Making the grade for IU's School of Education

Only above-average students make the grade for IU's
education school
a letter to the editor in response to the misinformation in a recent column by Andrea Neal....it is important to stay diligent and get the facts as we all work for better schools in Indiana--misrepresentation, political spin, and distortions get us nowhere.  Ms. Neal should not only be embarrased but she should apologize.

I am writing in response to Andrea Neal's Nov. 24 column on raising teacher standards. I agree that the way to improve schools is to improve teachers. To do that, as Neal suggested, it is essential to recruit the best and brightest into teaching and prepare them well to be effective teachers. But spreading misinformation about schools of education dilutes that effort.


In her column, Neal mistakenly suggests that U.S. teachers come disproportionately from the bottom third of their high-school cohort groups. She adds that Indiana University accepts into its teacher education program students with cumulative GPAs as low as 2.5 on a 4-point scale. The implication is that IU education students are selected from the bottom third of high school graduates.

The fact is that before students are admitted to the IU School of Education they first must earn admission to IU. On the Bloomington campus, the average high school GPA of entering freshmen this fall was 3.69 on a 4-point scale and their average SAT score was 1199. This puts the majority of IU entering freshmen in the top 10 percent of high school graduates in Indiana.

Among these top-ranked students admitted to IU, those interested in education as a major must apply to the School of Education and meet additional admissions requirements. These requirements include at least a 2.5 average GPA in freshmen and sophomore arts and science college courses and no grade lower than "C" in pre-professional education courses. In addition, students must pass the math, reading and writing portions of the Praxis teacher license test of basic skills, and complete specific requirements in the content field they will teach.

The actual average college GPA of students admitted to the School of Education in Bloomington this fall was 3.39 on a 4-point scale. The requirement of at least 2.5 GPA in college courses before admission to the School of Education is higher than that of most other academic units on the Bloomington campus, which typically require a minimum 2.0 GPA.

To attract even more high-performing students, last year the School of Education in Bloomington instituted a new Direct Admits Scholars program that guarantees admission to entering IU freshmen who have distinguished themselves as outstanding students in high school. The average high school GPA of students admitted to the School of Education through this program is 3.82 on a 4-point scale.

But the real test of a high-quality teacher education program is the performance of graduates. This year eight of the 10 finalists for Indiana Teacher of the Year were alumni of the IU School of Education in Bloomington and Indianapolis. The Teacher of the Year and the runner--up are graduates of the Bloomington program. Two of the four Indiana finalists for the Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching announced a few weeks ago are IU School of Education alumni. That award is the highest recognition that a mathematics or science teacher may receive for outstanding teaching in the United States, an award won by an alumna two years ago.

We should indeed learn from international comparisons, find ways to increase starting pay for teachers, and continuously strive to improve the pipeline of professionals for the classroom. A productive discussion, however, has to be based on facts and a more thorough understanding of how successful American schools of education prepare teachers. It serves no purpose to spread misinformation about schools that are doing an excellent job preparing teachers. To do so only undermines the effort to recruit top students into teaching.

Gonzalez is dean of the Indiana University School of Education.

Grading Education Reform

....an interesting presentation of some of the faulty logic in contemporary school reform.  Something similar was suggested when the IDOE decided to get in the business of mandated the curriculum of Schools of Education--would it even be thinkable to imagine that the state would do this for the School of Medicine?  Thoughts?

My View: Instead of slogans, try this to improve schools

Written by Steve Fox

For their efforts in school reform, I would like to award a grade of F to: Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Arne Duncan, all members of Congress who have voted for No Child Left Behind
legislation, all state governors and legislators who have supported standardized testing, accountability and choice as the answers to education problems, and all state superintendents of public instruction who have supported those simplistic answers.

That grade should result, at the minimum, in lowered pay for these policymakers, possibly reassignment to new jobs or, in some cases, dismissal. If any are already retired or have been fired by the voters, then we can require them to do public service, assisting teachers in their overcrowded, underfunded classrooms.

I apologize for any hurt feelings or damaged careers that result from my rigorous grading. However, we must put students at the center and not worry about the concerns of adults.

Now let's move on to some meaningful school reform.
Students are people, not widgets. We cannot evaluate student learning the way we might evaluate production on an assembly line. Try this interesting analogy. Give all the doctors in Indianapolis 180
patients each. These doctors have one year to work with these patients and improve their health. By the end of the year, we would ideally like to see 100 percent of those patients with passing scores on all
their medical tests. And we would like the doctors to spend at least 25 percent of their time with each patient doing repeated tests. Also, these doctors must follow medical and health procedures designed by policymakers who have no medical training. These doctors should not belong to the American Medical Association, because we all know the AMA is a selfish organization that cares only about defending bad doctors. Also, we are not interested in the patients' overall health, or any squishy talk about holistic medicine or mind-body connections or social conditions that affect health.

Just deliver the results, please.

Getting the Data Right--Progress in Indiana

Here, Here!  No one we know supports the status quo....but accurate reporting and resisting political spin has to insisted upon.

Data tell story of progress in our public schools


Written by John Ellis

Gov. Mitch Daniels, in his Nov. 7 opinion piece ("Student-centered learning should be our top focus") regarding education in Indiana, stated: "Only the most selfish special interests still insist on defending the status quo." No argument there. Our students deserve the best, and we know all schools are not as good as all of our students deserve.

I commend the governor for his support to require highly effective teachers for all of our children and improved accountability for all schools. Those are big issues and worthy of our time, debate and efforts to make significant improvements. However, we won't get there by ignoring Indiana's educational successes.  The governor stated: "Indiana has led the nation in many areas lately . . . but we can make no such claim about K-12 education."

Indiana's public schools have improved in several important measures over the past two decades, according to data from the Indiana Department of Education, the College Board, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and ACT Inc. It is a risk, when speaking to facts, that one is likely to be labeled as a defender of the status quo. But facts are not controlled by opinion.


On the NAEP, the "national reading and math test," Indiana has consistently outperformed the nation on all 35 assessments since 1990. Indiana's composite score on the ACT rose to 22.2 in 2008-09, the highest mark in state history. Indiana ACT scores have exceeded national averages in all 20 years of the study.

Verbal SAT scores rose from 490 in 1988-89 to an historic high of 504 in 2004-05. Since then, a revised SAT shows reading and writing scores separately. Reading has fallen to 496 in 2008-09, down from 498 in 2005-06. Writing has fallen to 480 in 2008-09, down from 486 in 2005-06. These scores came while Indiana tested 63 percent of all graduates, 17 percent more than the nation as a whole, thus giving more marginal students a chance at college. SAT math scores on the old SAT went up from 487 in 1988-89 to 508 in 2004-05, another top performance in state history. In the four years of the revised SAT, Indiana scored 509, 507, 508 and 507 respectively, maintaining a high performance level on a more difficult test.

The dropout rate was 8.7 percent for the Class of 2009, improving from 10.3 percent, 11.9 percent and 11.2 percent in three previous years of the new system that tracks every student. Hoosier public schools have successfully raised daily attendance in 15 of the past 20 years to the highest level in our state history. In the four years of the revised SAT, Indiana scored 509, 507, 508 and 507 respectively, maintaining a high performance level on a more difficult test.

The dropout rate was 8.7 percent for the Class of 2009, improving from 10.3 percent, 11.9 percent and 11.2 percent in three previous years of the new system that tracks every student. Hoosier public schools have successfully raised daily attendance in 15 of the past 20 years to the highest level in our state's history, 96.1 percent. The percent of graduates aspiring to go to college went up 19 of the 20 years to reach 76.9 percent in 2008-09, the highest level in state history. The need for this improvement has had consistently strong support from the governor.

The data show improvement in Indiana's public schools. Let's build from there, knowing that continuous improvement is never concluded, but ongoing, and needs to be consistently and accurately measured and reported.


Ellis is executive director of the Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents.

Thoughful Moderator in Education Reform

An editorial from the Indy Star unusually offers a bit of a voice of reason in the fervor to "reform" Indiana's schools.  Good cautions here but if you've been following the Daniels/Bennett agenda, "a thoughtful moderator" doesn't seem likely.
Thoughts?

Strike balance in push to better educate children- Indy Star

Gov. Mitch Daniels and the Indiana General Assembly need to move quickly but also thoughtfully to overhaul Indiana's educational system.  Last week's election results gave the governor and his Republican allies in the Statehouse a clear path to pursue reforms they've long desired, including merit pay for teachers, less rigidity in union work rules, and more freedom to open charter schools.

Much of Daniels' agenda makes sense, at least on paper.  But the governor, state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett and legislative leaders still need to show how ideas such as bonus pay for top-performing teachers will work in real-life schools.

And although the push to provide parents with additional options for educating their children is certainly welcome, the track record for charter schools is mixed. Some charters, like some traditional schools, are outstanding [19%, that's one in five people]. Others are mediocre at best. [and some are criminally negligent]

Teachers unions in Indiana have long brandished too much power in the General Assembly. Year after year, they've persuaded allies such as outgoing House Speaker Pat Bauer to kill good ideas and to promote measures that favor adults' interests over children's. Curtailing the unions' power is long overdue.

Yet, a balance must be struck. Veteran teachers need enough job security to ensure that they're not driven from classrooms because of the failure of others, including administrators and parents. Accountability is a vital concept, but it's critical that results are measured accurately and rewards and demerits are meted out fairly.

On Tuesday, the governor and the state superintendent were given a clear opportunity to move aggressively. They can't waste it.  But every reform-minded leader needs someone who is able to moderate excesses and promote accountability.

With Democrats reduced to the point of irrelevancy in the Statehouse, and deservedly so because of their absolute refusal to confront Indiana's educational problems, others must emerge to vet ideas driven by Daniels and Bennett.

It wouldn't be disloyal but prudent for Republican leaders such as likely House Education Committee Chairman Robert Behning and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Luke Kenley to take the lead on ensuring that reform measures aren't rushed through the legislative process.

Educators in the state's public and private universities also can help evaluate the flood of new proposals, including one that would provide financial incentives for some students to skip their senior year of high school to start college early.

Is the status quo acceptable in Indiana's schools? Absolutely not. But not every reform idea has merit.

Daniels and Bennett clearly understand the task ahead of them. They will be aggressive agents of change on behalf of the state's children. The key job of thoughtful moderator, however, is for now vacant.

Dark Days in Indiana

Q: Who's the biggest loser in November's election?
A: Public Education (Ann Delany, Indiana Week in Review)

Nov. 2nd Vote on the end of Public Education

A critical piece of commentary on the future of public education in Indiana.  Read it, take some notes, and pass it too a friend--then, for God's sake, VOTE.___________________________
The House Republicans of the Indiana House of Representatives, in their election agenda issued in early September, have called for private school vouchers and expanded private school tax credits if they gain control of the House in the November 2nd elections.


I oppose private school vouchers and tax credits, which would divert public money to private schools and insure the slow death of public schools through the gradual loss of both funding and community support. Therefore I must oppose the efforts of House Republican to win a majority in the House with my vote and with my voice.

Specifically, House Republicans call for public dollars to fund “grants” to allow students in “failing schools” to attend private schools, ignoring numerous public and charter options already available. They also call for an expansion of the tax credit program passed in the 2009 budget which diverts $2.5 million in state tax money to fund private school scholarships for “low-income families”. “Low-income” as defined in the 2009 law includes those making up to $81,586 for a family of four. Is that really “low income”?

Control of the House has been determined by a razor thin margin for years. Currently, Democrats hold the advantage 52-48. In 2005, when Republicans last recaptured the Indiana House by a 52-48 margin, I witnessed an epic legislative battle for several months on a bill to establish both private school vouchers and tax credits. Finally on April 7th, an amendment to remove vouchers from the bill passed 57-41 vote, with 10 courageous Republicans bucking their caucus leaders to resist private school vouchers.

Now, after retirements and primary election defeats, only two of those ten are still in the legislature. More recently in the 2010 short session, an amendment to SB309 was offered to allow tax credits for contributions to private schools, and only two Republican representatives opposed it.

The picture is clear. If they are in control, the Republican leadership will not fail in their efforts to bring private school vouchers and expanded tax credits to Indiana.  Therefore, the Nov. 2nd election is a referendum on the blockbuster issue of our generation: privatizing schools by supporting private schools with public funds.

This fundamental issue should not get lost in the din of campaign ads on other topics. With a legal mission to teach the Constitution and the attributes of good citizenship, public schools have been the key institution responsible for perpetuating our democracy. Giving public incentives to attend private and parochial schools will ultimately weaken public schools and destroy the community support that they must have to give all students who show up at the door a quality education. It will accelerate the fragmentation of our society along sectarian lines.

I believe that Indiana’s Constitution got it right in Article 1:”No money shall be drawn from the treasury, for the benefit of any religious or theological institution.” Our public policies must avoid financial entanglements with religious schools.

Advocates for public education who agree with me need to be aware that those supporting private school vouchers believe they are on the brink of success for a goal they have pursued for years. Whether public dollars stay with public schools or will be diverted to private schools will be determined in the all-important November 2nd election. Those who wish to protect public schools from these privatization strategies should actively participate in the election for members of the Indiana House of Representatives. On this crucial issue, the battle lines are clear.

LINK:

The ineffectiveness of Merit Pay

Remember this as the Bennett DOE continues to follow the path of market-based reforms.  Paying for performance sounds good and seems to make sense--except for the pesky little detail that it doesn't work.

Study: Teacher Bonuses Fail To Boost Test Scores

by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

text size A A A

ATLANTA September 21, 2010, 04:33 pm ET

Offering big bonuses to teachers failed to raise students' test scores in a three-year study released Tuesday that calls into question the Obama administration's push for merit pay to improve education.

The study, conducted in the metropolitan Nashville school system by Vanderbilt University's National Center on Performance Incentives, was described by the researchers as the nation's first scientifically rigorous look at merit pay for teachers.

It found that students whose teachers were offered bonuses of up to $15,000 a year for improved test scores registered the same gains on standardized exams as those whose teachers were given no such incentives.

"I think most people agree today that the current way in which we compensate teachers is broken," said Matthew Springer, executive director of the Vanderbilt center and lead researcher on the study. "But we don't know what the better way is yet."

The study comes as the Obama administration encourages school systems to link teacher pay and tenure to how students perform on tests and other measures of achievement.

The researchers looked at fifth- through eighth-grade math teachers from 2007 to 2009. A group of about 300 teachers started out in the study; half were eligible for the bonuses, the other half were not.

The bonuses were given out based on improvements in scores on Tennessee's standardized exam, which is used by the state as part of the federal No Child Left Behind requirements.

Springer was quick to point out that his study looked only at individual bonuses, not extra pay doled out to teams of teachers or an entire school. He said more research is needed.

"Some people were initially disappointed when they saw the results, but quickly turned around and said, 'Well, at least we finally have an answer,'" he said. "It means pay can't do it alone."

The U.S. Education Department called the study too narrowly focused.

"It only looked at the narrow question of whether more pay motivates teachers to try harder," said spokeswoman Sandra Abrevaya. "What we are trying to do is change the culture of teaching by giving all educators the feedback they need to get better while rewarding and incentivizing the best to teach in high-need schools, hard-to-staff subjects."

The American Federation of Teachers praised the study and argued that teachers need other resources, including better training and more supportive administrators.

"Merit pay is not the panacea that some would like it to be. There are no quick fixes in education," said union president Randi Weingarten. "Providing individual bonuses for teachers standing alone does not work."

Teachers unions have historically opposed merit pay, arguing that test scores are not an accurate measure of student achievement, that financial rewards could pit teachers against each other, and that administrators could use bonuses to reward favorites and punish others.

Jennifer Conboy, a high school social studies teacher in Miami, called merit pay a "baseless fad."

"Merit pay is an excuse to resist the attempt of teachers to get fair pay in the first place," the 37-year-old Conboy said. "On a personal level, merit pay would do nothing to me. I took this job because I think education is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and if I cared about democracy — which I do — then I had a responsibility to do whatever I could to strengthen education."

Only a few schools and districts across the country have merit pay, and in some states the idea is effectively illegal. The Obama White House hoped to encourage more states to pass merit pay laws with its $4.35 billion "Race to the Top" grant competition.

Some states tried to enact merit bonuses for teachers, but most, like Georgia, were unable to get the necessary laws passed. Colorado passed a controversial law that ties teacher pay to student performance and allows the state to strip tenure from low-performing instructors, but the state did not win the Race to the Top grant money it was counting on to help carry out the law.

Only about half of the 300 teachers originally in the Nashville study were left at the end of the three years because some retired, moved to other schools or stopped teaching math. About 40 teachers got bonuses each year. Overall, the researchers said, test scores rose modestly for both groups of students during the three-year study, suggesting that the financial incentives made no difference.

"It's not enough to say, 'I'll pay you more if you do better.' You've got to help people know how to do better," said Amy Wilkins, vice president of the Education Trust, a Washington think tank. "Absolutely we should reward them once they do better, but to think merit pay alone will get them there is insane."

(This version CORRECTS amount of Race to the Top program.)