition rate in
Boston in 3 years. That is 53 percent of people leaving the
profession. So we have to take that as a statement that we
don't have a very attractive profession that we're offering
people these days and people with choices are moving elsewhere.
And I think that mentoring, while necessary to creating a
climate in the profession that will attract and hold people is
not sufficient, as you said in your opening comments and there
are a whole bunch of factors in terms of creating reflective
community of practice at the school site, rewarding excellence
in terms of performance, giving people the opportunity to
advance without leaving the field, giving teachers some other
prerogatives that we associate with other professions, like
their own computers and telephones and offices and especially a
schedule that allows them not to be in front of children every
minute of their day but allows them the time to work with
another to strategize on how to be more effective at the work
they're doing, to do the sort of data analysis that we've heard
about here today and for the most part, while American school
days and years are typically shorter than those in most other
countries, American teachers are typically in front of children
for more time than other teachers are anywhere else and we've
got to somehow, again it goes back to this time issue that I
raised earlier--create an amount of time within the school day
that allows teachers to be true professionals and to work
together to strategize to make their work more effective.
Senator Obama. I don't know. I may have run out of time.
Mr. Flanagan. Maybe just one quick reaction.
The Chairman. The comments are so good--please.
Mr. Flanagan. To take the fear factor out of data. Right
now, I think if teachers are honest, they are concerned that
part of the assessment that is required under No Child Left
Behind is going to be used against them at some point. If you
think about an athlete, you really think about knowing some of
their weaknesses so that you can identify them and work on
them. We think about that the same way with teachers, that we
have this tremendous data stream now so you may know that over
a period of 5 years, a 5th grade teacher is really struggling
in math because of the results of the students over 5 years.
That shouldn't be an indictment of that teacher. That should be
a target and a diagnosis for professional development, just
like you would with someone like me who used to strike out a
lot in baseball.
Mr. Coleman. If I could respond--I'll be very brief. What
we are finding in our school--teachers are willing to learn in
a nonthreatening environment so when we have 5th grade teachers
that collaborate together, if one is not doing well and then
one is doing very well and they start sharing their data,
again, in a non-threatening environment, we are finding that
the master teachers are right there within our midst. We don't
have to pay for specialists or anyone to come in and do the
work for us or have an administrator sometimes involved. A
couple of years ago the 4th grade team wasn't doing well but we
had one teacher who had students that were in the 85th
percentile. The rest of the teachers had kids that were in the
60th percentile and having them sit down and talk to each other
and share their teaching strategies in the classroom because
they had the same clientele made a significant difference.
Ms. Barber. May I add to that, briefly? You mentioned
taking the fear factor out. If we are proud of our profession,
then we shouldn't be fearful. We have to--the tone has to be
that we are here to learn from each other and we need to work
collectively to make a difference in the lives of boys and
girls. We have to make a difference in leaders in the lives of
our teachers. We can't fire every teacher that comes through
our door. So we have to set a tone that says that we are going
to embrace what you bring to the table. We're going to look at
the data as it relates to you, as it relates to your students
and we're going to make--we're going to affirm those things
that are working but we're also going to make a plan of action
for those things that are not working. We have to have the
culture so that people are not afraid to be--to look at the
data. And not be afraid about what No Child Left Behind says or
any of the other accountability because it's easier to train
the teachers and not have such turnover and when teachers
understand that we're here for them, then we're not going to
have that factor because the day is going to be structured so
that you can have more time. Nobody ever gave me a schedule and
said you have to have this, this and this. I had to set up what
was going to work for teachers. Thirty minutes planning is not
adequate. They needed more time because there was a wider gap
that had to be overcome. So we have to take that fear factor
out and make education what it should be. It should be
something that we're proud to be a part of.
The Chairman. We'll come back to this in a minute but
unless Senator Roberts and Senator Allard--I know they'll have
some questions and then depending when we're going to have this
vote, we'll have a chance to come back to it.
Senator Roberts. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Thank
you--thank you for your dedication, thank you for your
expertise. This has been an outstanding hearing. I have three
questions and then I have some comments, if I can get them in.
No. 1, now this is for Mr. Flanagan.
In your testimony, you talked about the need for resources
and obviously we have to have more resources. We promised years
ago to fund IDEA at 40 percent. It has become one of the
greatest unfunded mandates of all time. And Senator Harkin and
I have introduced legislation, along with many, to put the
current funding level, which is about 16 to 16.5 percent up to
40 percent. If IDEA was fully funded at the level promised by
Congress, wouldn't that help Michigan schools to better fund No
Child Left Behind and your answer is yes.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Flanagan. You know, my answer is yes, sir. But let me
tell you----
Senator Roberts. I have an open question. Growth models
have been discussed by educators in my State as a better way to
assess students, especially those with disabilities and English
language learners. In other words, if you go from A to B to C,
tremendous growth, why shouldn't that be considered on some
kind of a percentage basis? I know No Child Left Behind may be
D and E but if that student who came from zero or minus, got
that far, why can't that be taken into account?
Mr. Flanagan. Can I just mention on my yes answer, which I
do agree with. I was a regional superintendent and Detroit was
in my area at that time. We had 35,000 special needs kids. Half
of them were learning disabled. If we had some of the resources
that were available under IDEA--but also----
Senator Roberts. Promised.
Mr. Flanagan. Promised and if we also had what I would say
are some stronger preschool programs, 80 percent of those
learning disabled kids would never have been labeled learning
disabled. We would have been in a position where these kids
would have moved in a very different fashion through their
education. So I mean, I would agree with you on the IDEA.
Mr. Reville. Can I say something to the growth thing?
Senator Roberts. Certainly.
Mr. Reville. I mean, the name of the game should be about
improvement. If we have an accountability system, which we do
in many States, that is basically looking at this year's 4th
graders against last year's 4th graders and measuring progress
in that way, we're really measuring more of the difference
between the two cohorts than we are as to whether or not
anybody has learned anything. We ought to rather be looking at
how this year's 4th graders are doing next year as 5th graders
so we can see how much growth there has been during that
interval.
Senator Roberts. So you're supportive of the growth model?
Mr. Reville. Absolutely.
Senator Roberts. Eight percent, when I first ran for
Congress, were non-Caucasian and today it is 53 percent. The
same thing is happening all over southern Kansas. The same
thing happening a lot in our southern States. Why can't, if
we're going to reach a proficient reading level after 1 year of
instruction, why can't we extend--why can't we expand that to 2
years? That would really be beneficial because that--if you
can't read, you're not going to get reading in math and science
scores and it takes longer than 1 year and we have a lot of
drop outs among those students. So why can't we extend that
from 1 year to 2 years?
Mr. Flanagan. Our written testimony asks for 2 years. I
really agree with that.
Senator Roberts. I thank you. Mr. Coleman.
The Chairman. Could the Senator just yield on that?
Senator Roberts. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Generally speaking, I think in Massachusetts,
we're 1 year, aren't we, Paul? What are we--a lot of States
have passed initiatives or rules or regulations to set times. I
don't know precisely but I know----
Senator Roberts. It's not realistic.
Mr. Flanagan. But it's not realistic.
The Chairman. I know but that's the point I want to make,
is that it does exist in many places. I think Senator Roberts
point is absolutely right. I want to support it. I just was
interested in the fact that in many communities, they have
legislated that, have they not?
Mr. Reville. That's right. It's a collective exercise in
wishful thinking.
Senator Roberts. I'm always glad to hear from the Chairman
when he agrees with me.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Coleman, An Achievable Dream Academy. 8:15 to 4:30, you
get these kids in and pardon me, young people and then on
Saturday morning and you're doing amazing work. What do you do?
You have busses.
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
Senator Roberts. Do you have a post-school kind of program
here?
We do, in Kansas City, Kansas in one school, where an
extension service, of all things, out of agriculture pays for
it. Amazing. And we have quite a program. And it's fun. And it
keeps the kids--or the latchkey kids who may not even have a
parent at home. And it's in an area, if they go from the school
to home, they're in trouble. So do you have that capability as
well?
Mr. Coleman. Please repeat that question, Senator.
Senator Roberts. OK. You're teaching people from 8:15 to
4:30.
Mr. Coleman. That's correct.
Senator Roberts. What do you do after 4:30?
Mr. Coleman. After 4:30, we send them home on the bus.
Senator Roberts. On the bus. You send them home.
Mr. Coleman. Yes.
Senator Roberts. You do not have a program, perhaps if
there is a working mother who is not home?
Mr. Coleman. No we don't. They are sent on the bus.
Actually, we dismiss at 4:30. By 4:15, the buses are taking all
the kids home. So it's not designed to be an after-school
program. We just extend the curriculum.
Senator Roberts. All right. I just want to have one other
comment and I'm over time and I apologize. If you're going to
get good teachers, you've got to pay them. And you've got to
open up the back door. For people who want to teach without
having to go through Ed Psych I, Ed Psych II, Standard
Deviation. Basically, it's a labor of love. I know a teacher
who was in the service who had a newspaper out in Arizona. He
was asked to join the faculty because one of the teachers was
absent. He taught speech, English, journalism, took over the
newspaper, the yearbook, American History, was an assistant
coach and a referee. And he also had a newspaper to run. That
was me. For thirty-eight hundred bucks. I did it for 3 years.
Couldn't afford it. But at any rate, we have got to get teacher
salaries to a--I don't know what your daughter makes, sir, but
it's not enough.
Mr. Flanagan. Right.
Senator Roberts. And so I don't know how we do that. That's
been something that's bugging me for a long time because
teachers leave, as you say, after 5 years. Got to open up that
back door. If a businessman--if you're a military person, even
a Senator or whatever, I'm qualified to give a lecture at the
University of Kansas. But I can't teach in the secondary system
because I'm not qualified, even with all the years I've had of
public service because you've got to take X, Y or Z, even if I
wanted to. I guess I could become a guest lecturer or something
like that. That's not right. I'm done.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Senator Allard.
Senator Allard. How much time do we have?
The Chairman. You've got--it just started. So we'll stay
here with you, 5, 8 minutes.
Senator Allard. OK, very good. And I don't see a time
clock. I'm new here but I just----
The Chairman. No, we'll----
Senator Allard. All right, very good.
The Chairman. We'll go together.
Senator Allard. Ms. Turner, I was fascinated with your
comments about the computer and the role that it plays in
education. There is also plenty of opportunity for abuse with
the Internet. I assume it has access to the Internet.
Ms. Turner. Yes, it does.
Senator Allard. So how do you control potential abuse with
the computer within your system?
Ms. Turner. There are a lot of filters on it. There are a
lot of blocks put on by the technology specialists so students
can't access certain sites, so they can do that.
Senator Allard. Now, if that's anything like my experience
with computers in my office, you need a lot of support. They
pick up viruses, they break down, they become dysfunctional one
way or another. Does that require quite a bit of extra support
within the system, to manage those computers from a maintenance
standpoint?
Ms. Turner. Right. There is a lot of maintenance to it.
It's a lot of upkeep. We have to keep the system going. There
are so many times during the classroom and you want to use the
Internet and the Internet is down. So you have to have a backup
plan. So yes, there are problems with it. But it's also the
move into the 21st century, like you said, in your office--
we're trying to do better, faster things and that breaks down,
too. So we just keep on top of it. We have a good staff that
supports it.
Senator Allard. So the way I gather your testimony, even
though there are disadvantages that you have to learn to deal
with in the system, I suppose when you first start out, you
have more disadvantages but as you get the system working and
you get the expertise in your staff, then those disadvantages
work away.
Ms. Turner. True. Actually in our case, it worked a little
bit backwards. The first time, we didn't have quite as many
problems because fewer students were using it. When we added
the 10th grade on, the network got bigger so that added more
problems. But then the teachers were more qualified. They had
had the professional development so they had backup plans. They
could work with it. So the good outweighs the bad.
Senator Allard. Mr. Reville, if you look at the No Child
Left Behind program now, what two aspects of that do you think
are most effective and what two aspects would you say is least
effective?
Mr. Reville. Overall----
Senator Allard. And the goal would be in terms of student
achievement. Which two goals are most effective or two
strategies are most effective? What two strategies would be
least effective, in your mind?
Mr. Reville. Well, I think one of the most effective things
about No Child Left Behind has been the identification of
subgroups and the insistence, as we've heard from a number of
panel members, I'm looking at each and every student and
holding schools accountable for the performance of each child.
I think that's been critical and has drawn attention to a lot
of underserved populations.
I think also just the general imposition of an
accountability system that requires progress in each and
every--it requires every State to set high goals for students,
to set high standards and to measure progress. Now at the same
time, I will say one of the greatest weaknesses, I think, the
way in which we measure that progress needs a lot of work. We
need to move toward a growth model in the way in which we do
this. Some of our assumptions that schools can improve on a
linear trajectory by the same amount each year----
Senator Allard. That was adequate, but my time is running
out. On the growth model, if you say you expect them to advance
a certain percentage each year, doesn't that even further have
the potential of further disadvantaging the one who starts out
at the very bottom? In other words, 5 percent of 5 is much less
than 5 percent of 10 and as that extrapolates up grade to
grade, you have the potential of further disadvantaging a
student if you're not careful with that kind of model.
Mr. Reville. Well, I think it is possible to have
differential expectations depending upon the gap between
yourself and proficiency and that suggests differential
treatment in the schools. Again, it goes back to my earlier
comment, which is, if we are giving the same amount of time and
the same amount of instruction to everybody, irrespective of
their distance from proficiency, then we're not likely to get
everybody to the same standard at the same time. It would be a
bit like running your hundred-yard dash. Some kids are starting
at 300 yards from the finish line. Other kids are starting 25
yards from the finish line and we're suggesting, well everybody
ought to finish at roughly the same time. So I think there are
ways in which we can say, if you are a long way from the
standard of proficiency, you're going to need more time and
more help because you've got to have a rate of progress that's
higher than the rate of progress that we're expecting of other
students who may be closer to the standard.
The Chairman. Well, we want to thank all of you. Was there
any other--we're going to run out of time. So I guess we won't
have a chance to listen to other kinds of comments but this
worked just the way that we had hoped. It was enormously
informative to the members of the committee we want to thank
you all. We want you to be part of this. We're not going to let
you go after today and we're going to be working on this
legislation and we're serious about it. We're going to keep the
record open for questions but we're going to draw on you as we
draft the legislation and a lot of good suggestions about how
we can make some progress. Splendid recommendations, a lot of
life experience and by people who have been dealing with this
issue for the last 4 or 5 years. It can be invaluable, I think,
for the children of the future to benefit from your experience.
So we're very, very grateful to all of you.
We'll stand in recess.
[Whereupon, at 12:01 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]