Schools for Tomorrow Blog

In the past 3 years the Denver BOE has authorized exactly two charter schools now in operation: West Denver Prep (opened 2006) and Denver Venture Academy (opened yesterday). In contrast, in New York City, Mayor Bloomberg just announced that 18 charter schools will be opening this fall. Charter schools under Bloomberg (and Joel Klein) have grown from 3,200 students in 2002 to an estimated 24,000 this fall. Bloomberg says:

“It’s the charter schools that let parents vote with their feet and tell us what the parents think about the quality of the education, of the schools. And I can tell you, one of the reasons that the public schools in the city have gotten better is because the charter schools exist and give parents an alternative and let parents see that you can do something better.”

This Spring the Denver BOE authorized exactly one new school operator: the nationally known Envision Schools (as well as an expansion of the Charter for West Denver Prep). Depending how you count new operators versus expansions of existing charters (DSST received an expansion in 2007), that is a total of four operators and seven charter schools - in five years.

Part of the difference here is the quality and number of charter applicants, but it is also the decision (or lack) to integrate charters as part of a larger strategic effort to improve schools. This is where Denver and NYC have gone separate ways.

In addition, DPS also has yet to close a charter school, even though some are among the worst schools in the city. Paradoxically, when you can’t close the bad ones, it seems harder to open the good ones (and there have been BOE votes where may of the same members who vote to stop promising new schools from starting then vote to keep bad existing schools open).

My question is: Has NYC closed charters successfully? And is the ability to close underperforming schools (district and charter) a prerequisite to opening good ones?

After all, there are fiscal reasons to close schools, but if you are not replacing them with a better option, what’s the point.

How much testing do we need?

Now before you accountability absolutists start hyperventilating, rest assured that I’m not one of those bleeding hearts who wants to abolish CSAPs because they traumatize sensitive 4th graders with iffy math skills, cost millions or tempt jumpy principals to flirt with bribery.

What I wonder about, though, is whether we’re learning anything new from standardized tests.

August is a time to look forward, with school starting, but it’s also the month to look back, because it’s test results season.

The 2008 CSAP results were released a couple of weeks ago, the national ACT results came out Wednesday and the annual SAT report is coming soon.

Because we Americans are addicted to stats and scores (just listen to those announcers at the Olympics), every release of test results is parsed exhaustively. Gains of a few tenths of a percent at the local elementary school are hailed as encouraging progress, and comparisons are eagerly made between districts, and between a district’s scores and state averages.

None of that may mean much at all. (Sorry DPS.)

Over time, if you look at CSAP percentages of advanced or proficient or at ACT average composites, it’s striking how little change there is. The numbers fluctuate within single digits over several years.

When you dig deeper into the scores, you see the same patterns you saw the year before and the year before that. Among them:

Minority kids don’t do as well as white kids.
Poverty is a factor.
There are differences between boys and girls.
Overall performance declines as kids get older.
There’s an astonishingly low level of math and science proficiency.
High schoolers who take a more rigorous class schedule do better on the ACT.
Most kids aren’t ready for college work.

No, we shouldn’t do away with standardized tests. The CDE’s growth model offers some potentially useful new ways to look at the annual avalanche of CSAP stats. (Although, growth stats also may just tell us what we already know. As CDE assessment whiz Rich Wenning said at the CSAP news conference on July 29, “Our lowest achieving students are not making enough growth to catch up.” He repeated that comment to the State Board of Education on Aug. 13.)

The real questions are what can be done to help them catch up, and how many of them can realistically be expected to catch up?

There was a compelling - and overlooked - perspective in the Denver Post by the ever-interesting Marguerite Roza on how productivity has transformed most American workplaces and some suggestions on applications to education. HERE is the piece.

I’m grateful to Alan for the chance to contribute to this blog, even if the timing means my initial post is a self-referential link to this Op-Ed in today’s Denver Post.

The Post’s editors contributed the title and made a few edits for space. The deleted text was this: To draw even with the state on student proficiency within a decade, DPS realistically needs an increase in CSAP of at least 3 points every year. However as DPS has never made 3 overall points of progress in any single year, much less for 10 years straight, the chances are roughly equal to the Broncos winning the Beijing Olympics.

So whether one sees the recent DPS scores as a glass half-empty or half-full, Denver’s considerable talent, effort and money have produced, at best, incremental improvement. And it should also be clear by now that incremental improvement is not enough to provide another generation of Denver’s children with the educational opportunities they need.

My personal belief - not in the Op-Ed - is that reform undertaken at a slow pace is likely doomed to failure, and that the recent admirable gains from DPS can either serve as an accelerator to greater reform, or if taken as evidence that the current efforts are adequate, will soon be a historical blip.

For example, see this DPS press release about recent substantial improvements on the CSAPs. Just don’t miss that it is from August of 2005. History is a strong opponent.

My question is this: If one believes DPS is indeed making adequate yearly progress (sorry), is it reasonable to wait another generation or more just to equal to the Colorado average? If not, what should be done? I hope some of you will have ideas that eclipse mine.

While it is probably human nature to look to solve a particular problem with a “silver bullet” (magic pill, pixie dust, panacea, Batman, whatever) – that single, usually simple solution rarely seems to exist in the complex world in which we actually live.

Certainly education policy research, as well as 30+ years of pretty well-analyzed experience on the ground, suggests that no silver bullet will solve yawning achievement gaps and lower than desirable average performance, whether in Colorado or any other state.  But, we tend to continue looking, instead of focusing our efforts on implementing a handful of policies that show at least some promise of gains.

I am reminded of this most recently by the CSAP results in Denver and Aurora.  Hopefully, those positive results are more indicative of a real turnaround taking hold in those urban districts, and not a one-year blip or statistical “regression to the mean” type result.

Assuming the more positive outlook, what is interesting is the different approaches in these neighboring urban districts.  While there are some overlaps, Aurora’s former military leader John Barry has pursued a series of reforms related to the Broad Foundation training he received to become a superintendent.  I know there was some initial skepticism in the Colorado reform community about these approaches, but they may now be paying off.

Michael Bennet in Denver focused upon The Denver Plan, better literacy, reading, and ESL training, middle school focus, and a variety of leadership and quasi-autonomy reforms.  They too seem to be working.

On the other hand, Mapleton has been the district that many reformers have highlighted as doing lots of great things.  But, their CSAP scores have been moving in the opposite direction, and not just this year – perhaps a long implementation dip, but you have to worry a bit.

All of this says to me that we know a few things that work, but a lot more effort needs to be expended in combining them and really implementing them thoughtfully, not just chasing the next magic fad.  And, that takes a little time and patience, not as an excuse, but as a reality.

Seems like Denver Public Schools is overdue for some good news: Even as the rest of the state treads water, today’s release of CSAP results underscores a positive trend in Colorado’s 2^nd largest school district:

Denver Public Schools made substantial 3.6 percentage point gains in reading scores, according to an internal memo obtained by Education News Colorado.

DPS also outpaced the state in terms of reading gains at all eight grade levels tested, the memo said. However, the urban district still lags far behind Colorado’s overall reading scores.

The Denver district made more modest gains in writing, mathematics and science, though even those gains – in the vicinity of 1 percent –  bested the state, which had a flat year.

“Though we always aspire for better outcomes, we are pleased with this year’s CSAP results,” DPS’ departing Chief Academic Officer Jaime Aquino wrote in an email to district staff.  “The scores are a validation of the work we are doing.  It shows that we are heading in the right direction and that our trends are promising since we continue to outpace the state’s change.”

Time for the crack research teams to dig deeper. What factor(s) might be making a difference here? Or is Denver’s performance just a fluke? Inquiring minds demand answers, while experienced souls anticipate a long time to learn any answers, if any are to be learned.

In the meantime, news like this just might give Superintendent Michael Bennet the momentum he needs to continue pushing his ambitious reform agenda.

But it doesn’t put the teachers union in a good place. Already having struggled to shed the well-earned mantel of obstructionists in the Bruce Randolph autonomy struggle, the DCTA’s latest position against a proposed upgrade in the innovative and nationally-observed ProComp teacher pay program now becomes more precarious.

The district still has a long way to go in raising performance and closing the achievement gap, but today brings more solid proof that it’s moving in the right direction. So does DCTA tout the improvement and concede that Superintendent Bennet has earned the benefit of the doubt in moving forward? Not likely. Or does DCTA downplay the news and forfeit what remains of the good faith earned as original partners in ProComp?

My guess is they stay silent as the mediation process continues and they ponder the potentially suicidal strategy of a strike during the Democratic National Convention. At least the intrigue keeps us paying attention during the slow summer months.

Today’s press conference unveiling 2008 CSAP scores was, when you get right down to it, much ado about, well, nothing much.

Windy speeches abounded, the crowd in the packed lobby of the Colorado Department of Education’s ornate HQ applauded dutifully at all the right moments. The word of the day was ‘mixed,” as in CSAP results were “mixed,” which is a polite synonym for not so great, or maybe even lousy.

As usual, some schools and districts did better than expected while others did worse. This year, Denver Public Schools and Aurora Public Schools exceeded expectations, giving those beleaguered urban districts, and their break-the-mold superintendents a boost, and raising expectations for next year.

But the whole event had an anticlimactic air about it, because the big shoe has yet to drop. That would be detailed data from the gaudy new Colorado Growth Model, also known as Information That Actually Means Something. We got a taste of the growth model today, with the release of statewide data.

Even that general data gives a fascinating peek behind the scenes of, say, the achievement gap. One tidbit: only 13 percent students rated unsatisfactory or partially proficient on the math CSAP are growing fast enough to get them to proficiency in three years. (Look for stories on this and other CSAP subjects on the Education News Colorado web site).

Late next month, when CDE releases growth model data for districts and schools, we’ll really be able to tell what’s going on, education-wise in Colorado – at least compared to the woefully incomplete and shallow stuff we’ve been fed until now. I’m sure the growth model data won’t be perfect, but having it at our disposal will be akin to moving from black and white to color, from two dimensional to three dimensional, from mono to stereo.  

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Nowhere is education in more dire straits than in Washington, D.C. Of course, overhauling a dysfunctional system inevitably leads to turmoil and disaffection. But a new poll from the advocacy group Education Reform Now shows overwhelming support for the course of action taken to fix D.C. public schools. Not only the more modest reforms but also some of the messier business of reform elicits widespread approval:

In one of the most surprising elements of the poll, respondents were asked about the controversial March 6^th firing by [D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle] Rhee of 98 DCPS employees under her newly-won ability to classify non-unionized central office workers as “at will” employees. The change was requested by [Mayor Adrian] Fenty and Rhee and approved by the City Council.

Two-thirds of respondents indicated they support Rhee‘s argument that she was attempting to establish a culture of accountability in the school system - 28% were opposed to the firings.

Among other things, the poll showed tremendous support for the district’s nascent public charter schools and publicly-funded scholarship program - as well as a general belief that the public schools have shown improvement as a result of the competition.

The survey appears to have been conducted before Rhee’s radical idea to change teacher pay was brought forward. Alan Gottlieb is right: this proposal is “several steps beyond ProComp”,  including a more progressive, performance-based pay formula and an agreement to divest of the rights of tenure. In fact, this dramatic bargain — tenure for higher performance pay — mirrors what was attempted a few years ago in Colorado’s rural Ignacio School District, but on a much larger scale.

Inquiring minds want to know what the people of Washington, D.C., might think of Rhee’s radical idea. Why? To see if it has political legs to come to fruition. But also because Denver’s more modest ProComp is under assault - with the local teachers union gleefully celebrating satirical portrayals of the alleged “merit pay” program’s downfall.

Maybe reforms have a harder time surviving here because Denver schools haven’t reached the dire straits of their counterparts in Washington, D.C. What a sad commentary that is, as well as a clarion call to reformers for vigilance and determination.