Closing Achievement Gap Presentation

© 2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

Joseph Yeado and Natasha UshomirskySeptember 25, 2012

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

What can we do?


WHO WE ARE WHAT WE DO

The Education Trust works for the high academic achievement of all

students at all levels, pre-kindergarten through college, and forever closing the achievement gaps that separate low-income students and students of color

from other youth. Our basic tenet is this — All children will learn at

high levels when they are taught to high levels.

Advocacy to help schools, colleges, and communities mount campaigns

to close gaps

Research and policy analysis on patterns and practices that both

cause and close gaps

Technical assistance to schools, colleges, and community-based organizations to raise student achievement and close gaps

THE EDUCATION TRUST


Overview of Presentation

• What’s the status of achievement and gaps today?

• How do ARCC states compare to the rest of the nation?

• What do we know about improving student outcomes?

© 2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2012 THE EDUCATION TRUST

First, some good news.


Source:

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

1971* 1975* 1980* 1984* 1988* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999* 2004 2008 2012150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

9 Year Olds – NAEP Reading

African American Latino White

Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore

*Denotes previous assessment formatNational Center for Education Statistics, “The Nation's Report Card: Trends in Academic Progress 2012”


Source:

Performance for all groups has risen dramatically

1973* 1978* 1982* 1986* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999* 2004 2008 2012200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

13 Year Olds – NAEP Math


Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore



Source:

Rising performance for students of color leads to gap narrowing over time

1971* 1975* 1980* 1984* 1988* 1990* 1992* 1994* 1996* 1999* 2004 2008 2012220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

320

17 Year Olds – NAEP Reading


Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore



And next time somebody tells you, “We’re spending more on education, but the results are flat,” show them the results of 15 years of effort in

mathematics…


Source:

1996 NAEP Grade 4 Math

NAEP Data Explorer, NCES

African American Hispanic White0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

7361

26

2432

49

3 7

26

By Ethnicity - National Public

Below basic Basic Proficient or advanced


Source:


National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/


African American Hispanic White0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

34 28

9

4948

39

17 22

52

By Ethnicity - National Public



Source:

1996 20110%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

60

27

33

48

7

24


More low-income students are performing at higher levels today than in 1996



Bottom Line:

When we really focus on something, we make

progress!


Clearly, though, much more remains to be done.


Source:


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

34%

34%

32%

Students Overall - National Public

Proficient/AdvancedBasicBelow Basic

Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s


2011 NAEP Grade 4 Reading


Source:


Africa

n American

Asian/P

acific I

slander

Latino

American In

dian/Alaska

Native

White

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

51%

21%

50% 51%

23%

32%

30%

33% 30%

35%

16%

49%

17% 19%42%

By Race/Ethnicity – National Public


Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s


2011 NAEP Grade 4 Reading


Source:


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

28%

39%

34%

Students Overall - National Public


Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s




Source:


Lower Income Higher Income0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

41%

16%

41%

37%

18%

47%

By Family Income – National Public


Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s




But, rather than organizing our educational system to close these

gaps, we’ve organized it in a way that widens them.

Gaps in achievement are a direct result of gaps in opportunity to

learn.

These opportunity gaps begin before children arrive at the schoolhouse

door.


How?

By giving students who arrive with less, less in school, too.


Less funding


Funding Gaps Between States: Inequities in federal, state, and local

expenditures per student

GapHigh-Poverty versus Low-Poverty States

–$2,278per student

High-Minority versus Low-Minority States

–$2,330 per student

Source: Preliminary Education Trust analyses of U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Census Bureau data for the 2008-09 school year.


Lower expectations


Source:

Low SES students are receiving A’s for work that would earn high SES students C’s or lower.

Education Trust analysis of data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009.

A B C D0

10

20

30

40

50

60

44

38

33 33

5349

46

39

Performance on the HSLS Algebra Assessment by Grade and SES Among Students in 8th grade Algebra

Lowest SES QuintileHighest SES Quintile

Estim

ated

Num

ber

Righ

t


Less access to rigorous

courses


The single biggest predictor

post-high school success is the

QUALITY AND INTENSITY OF THE

HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUMCliff Adelman, The Toolbox Revisited, U.S. Department of Education


African American Latino White Asian0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

35%

68%63%

94%

Perc

enta

ge o

f stu

dent

s who

wer

e in

the

top

two

quin

-til

es o

f mat

h pe

rfor

man

ce in

fift

h gr

ade

and

in a

lgeb

ra

in e

ight

h gr

ade

Source: NCES, “Eighth-Grade Algebra: Findings from the Eighth-Grade Round of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K)” (2010).

Even African-American students with high math performance in fifth grade are unlikely

to be placed in algebra in eighth grade


Only one in five African-American high school students took an AP course they had the potential to do well in

Source: College Board, “The 8th Annual AP Report to the Nation,” 2012.

Note: Students were considered to have taken an AP subject if they took an AP exam in a subject for which they had potential. Students were considered to have AP potential if they had a 70% or greater likelihood of scoring at least a 3 on an AP exam based on their PSAT/NMSQT scores.

African American Asian/Pacific Is-lander

Latino American Indian/Alaska

Native

White0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

20%

58%

30%26%

38%

High School Class of 2011

Perc

ent w

ho to

ok a

n AP

cou

rse

they

wer

e lik

ely

to d

o w

ell i

n


Low-income and minority students are also less likely to have access to high-quality assignments.

Using the same textbook, School A in California offered high-level assignments; School B did not.

School A1,467 students enrolled in 2005

• 82% White• 6% Asian• 4% Latino• 2% Black

• 2% Low-Income

School B2,001 students enrolled in 2005

• 45% White• 4% Asian

• 48% Latino• 1% Black

• 27% Low-IncomeSource: Education Trust – West analysis of two high schools in unnamed California districts


High-Level College-Prep Assignment• Describe the fundamental problems in the

economy that helped cause the Great Depression. Consider agriculture, consumer spending and debt, distribution of wealth, the stock market.

• Describe how people struggled to survive during the Depression.

• How did Hoover’s belief in “rugged individualism” shape his policies during the Depression?

Source: Education Trust – West analysis of two high schools in unnamed California districts


Low-Level College-Prep Assignment• Role play (“Meet the Press”) and interview

key people of the era.• Draw a political cartoon highlighting a major

event of the time.• Share excerpts from noted literary authors--

Lewis, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Hughes.• Listen to jazz artists of the 1920s.• Construct a collage depicting new inventions.

Source: Education Trust – West analysis of two high schools in unnamed California districts


Less access to the

strongest teachers


High Poverty Low Poverty

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

22%

11%

Perc

ent o

f Cla

ss T

augh

t by

Teac

hers

With

N

eith

er C

ertifi

catio

n no

r Maj

or

Classes at high-poverty secondary schools are more likely to be taught by out-of-field*

teachers.

Note: High-poverty school: 55 percent or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced-price lunch. Low-poverty school :15 percent or fewer of the students are eligible for free/reduced-price lunch. *Teachers with neither certification nor major. Data for secondary-level core academic classes (math, science, social studies, English) across the U.S. Source: Education Trust Analysis of 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey data.


National City Suburban Small Towns Rural0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

0.058

8.2%

4.9%

8.0%

6.6%

4.4% 4.2%

4.7%

7.0%

High PovertyLow Poverty

Perc

enta

ge o

f Firs

t Yea

r Tea

cher

s

Source: Analysis of 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey data by U.S. Department of Education. Data from a representative sample of schools across the USA.

*Teachers in first year as the teacher of record. Note: High-Poverty = schools with 55% or more students eligible for free or reduced price lunch. Low-Poverty = 15% or fewer students eligible for free or reduced price lunch.

33

Nationally, students in high-poverty schools are more likely to be taught by novice* teachers.


Recent research found that low-income students in LAUSD were 2x as likely to be taught by the Least Effective teachers and over 1.5x less

likely to be taught by the Most Effective ones.

Least Effective Most Effective0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

20%26%

10%

43%

Distribution of Teacher Effectiveness* by Student Income

Low-IncomeNon Low-Income

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

English Language Arts Teachers

Note: Low-income students are those eligible for free/reduced price lunch.

*”Most effective” teachers are those placing in the top quartile on a student-level value-added measure and “Least effective” are those placing in the bottom quartile. “Average” are those teachers in the middle 50% of the value-added distribution.

Source: “Learning Denied: The Case for Equitable Access to Effective Teaching in California’s Largest School District.” Education Trust-West, January 2012. 34


More “access” to harsh, exclusionary discipline practices


Source:

African American and Latino students are more likely to have ever been suspended than white students

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Parent and Family Involvement in Education Survey of the National Household Education Surveys Program (PFI-NHES), 1999, 2003, and 2007.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

49%

13%

25%

18%

Percent of Students Who Have Ever Been Suspended

Note: Data are from 2007

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s


The results are devastating.

Kids who come in a little behind, leave a lot behind.


Source:


Only 16 percent of African-American and 29 percent of Latino graduates are college-ready in reading.

African American American Indian Latino White0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

16%

26%29%

54%

ACT, 2013, The Condition of College and Career Readiness

Pe

rce

nt

of

te

ste

d g

rad

ua

tes

Percent of tested graduates reaching college-readiness benchmark on ACT in reading


Source:


And the results are similar in math.

African American American Indian Latino White0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

14%

22%

30%

53%

ACT, 2013, The Condition of College and Career Readiness

Pe

rce

nt

of

te

ste

d g

rad

ua

tes

Percent of tested graduates reaching college-readiness benchmark on ACT in math


What about other options?


Source:


White African American Latino0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

81%

61%

71%

Only 61% of African American and 71% of Latino graduates who were interested in serving in the military met the minimum score

necessary for enlistment in the Army.

The Education Trust, 2010, Shut out of the Military: Today’s High School Education Doesn’t Mean You’re Ready for Today’s Army

Data based on the results of the Armed Forces Qualification Test, a component of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, 2004 – 2009. Note: The data represent a self-selected sample of individuals whose highest degree was a high school diploma and who had an interest in enlisting in the military. Data are not representative of all students.


And these are the students who remain in school through

12th grade.


African Amer-ican

Latino White Asian Native Amer-ican

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

66%71%

83%93%

69%

Class of 2010

Aver

aged

Fre

shm

an G

radu

ation

Rat

e

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, “Public School Graduates and Dropouts from the Common Core of Data: School Year :2009-10” (2013).

Students of color are less likely to graduate from high school on time.


So, how are ARCC states doing?


Source:


K-12 Enrollment by State and Ethnicity (2011)

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), April 2012, Public Elementary and Secondary School Student Enrollment and Staff Counts From the Common Core of Data: School Year 2010–11, Tables 1 and 2, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/snf201011/index.asp

Kentucky Tennessee West Virginia0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

81.9

67.3

92.0

54.1

10.8

23.9

5.2

24.1

3.9 6.11.1

11.4

5.94.1

White Black Hispanic American Indian Asian Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander Two or more races

Perc

ent o

f stu

dent

s

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/snf201011/index.asp


Source:


Percent of students qualifying for free/reduced price lunch(2011)

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), April 2012, Numbers and Types of Public Elementary and Secondary Schools From the Common Core of Data: School Year 2010–11 , Table 7, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/pesschools10/index.asp

Kentucky Tennessee West Virginia0

20

40

60

80

100

56.5 55.151.4

36.7

Perc

ent o

f stu

dent

s

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/pesschools10/index.asp


How do Kentucky, Tennessee Virginia, and West Virginia compare to other states?


State Improvement on NAEP – 4th Grade Reading, All Students

West VirginiaAlaska

IowaSouth Dakota

MissouriMaine

OregonConnecticut

WashingtonMinnesota

ColoradoMichigan

South CarolinaNorth Carolina

New YorkIndiana

WisconsinVermont

UtahDelawareOklahoma

OhioWyomingMontana

IdahoNew Hampshire

TennesseeNebraskaArkansas

VirginiaIllinoisKansas

TexasArizona

National PublicMississippi

North DakotaNew Mexico

HawaiiNevada

LouisianaCalifornia

Rhode IslandKentucky

New JerseyFlorida

GeorgiaPennsylvania

MassachusettsMarylandAlabama

-10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

-4.8-3.6-2.6-2.5-1.9-1.8-1.2-0.9-0.6-0.3-0.2

0.10.10.10.30.30.40.61.11.21.92.02.02.42.62.6

2.72.72.9

3.03.13.43.53.5

3.63.73.94.85.45.65.75.76.0

6.16.26.57.28.59.212.113.2

2003-2011 Change in Scale Scores

Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


State Improvement on NAEP – 4th Grade Reading, Low Income Students

West VirginiaWashington

IowaSouth Dakota

MaineColorado

OregonMissouriVermont

AlaskaConnecticut

South CarolinaUtah

WisconsinMinnesotaDelawareNebraska

VirginiaWyoming

North CarolinaIdaho

ArkansasHawaii

MichiganTexas

New YorkOklahoma

IndianaOhio

New MexicoMississippi

KansasIllinois

North DakotaNational public

MontanaTennessee

KentuckyCaliforniaLouisiana

Rhode IslandArizona

MassachusettsGeorgiaNevada

New HampshireFlorida

New JerseyPennsylvania

MarylandAlabama

-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

-7.6-3.8-2.9-2.7-2.4-1.4-1.2-0.9-0.8-0.5-0.2-0.1

0.30.91.42.02.12.42.72.82.93.43.73.93.94.04.24.65.15.15.25.35.55.7

5.85.9

6.26.3

6.97.47.98.28.79.69.89.811.111.512.616.016.3


Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


Massach

usetts

Maryland

Connecticu

t

Vermont

North Dako

ta

Kentucky

Florida

Ohio

Colorado

New York

Minnesota

North Carolin

aIdaho

Indiana

Wash

ington

Missouri

National Public

Illinois

Texas

Oregon

South Carolina

West

Virginia

Nevada

California

Mississ

ippi

Alaska175

185

195

205

215

225

235

245

2011

NA

EP

Sca

le S

core

s, 4

th G

rade

Rea

ding

States’ 2011 performance on NAEP - 4th Grade Reading, All Students

Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


States’ 2011 performance on NAEP - 4th Grade Reading, Low Income Students

2011

NA

EP

Sca

le S

core

s, 4

th G

rade

Rea

ding

Massach

usetts

New Hampshire

Kentucky

Maryland

Montana

Vermont

Kansas

Pennsylva

niaIdaho

GeorgiaTexa

s

North Carolin

a

Oklahoma

South Dakota

National public

UtahIowa

Connecticu

t

Michigan

Wash

ington

Tennessee

South Carolina

Nevada

Arizona

New Mexic

o

Alaska175

185

195

205

215

225

235

245Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


New YorkIowa

NebraskaOregon

West VirginiaUtah

MissouriConnecticut

South CarolinaMichigan

IndianaAlaska

WyomingMinnesotaWisconsin

North DakotaNorth Carolina

KansasDelawareCalifornia

South DakotaTennessee

New HampshireIllinois

FloridaLouisiana

National publicIdaho

MaineWashington

MontanaOhio

AlabamaOklahomaKentucky

PennsylvaniaVirginiaArizona

VermontMississippi

ColoradoGeorgiaNevada

MarylandRhode IslandNew Mexico

MassachusettsHawaii

New JerseyTexas

Arkansas

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

0.71.01.0

1.62.5

2.73.23.3

3.73.73.8

4.24.34.3

4.84.9

5.05.4

5.65.75.75.95.9

6.16.56.56.66.76.87.07.07.0

7.27.37.3

7.67.6

7.98.28.38.3

8.810.1

10.310.9

11.212.012.1

12.713.313.3


State Improvement on NAEP – 8th Grade Math, All Students

Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


West VirginiaUtah

North DakotaNebraska

ConnecticutIowa

OregonSouth Dakota

South CarolinaMinnesota

MissouriKansas

WyomingNew YorkMontana

IndianaWashington

New HampshireAlaskaMaine

MichiganIdaho

LouisianaVirginia

DelawareVermont

CaliforniaKentuckyAlabama

MississippiArizona

OklahomaNorth Carolina

WisconsinNational public

OhioColorado

FloridaPennsylvania

MarylandTennessee

NevadaArkansas

IllinoisRhode Island

HawaiiNew Mexico

GeorgiaTexas

New JerseyMassachusetts

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

2.82.9

3.33.8

4.14.64.7

5.15.25.4

5.76.0

6.46.5

7.17.37.4

8.38.38.48.58.5

8.78.7

8.99.0

9.29.2

9.79.79.79.8

10.110.4

10.610.8

11.111.311.411.5

12.013.013.013.0

13.314.0

14.514.6

16.618.3

19.0

State Improvement on NAEP – 8th Grade Math, Low Income Students


Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


Massach

usetts

New Jerse

y

Montana

North Dako

ta

South Dakota

Kansas

MaineOhio

Maryland

Connecticu

t

North Carolin

a

IndianaUtah

Illinois

Rhode Island

National public

Missouri

South Carolina

Michigan

Arkansa

s

Georgia

Florida

New Mexic

o

West

Virginia

California

Alabama240

250

260

270

280

290

300

2011

NA

EP

Sca

le S

core

s, 8

th G

rade

Mat

h

States’ 2011 performance on NAEP - 8th Grade Math, All Students

Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


Texas

Montana

Vermont

South Dakota

Maine

New Hampshire Ohio

North Carolin

a

Colorado

Oregon

Kentucky

Oklahoma

Illinois

Wisc

onsin

National public

Nebraska

Alaska

Pennsylva

nia

Arizona

Georgia

New Mexic

o

Maryland

Louisi

ana

West

Virginia

Mississ

ippi

Alabama240

250

260

270

280

290

300

2011

NA

EP

Sca

le S

core

s, 8

th G

rade

Mat

h

States’ 2011 performance on NAEP - 8th Grade Math, Low Income Students

Kentucky

Tennessee

West Virginia

Virginia


Two ways of pulling all of this information together

Uneven at the Start: Differences in State Track Records Foreshadow Challenges and Opportunities for Common Core

Available at: http://www.edtrust.org/dc/publication/uneven_start

State Academic Performance and Improvement Tool

Available at: ttp://www.edtrust.org/naep_state_scores

We’ll take a closer look at this now

http://www.edtrust.org/dc/publication/uneven_start

http://www.edtrust.org/naep_state_scores


State Academic Performance and Improvement Tool

• Generates scatterplots that show state performance and gains on NAEP for students overall and by student group in 4th and 8th grade reading and math.

• Sample questions the tool can help you answer:– Compared with other states and the nation, how does my state rate on current

achievement? How about on improvement over time?– For which groups of students is my state higher achieving and faster improving

than other states?– For which student groups is my state lower achieving and lower improving?– Are there states that are doing better or improving faster that my state can

learn from?


States’ performance and gains on NAEP for all students 4th grade math

VA


Source:

States’ performance and gains on NAEP for low-income students4th grade math

Education Trust Analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress data

U.S.

VA


Source:

States’ performance and gains on NAEP for African American students

4th grade math



Source:

States’ performance and gains on NAEP for all students8th grade reading


VA


Source: Education Trust Analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress data

States’ performance and gains on NAEP for low-income students

8th grade reading

VA


Source:

States’ performance and gains on NAEP for white students8th grade reading


VA


In addition to the Uneven at the Start analysis and the State Academic Performance and Improvement

Tool, Ed Trust also released updated Ed Watch state reports.


• Present best available compilation of data on achievement, attainment, and equity in a consistent format so that educators, parents, and public officials can squarely face the issue of achievement for all groups of students.

• Include a wide array of achievement and attainment data for each state, including:– Comparisons between state assessment and NAEP proficiency rates– College-and-career readiness indicators– High school graduation rates– College graduation rates and degree attainment

Available at: http://www.edtrust.org/dc/resources/edwatch_state_reports

An additional resource:

http://www.edtrust.org/dc/resources/edwatch_state_reports


What Can We Do?

An awful lot of Americans have decided that we can’t do much.


What we hear many say:

• They’re poor.• Their parents don’t care.• They come to school without

breakfast.• They don’t have enough books.• They don’t have enough parents.


But if there’s truly nothing that schools can do, why are low-income

students and students of color performing so much higher in some

states…


Source:


Scale Scores by State – Low-Income StudentsTe

xas

Mon

tana

Verm

ont

Sout

h Da

kota

Main

eNew

Ham

pshi

reOhi

oNor

th C

arol

ina

Colo

rado

Orego

nKe

ntuc

kyOkla

hom

aIlli

nois

Wisc

onsin

Nation

al pu

blic

Nebra

ska

Alas

kaPe

nnsy

lvani

aAr

izona

Geor

giaNew

Mex

icoM

aryla

ndLo

uisia

naW

est V

irgin

iaM

ississ

ippi

Alab

ama

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290Grade 8 – NAEP Math (2011)

Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore

NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Proficient Scale Score = 299)


In some districts…


Source:

Bost

onHo

usto

nCh

arlo

tteDa

llas

Atlan

taNew

York

City

Hills

boro

ugh

Coun

ty, F

la.Au

stin

Chica

goLa

rge C

ity

Nation

al Pu

blic

Scho

ols

Phila

delp

hia

Balti

mor

e City

Jeffe

rson

Cou

nty,

Ky.

Miam

i-Dad

eSa

n Di

ego

Clev

eland

Dist

rict o

f Col

umbi

a Pub

lic Sc

hool

sM

ilwau

kee

Detro

itFr

esno

Los A

ngele

s

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

320Grade 8 – NAEP Math (2011)

Aver

age

Scal

e Sc

ore


Note: Basic Scale Score = 262; Proficient Scale Score = 299

Low-Income African-American Students Do Better in Some Districts


And most certainly, in some schools


De Queen Elementary SchoolDe Queen, AR

• 537 students in grades 3-5• 64% Latino• 30% White• 3% African American• 2% American Indian

• 80% Low Income

Note: Enrollment data are for 2010-11 school year.

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data


Source:

High Performance at De Queen Elementary School

Arkansas Department of Education

Overa

ll

Latino

White

Low In

come

English la

nguage learn

er0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

90%93%

86% 89%93%

76% 74%83%

70% 68%

Grade 5 Math (2012)

DeQueenArkansas

Perc

enta

ge P

rofic

ient

and

Abo

ve


Source:

High Performance at De Queen Elementary School

Overa

ll

Latino

White

Low In

come

English la

nguage learn

er0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%94% 95% 92% 93%

96%

86% 84%89%

81% 80%

Grade 5 Reading (2012)

DeQueenArkansas

Perc

enta

ge P

rofic

ient

and

Abo

ve


De Queen Arkansas0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

6%

17%

36%

44%

57%

36%

4%

Latino Students – Grade 4 Literacy (2011)

AdvancedProficientBasicBelow Basic

Pe

rce

nt

of

Stu

de

nts

Pro

fici

en

t a

nd

A

bo

ve

Advanced Performance at De Queen Elementary

Source: Arkansas Department of Education


Source:

Jack Britt High SchoolFayetteville, North Carolina

• 1,872 students in grades 9 – 12– 33% African American– 11% Latino– 45% White

• 26% Low Income

Source: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction

Note: Enrollment and ethnicity data are from 2011-12; low income data are from 2009-10


Source:

High Performance Across Groupsat Jack Britt High School

English I Algebra I Biology0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%91% 91%

95%

72%65%

70%

African-American Students - End-of-Course Examination (2012)

Jack BrittNorth Carolina

Perc

enta

ge a

t Lev

el II

I or a

bove

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction

Note: More than 95% of African-American students at Jack Britt scored at or above Level III in Biology, but North Carolina did not provide exact numbers.


Source:

High Graduation Rates at Jack Britt High School

Students Overall White African American Lower Income0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%93% 93% 91% 93%

80%85%

75% 75%

Graduation Rate (Class of 2012)

Jack BrittNorth Carolina

Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s

Source: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction


Bottom Line:

At Every Level of Education, What We Do

Matters


Available from Harvard Education Press

and amazon.com


What Do We Know About How To Accelerate

Success?What do the high performers do?


#1. They focus on what they can do, rather than

what they can’t.


Action Plan• Marzano Background Chapter 1• United Streaming video clips• Background knowledge literacy center

My Challenge

cause causecause

cause

Students’ Lack of Background knowledge

Lack of experiences outside the community

Cultural differences

Academic vocabulary

No one reads to kids at home Economic status

Lack of wide reading

cause

Second language at

home

causecause


#2. They set their goals high.


They celebrate progress, but constantly acknowledge how

far they still need to go.

“Yes, he certainly has grown, but if he doesn’t move faster he is likely never to

graduate from high school or go to college.”


#3. They don’t leave anything about teaching and

learning to chance.


An awful lot of our teachers—even brand new ones—are left to figure out on their own what to teach and what constitutes

“good enough” work.


What does this do?

Leaves teachers entirely on their own to figure out what to teach, what order to

teach it in, HOW to teach it…and to what level.


The result?

© 2012 THE EDUCATION TRUSTSource: Unnamed school district in California, 2002-03 school year.

Essay on Anne Frank

Your essay will consist of an opening paragraph which introduced the title, author and general background of the novel.

Your thesis will state specifically what Anne's overall personality is, and what general psychological and intellectual changes she exhibits over the course of the book

You might organize your essay by grouping psychological and intellectual changes OR you might choose 3 or 4 characteristics (like friendliness, patience, optimism, self doubt) and show how she changes in this area.

Grade 7 Writing Assignment


•My Best Friend:

•A chore I hate:

•A car I want:

•My heartthrob:Source: Unnamed school district in California, 2002-03 school year.

Grade 7 Writing Assignment


Adopting new standards – even very high ones – is only the first step


Common Core State Standards have the potential to dramatically raise the rigor of

instruction – and student achievement – in classrooms across the country.

But to realize this potential, states will need to make sure that teachers and students have the

supports they need to meet these expectations.


What does that mean?To name a few… • Professional development.• Instructional materials – curriculum, sample

assignments, etc. • Examples of what meeting the standards looks

like.• Purposeful, carefully designed supports for

students who are starting further behind


#3. They strive to give ALL students – not just some students – access to

a rigorous curriculum


And they make sure that students get the support they need to succeed in

these classes.


#4. Good schools know how much teachers matter, and they

act on that knowledge.


They know who their strongest teachers are.

And they know who is struggling.


They make sure the students who are struggling most get the

strongest teachers


They do all they can to support their teachers. But they do not tolerate bad

teaching.

“It is your job as principal to make a marginal teacher uncomfortable.”

--Jennie Black, assistant principal, Ware Elementary School, Fort Riley, Kansas


For kids, schools and classrooms are the units of change.

Our role – those of us who work with states and district – is to figure out how to help schools learn from places that are doing

something right, and create systems where principals and teachers help all kids succeed.

Becoming Agents of Scale



Stay in touch!

www.edtrust.org

Stay connected with The Education Trust online:

www.twitter.com/edtrust www.facebook.com/edtrust

1250 H Street N.W. Suite 700Washington, D.C. 20005202/293-1217

Natasha Ushomirsky [email protected]

http://www.twitter.com/edtrust

http://www.facebook.com/edtrust

Documents

Closing Achievement Gap Presentation