Category Archives: Local News

by | July 2, 2008 · 9:40 pm

WAES on the Radio

Tom Beebe of the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools and John Smart of the Park Falls School Board, the Policies & Resolutions Committee of the Wisconsin Association of School Boards and the Board of Directors of the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools. were on WORT‘s “In our Back Yard” today discussing the Wausaukee situation and the sad state of school funding in Wisconsin.

Click here to listen or download.

Support community-sponsored radio on WORT.

More on the possible Wausaukee School District dissolution here, here and here.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, education, finance, Local News, Referenda, referendum, School Finance, We Are Not Alone

by | June 21, 2008 · 1:45 pm

“Ain’t No Miracle Worker”

The Brogues, “I Ain’t No Miracle Worker” (click to listen).

There is a lot of excitement about Dan Nerad taking the reins as Superintendent of MMSD. I share this excitement. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting him three or four times, have read numerous articles about him and his work, have talked to people who know him from Green Bay and have researched what he has accomplished in his career. All this leads me to believe that Dan Nerad is a very high quality district leader who will fit well in Madison and contribute greatly to the improvement of our schools.

Still. I worry that expectations are unreasonably high and that we may be setting Nerad and ourselves up for a fall. Over and over again I have heard and read people saying “when Dan Nerad gets here” either preceded or followed by some hope or promise of a positive change. There will be changes and I think that (from my perspective) they will be mostly positive. So what’s the problem? Here is a list:

  • It doesn’t recognize all the good work of the recent past. Not Just Art Rainwater’s contributions, but the contributions of our Board members, our staff and teachers and our community. Looking to Nerad to for huge improvements can make it seem like MMSD has been stagnant or failing. It hasn’t. For some nice overviews and reflections on Art Rainwater and his time with MMSD, see the current MMSD Today.
  • We shouldn’t forget that educational improvement is incremental. Perhaps the best history of educational reform is David Tyack and Larry Cuban’s Tinkering Toward Utopia. In their prologue they write:

Although policy talk about reform has had a utopian ring, actual reforms have typically been gradual and incremental — tinkering with the system. It may be fashionable to decry such change as piecemeal and inadequate, but over long periods of time such revisions of practices adapted to local contexts can substantially improve schools. Rather than seeing the hybridizing of reform ideas as a fault, we suggest it can be a virtue. Tinkering is one way of preserving what is valuable and reworking what is not.

The point in the last sentence is related to my concerns about belittling what has been accomplished in our schools. Tyack develops this further in one of my favorite essays “A Conservationist Ethic in Education Reform.”

  • No policy, reform, set of policies or reforms will make everyone happy. Uncontested school board races and an apparent conflict and controversy avoidance strategy by the Board of Education may have lulled some into thinking that divisions are a thing of the past in Madison school politics. They aren’t. I recognize that most people involved share many values and even have much agreement about how best to put those values into action, but also know from personal experience that there are passionate disagreements among people of good will when it comes to education. Whatever Dan Nerad does or does not do, tries or does not try, some vocal segments of our community will object that it is too much or too little or just plain wrong. The divisions that have been hidden will become apparent again at some point. I believe that Dan Nerad is skilled at working toward consensus, finding common ground and building coalitions. This will serve him (and our community) well, but it won’t satisfy everyone.
  • The challenges Madison’s schools face are great, too great for any individual to address alone. The issues raised by demographic changes are well documented; the insane choices created by the state school finance system are well known; the pressures from testing and other ill-devised mandates of NCLB are readily apparent. I don’t believe these are intractable, but I do recognize that there are no simple answers and that sustained hard work and cooperation from all associated with the district and all segments of our community are necessary if we are to be successful in meeting these challenges. Dan Nerad cannot do this without help from many quarters. Much has been written about his openness, outreach and cooperative spirit, but if some members of the Board of Education continue to be blasé about or dismissive of public engagement, little improvement is possible. The community has to step up too. Schools of Hope (as well as other Urban League programs) and the Foundation for Madison Public Schools are great; Mayor Cieslewicz, Alder Satya Rhodes-Conway and others are actively working to expand school/city/community initiatives; MMSD has wide-ranging partnerships with the University of Wisconsin School of Education and other local research and higher education institutions; PTOs, PTAs and PTGs are doing wonderful things; Thousands of volunteers help our schools on a regular basis; Our legislative delegation — especially Rep. Sondy Pope Roberts — are leaders in the fight for school finance reform; ABC Madison and Get TUFF have been educating and agitating for state school funding changes; Communities and Schools Together and Mad-City Grumps are preparing for the next referendum campaign; countless other individuals and groups are contributing to the betterment of our schools… (apologies if I left out your favorite). An impressive list, but it isn’t enough. We all can and must do more.

So let’s work together to welcome Dan Nerad, expand the good our schools are doing, fix the state finance system, pass a referendum…have realistic expectations about what a change in the superintendency will bring and do our best to help Dan Nerad exceed those expectations.

In this spirit (or maybe just because I like it), here is video from the last referendum campaign.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized, AMPS, School Finance, Best Practices, Budget, Local News, Referenda, Take Action, No Child Left Behind, Pope-Roberts/Breske Resolution, education, finance, "education finance", nclb, referendum

by | June 19, 2008 · 5:15 pm

School-funding reform update, week of June 16

From the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools.

The Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools (WAES) is a statewide, independent, membership-based organization of educators, school board members, students, parents, community leaders, researchers, citizens, and community activists whose lone goal is the comprehensive reform of Wisconsin’s school-funding system. If you would like more information about the organization — or on becoming part of WAES — contact Tom Beebe at 920-650-0525 or tbeebe@wisconsinsfuture.org.

*******

Good news and not so good news out of Winneconne

Because of the flaws in Wisconsin’s school-funding system, more and more communities are forced to go to expensive and divisive referenda in order to operate their public schools. To date, a couple of things are known: The number of votes being taken is increasing and the rate of success is about 50 percent. While a “no” vote tells us that a great many public schools are approaching fiscal and educational crisis, there is also something to be learned in a “yes” vote.

One such lesson comes from Winneconne, where a scaled back referenda to exceed revenue limits by $880,000 in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 school years (a vote on a $1.19 million and $1.45 million proposal was defeated in April) was approved 1,645 to 1,116.

The good news is the referendum passed and allows the district to cover ongoing labor, transportation, and utility expenses. The not-so-good news is its passage does not eliminate the need for some budget cuts. The board had already identified $310,000 in cuts for next year and an additional $260,000 in 2009-10.

*******

Wisconsin’s tax ranking drops … What does it mean?

According to headlines and stories in media across the state, Wisconsin has, for the first time in years, moved off of the Top 10 tax list. Is that, however, a claim to fame or is it the canary in the mine shaft for those interested in school-funding reform and the protection of the state’s public structures that are financed through state and local taxes?

One view is offered by the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future

Executive Director Karen Royster and Research Director Jack Norman wrote in the May 24 Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that instead of worrying about where the state is in regard to total taxes, we need to pay much more attention to tax fairness . We “built momentum (in the last legislative session) for smart tax reform that will modernize our out-of-date system and create a fair and efficient method of raising revenue,” the pair said. The article went on to talk about recent successes and suggestions for the next session of the Legislature.

On May 29, Norman joined Andrew Reschovsky, professor of public affairs and applied economics with the LaFollette Institute at the University of Wisconsin-Madison on Wisconsin Public Radio to talk about taxes and public spending in Wisconsin. You can hear the complete hour on “Conversations with Joy Cardin” by clicking here.

*******

Tomah Journal wants candidates to get real about spending cuts
Sometimes, a newspaper editorial hits the nail squarely on the head in its insight and intelligence. June 5, the Tomah Journal did just that in an editorial titled, “Cut state spending? Candidates should offer specifics.” The paper vowed to make sure candidates in the upcoming election who talk about cutting spending are specific about those cuts.

The editorial was an answer to the fact Wisconsin dropped from 10th to 11th in terms of tax ranking. “Tax rankings by themselves have little meaning,” the editorial said. “What matters is tax value. Are state and local governments effectively providing public services that are cost-prohibitive for most individuals to purchase on their own? And is Wisconsin upholding its moral responsibility to make sure the poor, sick, and vulnerable aren’t doomed to destitution?”

That just about says it all and is the measure of good government … not just the relative position of tax payments. “Just as politicians who advocate more spending have an obligation to identify which taxes they would raise,” the Journal says, “aggressive tax-cutters have an obligation to identify the spending they would cut. And, if they can’t identify specific cuts, then it’s a concession that Wisconsin is making the right choices on taxes and spending.”

*******

WAES upgrades website; joins YouTube and Facebook

It will be a while before it is finished, but we are in the process of giving a new look and feel to the WAES website in order to make it more user friendly and, most importantly, valuable to those involved in reforming the way Wisconsin funds its public schools.

At the present time, not much will look different, but that will change. One of the new features is that you can join WAES online and send in your dues with a credit card or with PayPal. It should also be easier to sign up for and read the e-mail update and to register for a school-funding reform presentation. Give the site a look-see at http://www.excellentschools.org. Let me know what features you feel would make it more valuable for you.

That’s not all that’s new. WAES has also entered the brave new world of Facebook and YouTube. For those of you using the former, check us out, join up, bring in your friends, use this new and exciting technology to spread the word about school-funding reform, and show your support and network with other people working to change school finance by joining the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools Facebook cause. Also, they say a picture is worth a thousand words. If that’s true, then video must be worth a million. WAES is new at it, but go to the WAES YouTube Channel and, thanks to WAES members and technical folks at Advocates for Madison Public Schools, see what’s going on. Be sure to subscribe to the WAES Channel on YouTube or check back for updates
*******

Sen. Schultz continues to advocate school-funding reform

Too many people think that school-funding reform is all about Republicans vs. Democrats. It’s not, and Sen. Dale Schultz, a Republican from Richland Center, is a good example. In a recent column in The Monroe Evening Times, he praised the Governor for signaling his willingness to talk about reform and said he looks “forward to joining him to improve how our schools are funded.”

Sen. Schultz also offered some good comments on the property tax levy credit, part of the school-funding formula that directs state aid intended for children in classrooms to property taxpayers. “The name is misleading,” Schultz said, “because school levy credits actually are payments to municipalities to offset municipal tax levies, and schools never see the money. The shifting of millions of aid dollars to the levy credit meant less in general school aids that go where needs are greatest — small, rural, and poor school districts … ”

The comments didn’t go quite far enough, however, because there are “small, rural, and poor school districts” in some parts of the state — those with artificially high property values — that actually do benefit from the levy credit. Because of their high property values, these groups get very little if any state aid. Taxpayers in those districts do, however, get the levy credit. It is, therefore, a big piece of the school budget for many districts.

WAES Wisconsin Adequacy Plan addresses the problems in both types of school districts and looks forward to working with Sen. Schultz and other legislators to actually change what is an unfair and inadequate funding system.

*******

WAES needs your support now more than ever

There’s a great deal going on around the country and in Wisconsin that will affect our communities and our families for years to come, but nothing is more important than the the future of our public schools. At a time we need a state school-funding formula that moves our children’s education to the next level, however, we have one that is unequal, inadequate, and too complicated. It doesn’t work for children. It doesn’t work for families, and, it doesn’t work for schools.

We need to change the way we fund public schools in Wisconsin and we need to do it soon. If we don’t act, we should expect nothing more than the status quo which, for the last 15 years,has been laying off teachers, increasing class sizes, divisive referenda just to run our schools, and cuts in the quality programs and services we used to offer Wisconsin’s children. The quality and quantity of education continues to erode in virtually every corner of Wisconsin.

Nothing will change until we demand that the Legislature and the Governor do what is right for children and for taxpayers. That is the sole purpose of WAES — to make that demand and to work with the people of the state to make it happen.

As an independent, dues-supported, non-profit organization, WAES needs your help to continue this important work. As more and more school districts edge toward the brink of fiscal and educational crisis, this work and your support are more important than ever.

If you haven’t joined already, now is the time to join WAES. You can go to our website and use PayPal or your credit card. If that doesn’t work for you, print the Membership Statement, fill it out and mail it, along with your check, to Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, 315 Maple Street, Fort Atkinson, WI 53538. To get the dues structure for organizations — or for more information — contact Tom Beebe at 920-650-0525 or tbeebe@wisconsinsfuture.org.

You can make a difference.

*******

Yet more proof that early-childhood-education programs work

It isn’t something we don’t already know, but the latest analysis of a long-running early-childhood-education program for children of low-income families in Chicago suggests economic payoffs from such services that continue well into childhood.

The most recent work reported by the Early Childhood Focus says that attendance in the preschool program for 18 months — averaging a cost of $6,692 per child — generated a return to society of $47,759 per participant. This figure includes increased taxes on earnings due to educational attainment ($7,243), savings to the criminal justice system ($7,130), reductions in school remedial services ($4,652) and averted tangible costs to crime victims ($6,127).

This research is recognized by WAES and is included as a key piece in most adequacy funding reform models — including the Wisconsin Adequacy Plan — that is based on research. At the same time, it flies in the face of the claims made by some members of the State Legislature arguing against increases in public school revenue.

*******

School-funding reform organization welcomes four new members
WAES welcomed two new members since the last e-mail update. We need your help now, so please consider joining as a dues-paying member of the school-funding reform organization

New members are (you can see the complete list here):

Individuals: Doug Leuck and Carol Krogmann

School district:Athens and Cadott

*******

Help us better serve you by letting us know when you change your e-mail address. In that way we can stop sending the update to the old one and switch over to the new address as soon as possible.
*******

School-funding reform calendar
June 19 — School-funding reform presentation for the Northwoods School Funding Alliance, 7 p.m., at Lakeland Union High School in Minocqua.

June 20 — School-funding reform presentation as part of the finance class of the education leadership course offered through Edgewood College, 10 a.m., DC Everest School District office, 6300 Alderson Street, Weston
July 29 — School-funding reform presentation as part of the School Law and Politics class offered through Marian University , 9 a.m., Northcentral Technical College, Wausau.

*******

Please feel free to share your copy of the WAES school-funding update with anyone interested in this important public policy issue. Contact Tom Beebe at tbeebe@wisconsinsfuture.org or 920-650-0525 for details.
—

Thomas S. Beebe, Outreach SpecialistWisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools315 Maple StreetFort Atkinson, WI 53538Cell: 920-650-0525E-mail: tbeebe@wisconsinsfuture.org.

The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped,” — Hubert Humphrey, 1976

[Disclosure: I am a member of the WAES Board of Directors}

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, education, Elections, Equity, finance, Local News, National News, Referenda, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized, We Are Not Alone

by | June 17, 2008 · 3:21 pm

Where’s the QEO? (again)

At times I feel like a broken record, asking the same questions over and over again. But as long as our news media continues to leave essential information out of their reports — like pages missing from the middle of a book –, I’m going stay stuck in this groove.

The inspiration today is the story in the Wisconsin State Journal by Sandy Cullen on the arbitrator’s decision on the 2006-2008 MMSD contracts with the Madison Teachers Incorporated affiliated clerical, security and educational assistants bargaining units (disclosure: My spouse is a Special Education Assistant with MMSD). The question (and some of the text) is the same as this post from over a year ago on the MTI teacher contract negotiations: “Where is the QEO?”

If the story had been solely about the district employees covered by the arbitration, leaving out the QEO might have been acceptable. But teachers are part of the story Cullen wrote and once teacher contracts — and the place of health insurance in these contracts — are raised, some discussion of the Qualified Economic Offer Law is needed.

In brief, (quoting from my previous post), “The QEO requires districts that wish to avoid arbitration to offer each year a total package that is at least 3.8% larger than the previous contract. Total package means salary and benefits combined. With health care costs rising that has meant very small salary increases for Madison’s teachers…. This mix or balance has been their choice, how they have wished to “spend” their 3.8%. The state says this is their money and that health care is part of collective bargaining.”

The clerical employees, the security employees and assistants bargain on a very different court of play, one without the floor (or ceiling) provided by the QEO and one that is less orientated toward a single “total package” figure.

As John Matthews of MTI notes in Cullen’s story, ” “I expect they will now come back and try it [to obtain a change in health insurance providers/choices] again with the teacher group.” When that happens, some fool will no doubt point to this arbitrator decision or the the contracts negotiated for administrators or even Dane County employees and accuse the Board or the District or the Union of malfeasance if the changes don’t go through.

A basic understanding of the QEO exposes these comparisons as absurd. For this reason, in the interest of informed public discussion is is essential that all discussions of teacher contracts in Wisconsin include some explanation of the QEO.

A couple of other issues with Cullen’s article.

This paragraph is a bit one-sided and misleading:

“It certainly will be a benefit to both our employees and the taxpayers,” said Superintendent Art Rainwater, adding that the savings were applied to salary increases for the employees affected.

There is nothing wrong with quoting Supt. Rainwater’s view, but good journalism requires some analysis of that view or at very least an acknowledgment of alternative interpretations. On the point Rainwater makes in this paragraph, Cullen provides neither. I think the MTI negotiating team (and according to MTI employee surveys, a majority of the members of the bargaining units) would disagree that it is a benefit to the employees. After all, they fought tooth and nail against the change. The arbitrator’s decision also had some interesting things to say about the “quid pro quo” trade off of wages and insurance choices (“The Arbitrator concluded that the Employer demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence the need for a change, but it failed to establish by that standard that it offers a quid pro quo for the change“). What is clear is that the 2.5% and 2.9% wage increases are near or below the rate of inflation and that they are exactly the same as the increases proposed by the Union, without any health insurance changes. If I read the statement and the District’s position correctly, they are saying the only way we can provide cost of living increases to some of our lowest paid employees is by cutting their benefit costs. I realize that the broken school finance system creates hard choices, but this kind of balancing the books on the backs of the those at the bottom is not a very attractive idea (I can’t find a copy of the administrator agreement or salary scale, does anyone know what annual increases they receive?).

The other thing that bothered me is that you have to get to the last paragraphs of Cullen’s story to learn that this contract expires in September. The parties spent untold hours and dollars reaching a settlement that will be active for all of 2 1/2 months (the insurance portion, only for a month, beginning August 1). There is no attempt to estimate these costs — including the services of hired guns contracted by the district — anywhere. The story cites a $1.6 million savings for next year. That is probably true because negotiations for the next contract will begin with the terms of this contract, but there really is no guarantee. The only guaranteed savings are for the month of August, 2008 (about $130,000, minus administrative costs involved with the changes).

This isn’t about whether the arbitrator, the district or the union were right or wrong; it isn’t about costs and benefits of WPS as an insurance provider. My primary concern here is the lack of quality reporting and how this lack makes it more difficult to have informed public discussion of issues that should be of concern to all of us.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", AMPS, Budget, Contracts, education, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | June 12, 2008 · 12:59 pm

Here Comes the Summer

To celebrate the last day of school for the 2007-8 year in the Madison Metropolitan School District, a selection of Summer music videos.

The Undertones, “Here Comes the Summer.”

Sly and the Family Stone, “Hot Fun in the Summertime.”

Eddie Cochran, “Summertime Blues.”

Doc and Richard Watson,” Summertime.”

The Lovin’ Spoonfull, “Summer in the City.”

The Barracudas, “Summer Fun.”

Congratulations to all the graduates; thanks to all the teachers and staff, especially those retiring.

Enjoy the season!

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Local News

by | June 11, 2008 · 3:31 pm

New Library Public Hearing

Via Brenda Konkel, This Side of Town…

Here’s your chance to tell the decisions makers what YOU want!

The Library Board and the Surplus Property Committee will be holding a meeting solely to solicit public input prior to issuing a RFP for the downtown library. This is the only item on the agenda. The current proposal for an RFP would incorporate the new library into a larger mixed use building rather than the independent free standing building that currently exists. If you have thoughts about the future of the downtown library this is an opportunity to speak.

The Madison Public Library Board in conjunction with the Central Library Disposal Surplus Property Criteria and Selection Committee is seeking public input on plans for a new Central Library. The hearing will be Monday, June 16th, 6:30 p.m. at the Central Library at 201 West Mifflin Street.

I love libraries!

Here is what I want (to start, no order):

  • Sunday hours, year round.
  • Space to take the collection out of storage (I love finding obscure things on the shelves, with so much in storage that becomes less likely).
  • Comfortable and practical meeting rooms.
  • Nice reading/research rooms.
  • Spacious and flexible children’s room(s?).
  • Natural light.
  • I don’t mind sharing the library with the homeless and the down and out.  They are part of our community too.

What’s on your list?

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Local News, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | June 9, 2008 · 7:52 pm

Too Late the Truth?

From “The Impact of the Adequate Yearly Progress Requirement of the Federal No Child Left Behind Act on the Great Lakes Region,” a study released by the Great Lakes Center for Educational Research and the Education Policy Studies Laboratory at Arizona State University.

From “The Impact of the Adequate Yearly Progress Requirement of. the Federal “No Child Left Behind” Act on Schools in the Great Lakes Region,” a study released by the Great Lakes Center for Educational Research and the Education Policy Studies Laboratory at Arizona State University.  See also “Many States Have Taken a “Backloaded” Approach to No Child Left Behind Goal of All Students Scoring ‘Proficient'” from the Center on Education Policy.

On June 24, The Department of Public Instruction will release the preliminary Adequate Yearly Progress Reports on schools and districts in Wisconsin, as required by the No Child Left Behind Act. My guess is that MMSD will have a higher number of “failing schools” this year. Think of Madison as being “ahead of the curve.”

AYP is not the best gauge of the work our district is doing; NCLB isn’t a good law and AYP is ridiculous yardstick.

If the flaws in and political manipulation behind NCLB weren’t obvious already, an interview with former Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Susan Neuman in the new Time magazine confirms what we already knew. Excerpts below.

There was always something slightly insane about No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the ambitious education law often described as the Bush Administration’s signature domestic achievement. For one thing, in the view of many educators, the law’s 2014 goal — which calls for all public school students in grades 4 through 8 to be achieving on grade level in reading and math — is something no educational system anywhere on earth has ever accomplished. Even more unrealistic: every kid (except for 3% with serious handicaps or other issues) is supposed to be achieving on grade level every year, climbing in lockstep up an ever more challenging ladder. This flies in the face of all sorts of research showing that children start off in different places academically and grow at different rates.

Add to the mix the fact that much of the promised funding failed to materialize and many early critics insisted that No Child Left Behind was nothing more than a cynical plan to destroy American faith in public education and open the way to vouchers and school choice.

Now a former official in Bush’s Education department is giving at least some support to that notion…

[T]here were others in the department, according to Neuman, who saw NCLB as a Trojan horse for the choice agenda — a way to expose the failure of public education and “blow it up a bit,” she says. “There were a number of people pushing hard for market forces and privatization.”

Neuman also regrets the Administration’s use of humiliation and shame as a lever for school reform. Failure to meet NCLB’s inflexible goals meant schools would be publicly labeled as failures. Neuman now sees this as a mistake: “Vilifying teachers and saying we are going to shame them was not the right approach.”

The combination of inflexibility and public humiliation for those not meeting federal goals ignited so much frustration among educators that NCLB now appears to be an irreparably damaged brand. “The problems lingered long enough and there’s so much anger that it may not be fixable,” says Neuman. While the American Federation of Teachers was once on board with the NCLB goals, she notes, the union has turned against it. “Teachers hate NCLB because they feel like they’ve been picked on.”

Is there a way out of the mess? Neuman still supports school accountability and the much-maligned annual tests mandated by the law. But she now believes that the nation has to look beyond the schoolroom, if it wishes to leave no child behind. Along with 59 other top educators, policymakers and health officials, she’s put her name to a nonpartisan document to be released on Tuesday by the Economic Policy Institute, a Washington think tank. Titled “A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education,” it lays out an expansive vision for leveling the playing field for low-income kids, one that looks toward new policies on child health and support for parents and communities. Neuman says that money she’s seen wasted on current programs should be reallocated accordingly. “Pinning all our hopes on schools will never change the odds for kids.”

The right wing attack machine turned on Scott McClellan when he belatedly told the truth. We can expect the same treatment for Neuman.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under Accountability, AMPS, Best Practices, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, National News, nclb, No Child Left Behind, Uncategorized

by | June 5, 2008 · 3:23 pm

Talkin’ Dropouts

James Brown, “Don’t Be a Dropout.”

Lots of news about dropouts and graduation rates recently.

Education Week just published their Diplomas Count report. It is pretty alarmist. Graduation rate scholars Jim Heckman, Paul LaFontaine, Larry Mishel, and Joydeep Roy raised some issues with how Education Week counted (hat tip to eduwonkette, one of my new favorite education bloggers):

In our examination of the data and methodologies available to estimate high school graduation rates we have found that insights can be gained from household surveys and from administrative data on student enrollment and diplomas granted. However, we find the measures of graduation rates in Education Week’s Diploma Counts project, computed from diploma and enrollment data, to be exceedingly inaccurate. The main problem is the assumption that the number of students enrolled in 9th grade is the same as the number of students entering high school. This assumption artificially lowers the estimates of current graduation rates, especially for minorities who are more likely to be retained (repeat 9th grade). This measure also artificially reduces the growth of the graduation rate over time because the practice of grade retention has grown over time, again, especially among minorities.

The resulting errors are sufficiently large to artificially lower the graduation rate by 9 percentage points overall and by 14 percentage points for minorities. Grade retention also differs sharply across states and localities, distorting geographic comparisons. Last, these measures do not reflect the ultimate graduation rates of a cohort of students because the data do not capture diplomas provided by adult education and other sources than schools.

Paper from Heckman and Lafontaine, here; Paper from Mishel and Roy, here.

The Wisconsin State Journal editorialized in favor of adopting the graduation rate measure endorsed by the National Governor’s Association (NGA) as a single national standard (Leslie Anne Howard of the Dane County United Way had an op. ed., mostly in support of this position). There is much to be said in favor of national statistical standardization, but if the adopted standard is flawed, you open the door to a new set of problems. The NGA measure is largely based on the one used by Florida. Sherman Dorn notes some “troubling issues” with the Florida rate calculations:

  • The inclusion of alternatives to standard diplomas in the graduation numbers, with no public disaggregation
  • The exclusion of alleged transfers and movers from the base (creating an adjusted cohort) without any data quality checks to ensure that transfers really show up at a private school or in another state
  • The exclusion from the base (adjusted cohort) of students who drop out and immediately enroll in GED programs (as transfers to adult programs)

He also has some nice general thoughts on what to look for in graduation rate calculations here and here (lots more on his site, browse around or do a search; his posts are very accessible for those of us who are not steeped in the swamp of grad rate measures).

Information on how Wisconsin calculates dropout and completion rates. Many of the issues noted in the critiques of the various measures are present with Wisconsin’s. MMSD posted am 81.8% “regular diploma” completion rate in 2006-7, but there are great disparities among the rates for white students (90.4%), African American students (61.6%) and Hispanic students (60.8). The 2006-7 dropout rate was 2.699%, also with pronounced racial disparities (data can be accessed here).

Finally, this story in the Cap Times on Operation Fresh Start, (which has a GED component). By the way, I think this is a fine use of Wal-Mart’s money, but I still wish our legislators would get them to pay their fair share of taxes (some recent progress, but a long way to go).

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, AMPS, Best Practices, education, Equity, Local News, National News, nclb, No Child Left Behind, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | June 4, 2008 · 3:52 pm

Equity Policies — Learning from Others

I’m still working through what did and did not happen with Equity at Monday’s MMSD Board of Education meeting (video here, starting at about the 2 hour and 25 minute mark) and how and why things did and did not happen. The very short version is that the Board passed a policy that did not include the “Considerations” or any implementation regulation or guidance, but thanks to an amendment by Maya Cole does improve upon the draft version’s reporting clause (for more information and my pre-meeting thoughts, see this post).

One of the canards that was part of the discussion was that (Equity) policies can or should not include implementation guidelines or regulations. Policies and implementation plans come in many forms; there is no one right way. For that reason, I’m going do a series of posts on what other districts are doing in this area.

My opinion is that Madison is doing much and isn’t doing enough. Madison is doing much because many of the programs and procedures in place embody equity ideals. Madison isn’t doing enough because there is not a systematic focus on equity related issues and much of what goes on is simply “current practice” and note the result of any clear commitment. Focus and commitment could be derived from a policy or (like in Brookline, MA) a specific initiative. Whatever you think is best, it is always good to know what other districts are doing as a basis for comparison.

Today’s post is from Charlotte-Mecklenburg, NC School District. Like MMSD, CMS is a founding member of the Minority Student Achievement Network.

Here is the entirety of CMS’s “Equitable Educational Opportunities” policy:

The Board of Education is committed to providing equal access to excellent educational opportunities for all its students in all its schools.

The provision of such opportunities for all students is expected to require providing additional resources and implementing innovative strategies to schools serving students with additional educational needs, particularly students at risk of academic failure. Such resources and strategies may include, but are not limited to: differentiated staffing; smaller class sizes; increased instructional supplies and materials; expanded and renovated facilities; innovative family and community involvement initiatives; upgraded technology; comprehensive co-curricular activities; supplemental guidance and counseling; enhanced professional development; and preschool educational opportunities.

In determining whether all students are being provided with such opportunities, the Board of Education shall adopt baseline standards in the following areas: educational opportunities; student achievement; instructional materials and supplies; media equipment and resources; technology; facilities; faculty; teacher/student ratio; and family and community involvement.

On an annual basis, aligned with the annual budget process, the Superintendent shall present to the Board of Education the following: recommendations related to the baseline standards in the areas listed above; assessment of whether all students are being provided equal access to excellent educational opportunities; strategies for ensuring that all students are provided such opportunities; determination of the amounts of funding and resources needed to provide such opportunities; and recommended allocation and reallocation of the funds and resources needed to provide those opportunities.

On an annual basis, aligned with the annual budget process, the Board of Education shall do the following: comprehensively review and revise the baseline standards in the areas listed above; assess whether all students are being provided equal access to excellent educational opportunities; direct the Superintendent to develop strategies for ensuring that those opportunities are being provided; determine the amounts of funding and resources needed to provide such opportunities; seek and direct the Superintendent to seek the funds and resources needed to provide such opportunities; and allocate, reallocate and direct the Superintendent to allocate and reallocate the funds and resources needed to provide those opportunities.

The Board and Superintendent shall appoint a committee to help facilitate the annual analysis of the provision of equal access to excellent educational opportunities for all its students in all its schools. The Superintendent shall establish and implement regulations and strategies designed to accomplish the requirements of this policy.

This is much, much more specific in implementation and reporting than what Madison has adopted. I like it.

For more equity related policies from CMS, click here.

For more on the equity work in CMS, click here, 2006 PowerPoint here.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, education, Equity, Local News, Uncategorized, We Are Not Alone

by | June 4, 2008 · 11:35 am

Quotes of the day

From Milwaukee Public Schools, 2006-7 School Report Card (click to see full report card). When value added is implemented in MMSD, we can expect similar reporting. Note that the gray areas are \

From Milwaukee Public Schools, 2006-7 School Report Card (click to see full report card). When value added is implemented in MMSD, we can expect similar reporting. Note that the gray areas are “error bands,” indicating 95% confidence intervals.

From an email sent by a DPI employee to Peter Sobol of the Monona Grove Board of Education.

… The WKCE is a large-scale assessment designed to provide a snapshot of how well a district or school is doing at helping all students reach proficiency on state standards, with a focus on school and district-level accountability. A large-scale, summative assessment such as the WKCE is not designed to provide diagnostic information about individual students. Those assessments are best done at the local level, where immediate results can be obtained. Schools should not rely on only WKCE data to gauge progress of individual students or to determine effectiveness of programs or curriculum.

From the WCER Value Added Research Center (contracted with MMSD and MPS).

Benefits of Value-Added Methods

Value-added methods “get the story right” by correcting for errors in the test scales, identifying and adjusting for bias in the administration of the test, in student participation, or in classroom treatments. In addition, one of the overriding goals of the work is to be transparent and fair. It is in everyone’s interest for schools to be as productive as possible for all students.

All teachers should be able to deeply understand and discuss the impact of changes in practice and curriculum for themselves and their students. Leaders should be able to make resource allocation decisions (money, staffing, etc.) informed by the best available data. Value-added methods can both showcase high levels of achievement as well as reward those who have mastered the art of improvement.

The MMSD value added analysis will rely on WKCE tests.

Anyone see a problem?

I’ve been working on a long post about the basics, benefits and limits of Value Added Analysis. Still a lot of work to do on that. Till then, here are two recent stories from Education Week (registration may be required).

New Uses Explored for ‘Value Added’ Data

Scrutiny Heightens for ‘Value Added’ Research Methods

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under Accountability, AMPS, Best Practices, education, Local News, Quote of the Day, Uncategorized