2001 national education summit · 2021. 3. 16. · three areas: teaching, testing and...

2001National

EducationSummit

Sponsored by Achieve, Inc.

The governors, corporate leaders and educators who organized this meeting extend

their deepest sympathies to those who lostloved ones in the terrorist assaults of

September 11. Events of that day have profoundly affected every American.

The people of the United States can draw on great reservoirs of patriotism, decency, courage and resilience as they respond to

this unpardonable tragedy. The participants in this meeting, united in the belief that

healthy public schools are the foundation ofour democracy, dedicate this Summit to the

task of building a stronger America.

Briefing BookOctober 9–10, 2001Palisades, New York

Sponsored by Achieve, Inc.

2001National

EducationSummit

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i tii

Board of DirectorsCo-ChairsJohn Engler, GovernorState of MichiganLouis V. Gerstner, Jr., Chairman

and CEOIBM Corporation

Co-Vice ChairsPhilip M. Condit, Chairman and CEOThe Boeing CompanyGray Davis, GovernorState of California

Board MembersKeith E. Bailey, Chairman, President

and CEOWilliamsRoy E. Barnes, GovernorState of GeorgiaCraig R. Barrett, President and CEOIntel CorporationFrank Keating, GovernorState of OklahomaGary Locke, GovernorState of WashingtonEdward B. Rust Jr., Chairman and CEOState Farm InsuranceArthur F. Ryan, Chairman and CEOPrudentialBob Taft, GovernorState of Ohio

PresidentRobert B. Schwartz

TreasurerRoger Semerad

Vice PresidentsMatthew GandalRonn Robinson

Summit CoordinatorT. Jason Weedon

About Achieve, Inc.Achieve is an independent, bipartisan,nonprofit organization created by gover-nors and corporate leaders to help raisestandards and performance in Americanschools. Achieve was founded at the 1996National Education Summit and subse-quently sponsored another Summit in 1999.

Achieve’s principal purposes are to:■ provide sustained public leadership and

advocacy for the movement to raisestandards and improve student per-formance;

■ help states benchmark their standards,assessments and accountability systemsagainst the best in the country and theworld;

■ build partnerships that allow states towork together to improve teaching andlearning and raise student achieve-ment; and

■ serve as a national clearinghouse on education standards and school reform.Achieve is providing a number of print

and electronic resources to help educationreform advocates as they work to ensureacademic and career success for all stu-dents. The organization has expanded itsWeb site (www.achieve.org) to provideadditional information and resources.

Achieve, Inc.

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i t iii

This meeting marks the third timein five years that leaders from government, business and educa-tion have gathered to consider

ways to raise standards and achievementin America’s schools. At the 1996 NationalEducation Summit, governors and businessleaders pledged to work together, state bystate, to accomplish these goals. Sincethen, academic standards and testing sys-tems have been created in nearly everystate, including many that never beforehad them. The participants also agreed tocreate a new organization, Achieve, toassist states in their reform efforts.

In 1999, education leaders joined gov-ernors and corporate CEOs for anotherSummit to examine the capacity of schoolsand school systems to deliver on thepromise of high standards for all children.That Summit produced an unprecedentedset of commitments across the states toimprove the quality of teaching, providesupports to struggling students and tightenaccountability systems so that no childrenare left behind.

Why hold another Summit? Becauseour work is not done. While there areexamples of schools that are turning thingsaround, the goal of high standards for allhas not yet been met. The president andCongress are poised to enact legislation thatwill accelerate the pace of these reforms.States will be challenged to expand theirtesting and accountability systems, inter-vene in chronically low-performingschools, and close the achievement gapthat continues to separate the advantagedand disadvantaged.

Most states are working hard on thisagenda. Most will have to work even harderin the months and years ahead. The 2001National Education Summit will providean opportunity for a frank exchangeamong governors, business leaders andeducators about the challenges and priori-ties that must be addressed if these effortsare to result in real academic success forour children.

About This Summit

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i t

Table of ContentsLetter From the Summit Co-Chairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vii

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix

Progress Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

We’re Seeing Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Our Work Is Not Done . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Progress Since 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Why Another Summit? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Public Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Backlash Overblown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Legitimate Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Teaching and Learning: Closing the Achievement Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Creating a Supportive Policy Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Improving the Quality of Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Testing and Accountability: Using Data to Drive Improvement . . . . . . . . . .21

Making the Most of Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Creating a Fair and Firm Accountability System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Statement of Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Technology Demonstrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41

Additional Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i t vii

Dear Colleague:

This gathering of governors, corporate leaders and education officials at the 2001 NationalEducation Summit comes at an important juncture. Less than one month removed fromthe tragic events of September 11, we’re reminded in the most poignant way possible ofthe need to unite and to aggressively resume the work of building the future of this greatnation. Both of those objectives will be front and center as we continue the work of driv-ing higher academic achievement for all students in our public schools.

Our agenda is straightforward: We must accelerate our progress in raising standardsand our ability to measure progress. We must address the achievement gap that threatensto divide the nation into two camps — the education “haves” and “have nots.” And wemust move with speed, in order to capitalize on the momentum and broad-based publicsupport for the reform movement.

Improving the nation’s schools for each and every child embodies our nation’s highestideals, our democratic values, and our economic and societal aspirations. The future ofAmerica, and of our children, depends on our focused diligence in enabling all children tolearn and succeed.

Over the next 24 hours, we will focus on strengthening state education systems inthree areas: teaching, testing and accountability. This briefing book includes informationon state activities in each of these areas, as well as data on our progress since 1996 and onpublic support for our efforts, to inform our discussions. Our goal is to adopt a statementof principles that we all must follow to accelerate our progress in raising the bar and clos-ing the achievement gap.

We look forward to working with you at the 2001 National Education Summit. Wehave a tremendous responsibility before us. Let us make the most productive use of ourtime together.

Letter From the SummitCo-Chairs

Louis V. Gerstner, Jr.Chairman and CEOIBM Corporation

John Engler, GovernorState of Michigan

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i t ix

The 2001 National EducationSummit briefing book was preparedby the staff of Achieve, Inc., withhelp from CommunicationWorks

and KSA-Plus Communications. Althoughrepresentatives of other organizations pro-vided ideas and information for thesematerials, Achieve is fully responsible forthe final content.

This briefing book would not havebeen possible without the hard work ofmany individuals and organizations.Achieve would like to thank all those whocontributed ideas, research and writing tothis book and commented on early drafts.

The briefing book was written by the following members of the Achievestaff: Matthew Gandal, Robert Rothman,Jennifer Vranek and Jason Weedon. MarkFaust, Torey Silloway and Scott Street, alsoof the Achieve staff, provided research support; Joe Garcia and his colleagues atCommunicationWorks and Bill Porter atKSA-Plus Communications also con-tributed research and writing. The Centerfor Children and Technology provideddescriptions of the technology demonstra-tions. Achieve is particularly indebted toVirginia Edwards and Kathryn Doherty ofEducation Week, who provided preliminarydata from “Quality Counts 2002.”

We also would like to thank the mem-bers of the Summit Advisory Committee,who provided ideas and information forthe briefing materials. These include: AnneBryant of the National School BoardsAssociation; Betty Castor of the NationalBoard for Professional Teaching Standards;Chester E. Finn, Jr., of the Thomas B.Fordham Foundation; Milton Goldberg of the National Alliance of Business; KatiHaycock of The Education Trust; TomHoulihan of the Council of Chief StateSchool Officers; Dane Linn of the NationalGovernors Association; Billie Orr of theEducation Leaders Council; Ted Sanders of the Education Commission of theStates; Susan Traiman of The BusinessRoundtable; and Brenda Welburn of theNational Association of State Boards ofEducation.

The following senior staff members toAchieve’s Board of Directors were extremelyhelpful in the final review of these materi-als: Stanley Litow and Robin Willner forMr. Louis V. Gerstner, Jr.; and Scott Jenkinsfor Gov. John Engler.

Finally, special thanks to KathyDelaney and her colleagues at KSA-PlusCommunications for managing the designand production of these materials.

Acknowledgments

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i t 1

Five years ago, the nation’s governorsand business leaders sat downtogether in Palisades, N.Y., to consid-er what to do to stimulate the move-

ment to raise standards and achievementin America’s schools. At the time, there wasevidence that the standards movement hadstalled. The voluntary national standards,which were expected to guide state efforts,were attracting criticism from many quar-ters and were not providing the modelsstates expected. Few states — fewer than 14— actually had developed standards in coresubjects. And ratings of those standardswere mixed at best.

These challenges failed to deter partici-pants at the 1996 National EducationSummit. On the contrary, the governors,chief executive officers and educatorssteeled themselves and recommitted theirstates to setting high standards for all stu-dents, developing assessments to measureprogress against the standards and holdingschools accountable for performance as away to improve instruction. As further evi-dence of their commitment, the governorsand CEOs created an organization, knownas Achieve, to help states in their efforts.

How far we have come. Today, 49 stateshave set standards for students, and whilethe quality of those standards varies, manyrepresent a considerable improvement overearlier standards. The best of the 1996 stan-dards would be about in the middle of thepack today.

Similarly, virtually all states now testtheir students in the four core subjects.The quality of the tests varies as well. Buttests today are more likely than ever toinclude questions requiring short answers oressay responses, and on the whole, tests are

more challenging, asking students todemonstrate that they have met rigorousstandards.

States also increasingly have addedaccountability measures, holding bothschools and students accountable for per-formance. And these accountability sys-tems are starting to show some effects:There is evidence that they are creating ahost of incentives for states, districts andschools to improve performance.

When governors and CEOs gatheredagain in 1999 for a National EducationSummit — this time with even more educa-tors — they reiterated their commitment toholding students and schools accountablefor their performance. At the same time,they focused greater attention on raisingthe quality of teaching and on giving allstudents a fair chance to reach standards —conditions vital to improving the nation’sschools. States offered action plans thatwere published on Achieve’s Web sitedescribing how they would hone theiraccountability systems to create incentivesfor schools and students to succeed andhow they would respond to greaterdemands on teachers and students.

Changes have been difficult, but theresulting activity, including new state poli-

Progress Report

HOW FAR WE HAVE COME. TODAY, 49 STATES HAVE SET

STANDARDS FOR STUDENTS.TESTS ARE MORE CHALLENGING,

ASKING STUDENTS TO

DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAVE

MET RIGOROUS STANDARDS.

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m i t2

cies, is evidence of the national consensus. The biggest news is thatthe efforts are beginning to pay offwhere it counts — in improved stu-dent achievement.

We’re Seeing ResultsMany sources show trends movingin the right direction.

National Gains■ In mathematics, performance

improved substantially for 13-year-olds during the 1990s,according to the NationalAssessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP, nces.ed.gov).Although performance remainslower than it needs to be, thepercentage of students perform-ing below the basic level droppedsharply, from 50 percent to 31percent; and the percentage offourth graders who perform atthe proficient level or higher inmathematics doubled over the decade,to 26 percent. (See chart at right.)

State Gains■ Twenty-seven of 31 states have signifi-

cantly improved their performance inmathematics at the eighth-grade levelsince 1990. In North Carolina, forexample, mathematics scores for eighthgraders climbed 30 points on a 500-point scale over the decade. Illinois,Indiana, Ohio and Texas also substan-tially improved mathematics scores.

■ Performance in reading also hasimproved over time in some states. InConnecticut, for example, nearly half— 46 percent — of fourth graders readat the proficient level or better in 1998,up from 38 percent four years before.Colorado showed similar gains, mov-ing from 28 percent proficient to 34percent proficient between 1994 and1998. (See map on next page.)

District Gains■ Below the state level, a number of dis-

tricts and schools registered impressivegains in performance. For example,Houston improved its performance onthe state’s Texas Assessment of Aca-demic Skills (TAAS) in every gradebetween 1994 and 2000; moreover, itsrate of improvement exceeded that ofthe state average — also in every grade.Houston not only improved overallperformance, but the district also sub-stantially narrowed the achievementgap between white and minority stu-dents. For example, the proportion ofHispanic fourth graders passing theTAAS test rose from 69 percent in 1994to 89 percent in 2000 — just 7 percentless than the proportion of white stu-dents who passed.

■ In San Diego, two-thirds of the city’sschools improved their performance in

1%* 2%* 2% 3%

12%* 16%* 19%* 23%

37%*41%

43%43%

50%*

41%*36%*

31%

13%*

69%64%*

59%*

50%*

26%21%*

18%*

1990 1992 1996 2000

At or AboveProficient

At or AboveBasic

* Significantly different from 2000.Note: Percentages within each mathematics achievementlevel range may not add to 100 or to the exact percentagesat or above achievement levels due to rounding.Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NationalAssessment of Educational Progess (NAEP), 1990, 1992,1996 and 2000 Mathematics Assessments

NAEP Mathematics Achievement ResultsAcross Years: Grade 4

Basic

Advanced

Below Basic

Proficient


2000 at a pace to enable them to qualifyfor cash awards from the state. Underthe state’s accountability system, schoolsearn awards if overall performance andthe performance for all racial and ethnicgroups within the school improves.

■ According to the Council of the GreatCity Schools (www.cgcs.org), 86 percent of the country’s largest urban schooldistricts increased state test scores inmathematics in all grades tested, and80 percent increased reading scores inmore than half the grades tested.

■ The gains for some districts have been sorapid that they now defy a stereotype:Some urban districts now outperformtheir suburban and rural counterparts. InAlbuquerque; Hillsborough County,Florida; and San Francisco, the mathe-matics scores in every grade were higherthan statewide averages.

Our Work Is Not DoneDespite these signs of progress, theachievement data also provide soberingreminders of why high standards, challeng-ing tests and strong accountability remainessential levers for improving schools.Consider the performance of U.S. studentscompared to students around the world.When American fourth graders were testedin the Third International Mathematics andScience Study (TIMSS, nces.ed.gov/timss) in1995, they ranked fourth and scored wellabove the average of all countries that par-ticipated. Four years later as eighth graders,U.S. students fell below the internationalaverage of countries that participated inboth studies. (See chart on next page, left.)

Several states and school districts tookpart in the 1999 TIMSS as if they werenations. While some states did better thanothers, none had scores significantly bet-

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1990 and 2000 Mathematics Assessments, 1994 and 1998 Reading Assessments

Changes in NAEP Eighth-Grade Mathematics Scores Between 1990 and 2000 and Fourth-Grade Reading Scores Between 1994 and 1998

Mathematics and Reading Scores Improved

Reading Scores Improved

Mathematics Scores Improved


ter than the U.S. national average. Morealarmingly, the study showed large gapsbetween students in large urban districtsand other students in the same states.

Results from NAEP also show that,despite gains in a few states, American student performance in reading remainsstubbornly flat and that achievement gapsbetween white and minority students arelarge and — in some cases — widening.(See chart below, right.) The 2000 NAEPmathematics scores, while showingimprovement, also show that 12th-gradeperformance slipped in the past few years,but not significantly.

The data show clearly that our work is far from over, and the promise of thestandards movement remains unfulfilledfor many young people. If for no otherreason than to redeem that promise, wemust continue down the path we havelaid.

But there are more important reasons tostay the course. The need for higher stan-dards and levels of achievement is at least

as acute, if not more so, than when statesstarted down this road. Consider:

■ The failure rates on employer-administered literacy and mathematicstests rose from 18.9 percent in 1996 to35.5 percent in 1998 — not because theapplicants’ skills declined, but becauseskill requirements for jobs increased,according to the American ManagementAssociation (www.amanet.org).

■ Nearly 50 percent of college studentsend up taking remedial courses in read-ing and mathematics, according to arecent study by the U.S. Department ofEducation. However, even more sober-ing is this fact: The more likely a col-lege student is to take remedial classes,the more likely that student is to dropout and not finish college. (See charton next page, top.)

■ In surveys by Public Agenda (www.publicagenda.org), college professorsand employers report high numbers ofstudents and job applicants lack keyskills in writing, mathematics andproblem solving. (See chart on nextpage, bottom.) The consequences of failing to carry

through on our commitments are severe.Make no mistake: Young people face highstakes — in the economy and in society. If

224 224 227 225

193 187194 193

0

175

200

225

250

500

1992 1994 1998 2000

NAEP Fourth-Grade ReadingScores By Race/Ethnicity:

1992–2000

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NationalAssessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1994,1998 and 2000 Reading Assessments

White Students

Black Students

517

524

502

0

500

505

510

515

520

525

Mat

h S

core

s o

n T

IMSS

Tes

t

1995As fourth graders

Source: Third International Mathematics and Science Study, 2000

Of countries that participated in both studies, in 1995, U.S.fourth graders performed at the international average inmath. Four years later as eighth graders, U.S. students’scores dropped; the international average rose.

1999As eighth graders

International Average of 17 Nations

United States

Math Scores on TIMSS Tests:1995 and 1999


they graduate from high schoolwithout the knowledge and skillsthey need to succeed, they faceclosed doors. They will not be ableto live productive, fulfilling lives.The aim of the standards movementis to open doors — to ensure thatall students obtain the knowledgeand skills they need. Earning a highschool diploma should be a ticket toa bright future.

The good news is that governorsand other state policymakers remaincommitted to the agenda of raisingstandards and achievement inAmerica’s schools. They are hard atwork developing, implementing andimproving policies that will accom-plish those goals.

And the success of states anddistricts that are improving per-formance points the way for otherschool systems. The factors that areleading to their success are not asecret. The most important charac-teristic they all share is that theyembrace the standards agenda andstick with it. They accept no excusesand make it everyone’s business toensure that students meet the highstandards set for them. They meas-ure results and let everyone knowwho succeeds and who does not,and they use data to improve teach-ing and learning continuously. Andthey make sure that everyone isresponsible for educating all stu-dents to high standards.

The hard work lies ahead:Standards, assessments andaccountability are only the firststeps. The real challenge isenabling all students to reach challengingstandards. That is the most significanttask states face as they look ahead to thenext five years of the reform movement.

Progress Since 1999Two years ago, governors, business leadersand educators made a strong start towardmeeting the challenges states face. At the1999 National Education Summit, the

How well prepared for college courses are high school graduates?

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research andImprovement, June 1999

How would you rate recent jobapplicants/freshman and sophomore

students when it comes to ... ?

Source: Public Agenda, “Reality Check 2001”

Employers Professors

81%

78%

78%

61%

66%

60%

52%

78%

77%

67%

64%

60%

50%

42%

Percent saying “fair” or “poor”

100%

Writing clearly

Speaking Englishwell

Interest inlearning

Basic math skills

Motivation andconscientiousness

Work habits

Grammar andspelling

Remedial reading 10%

Remedial writing and/or math 39%

TOTAL NEEDING REMEDIATION 49%

Percent of Students at Four-Year Colleges Needing ...


leaders pledged to do so by addressing threemain areas: improving teacher quality,helping all students achieve and strength-ening accountability.

To gauge states’ progress since theSummit, we turned to Education Week,which provided preliminary data from anannual state policy survey conducted for“Quality Counts 2002,” and to othersources. These data show that states havemade progress in many areas, but morework is needed.

Improving Teacher QualitySummit participants agreed to focus onimproving the recruitment of well-qualified people into teaching, raisingstandards for new teachers, strengtheningthe professional development of teachersand revamping compensation systems toreward high performance.

■ Recruitment. States increasingly have instituted policies to attract indi-viduals into teaching, including sign-ing bonuses, housing subsidies, betterpay and improved working conditions.In addition, states have created incen-tives to attract well-qualified teachersto schools where they are most needed.Eleven states are providing financialincentives for teachers to teach in low-performing schools, the Education Weeksurvey found. But states need to ensurethat these incentives are sufficient toattract well-qualified teachers to suchschools and that schools can retainteachers once hired.

■ Raising standards for new teachers.Seven states have implemented policiesto hold teacher-education programsaccountable for their graduates’ perform-ance on licensure tests, the EducationWeek survey found. A number of addi-tional states are beginning to revamptheir accreditation systems to give moreattention to the quality of graduatesfrom teacher-education programs. A fewstates also are discouraging out-of-fieldteaching. Compared to just one state in1999, six states now notify parents ifteachers are practicing outside of theircertification area. And, according to pre-liminary data for “Quality Counts2002,” 16 states require a subject-arealicense for middle school teachers.

■ Professional development. Preliminarydata from the Education Week surveyshow that 43 states now encourageongoing professional development byproviding specific funds. However,teachers remain concerned about thequality of the professional developmentthey are receiving and the lack of align-ment with the standards they areexpected to teach. (See chart below.)

ALTHOUGH STATES ARE MOVING

TO PUT IN PLACE COMPONENTS

OF ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS, FEW HAVE PUT ALL THE PIECES

TOGETHER. ONLY A HANDFUL OF

STATES NOW HAVE COMPREHENSIVE

ACCOUNTABILITY POLICIES.

05

10

1520253035

31%

17%

23%

10095

Teacher Access to Standards-BasedProfessional Development

Perc

enta

ge

of

Teac

her

s W

ho

Say

Th

ey H

ad ..

.

Plenty ofaccess to

training onstate standards

Plenty ofaccess totrainingon state

assessments

Plenty ofaccess to

training onusing testresults fordiagnosticpurposes

Source: Education Week, “Quality Counts 2001”


■ Compensation. Thirty states providesubsidies to teachers who seek certifica-tion from the National Board forProfessional Teaching Standards(NBPTS, www.nbpts.org), and 30 statesprovide bonuses to teachers who earnNBPTS certification. This is up from 23 states providing subsidies and 22states providing bonuses in 1999. Butonly a handful of states and districts —notably, Iowa, Cincinnati and Denver— have begun to revamp compensationsystems more broadly to reward teach-ers for skills and performance. Suchsteps are critical to ensure that the best-qualified teachers remain in teaching,just as pay-for-performance systems inbusiness encourage the best employeesto stay with their companies and workhard to improve performance.

Helping All Students Achieve HighStandardsParticipants at the 1999 National EducationSummit pledged to ensure that all studentshave access to a rigorous curriculum tied tohigh standards and to provide extra learn-ing time for struggling students. ■ Extra learning time. According to

state reports to Education Week, about

half the states provide or require dis-tricts to provide after-school, summer-school or extended-day academic serv-ices to low-performing students. Andalthough nearly all the states withgraduation examinations in placetoday require that students who failthe exams receive such remediation,in 2001 only half the states with suchexaminations paid for such remedia-tion, Education Week found.

Massachusetts has invested heavilyin supplemental learning opportunities,providing $80 million over three yearsto districts with large numbers of stu-dents with low scores on state tests.Districts have created a range of after-school and summer programs that pro-vide intensive, individualized instruc-tional support for students.

Strengthening AccountabilityThe 1999 Summit pledged to reward highperformance, provide assistance to strug-gling schools and apply sanctions to thosethat are failing persistently. ■ Accountability components.

Compared with 36 states in 1999, 44now produce or require districts to pro-duce school-level report cards, accord-

ing to Education Week’s sur-vey. Twenty-seven states nowassign ratings to all schools oridentify those that are lowperforming — up from 19states in 1999 — and all ofthose states provide assistanceto at least some of the poorlyrated or low-performingschools. Compared with 13states in 1999, 20 states noware providing rewards to high-performing or greatlyimproved schools. Thirteenstates have the authority toclose or reconstitute failingschools, up from 11 in 1999.(See chart at left.)

44

24

13

20

33

17

117

0

10

20

30

40

50

Rewards forhigh-

performingschools

Source: Achieve, Inc., Education Week

More States Have Accountability SystemsThan Ever Before

Num

ber

of

Stat

es W

ith

...

Public reportcards onschools

Required testsfor studentpromotion

or graduation

Sanctionsfor low-

performingschools

19962001


■ Comprehensive systems. Althoughstates are moving to put in place components of accountability systems,few have put all the pieces together.According to preliminary data from“Quality Counts 2002,” only a handfulof states now have comprehensiveaccountability policies that includeschool report cards, ratings for schoolsto show which ones need help, rewardsfor successful schools and sanctions forfailing schools. The number of stateswith such comprehensive policies hasincreased only from five to six since1999.

Why Another Summit?Governors, business leaders and educatorsrecognize that 2001 represents a time ofenormous challenge — and a time of oppor-tunity. Although some school systems havemade great strides, the pace of the economyand the society are changing so rapidly thatwe cannot move incrementally. We musttake bold steps to transform the educationsystem quickly so that all students can bene-fit. And it’s a collective responsibility. Statesand districts need support from the businesscommunity and the public.

At the same time, we recognize that thestandards agenda the states put in placeduring the 1990s is being put to the test.While there continues to be overwhelming

public support for the core policies wecommitted to five years ago, some statesare experiencing a pushback as accounta-bility policies take hold. This is hard work.We must be sure that we develop the rightpolicies, implement them fairly and shoreup public support.

Now is the time to focus on the mostcrucial challenges and address them in adeep enough way so that states can meetthem.

What are those challenges?

■ Supporting teachers and improvingteaching so that all students have a fairshot at meeting high standards.

■ Improving assessment by ensuring thattests provide high-quality informationon student performance.

■ Strengthening accountability in waysthat are firm, fair and balanced.One way to begin to focus on these

challenges is to look at what other stateshave done. Achieve’s strategy is to employbenchmarking: to examine the practices ofthe best performers and consider ways thosepractices can be adapted by other states.The 2001 National Education Summit is atime to reflect on the work ahead, to look tobest practices for ideas on how to move for-ward and to commit, together, to reach thegoal of building an education system whereall students achieve high standards.


With education consistentlytopping the concerns regis-tered by the public in nation-al polls over the last two years,

it is understandable that the steps states aretaking to improve their schools would drawsignificant attention — particularly fromparents and the media.

Three extensive public opinion surveysundertaken in the last 18 months havedelved more deeply into the demand forbetter schools. The polls examine whatpeople — especially parents — thinkabout the push for higher standards, test-ing and accountability for results. Thesesurveys from The Business Roundtable(BRT, www.brt.org), Public Agenda(www.publicagenda.org) and EducationalTesting Service (ETS, www.ets.org) tell thesame story: The public, including parents,remain squarely behind the agenda ofstandards, assessment and accountability.Consider:

■ Only 2 percent of parents who areaware of standards would stop imple-menting higher standards and go backto the way things were, while 53 per-cent want to continue the reformefforts as planned and 34 percent wantto proceed while making some adjust-ments, Public Agenda found. (See chartat right.) In BRT’s survey, more than 80percent of parents and nonparents saidthe emphasis on raising standards was a move in the right direction.

■ Sixty-five percent of parents and 70percent of nonparents said studentsshould have to pass a statewide test tograduate from high school even if theyhave passing grades in their classes,BRT found. Support rises above 75 per-

cent for both groups if respondentsknow that students have the chance totake the test more than once. (Seechart on next page.)

■ In all three surveys, parents and thepublic agreed that tests are a valuableway to target extra help for studentsfalling behind, to identify poorly per-forming schools and to inform parentsof their own children’s progress.

■ Public Agenda reported that 81 percentof parents favored a policy requiringsummer school for students who did notmeet standards, with 65 percent holdingto that support even if their own childhad to attend summer school.

Public Support

Continue the effort, but makesome adjustments 34%

Stop theeffort 2%

Don’tknow11%

Continue the effortas planned 53%

No Desire to Turn Back

Source: Public Agenda, September 2000

When it comes to your school district’s effort towardhigher academic standards, do you think the school

district should:


Backlash OverblownThe findings of these polls conflictin many ways with some commonportrayals of a growing “backlash”against standards, testing andaccountability. There are trendstoward increased reporting on standards and tests, according to a 2000 media analysis commis-sioned by Achieve, Inc. The analysisalso found stories that presented anincreasingly negative view of thesereforms. The phrase “high-stakestesting,” for example, appeared in666 stories in the 12 months stud-ied, compared to just 17 stories fiveyears earlier.

The media accounts often aredriven by boycotts, rallies, petitiondrives or other activities undertakenby a vocal, but relatively small cho-rus of critics. These local protestshave increased as accountabilitymeasures have been put in place — creatingreal pressure on schools and students toimprove performance. Some have seized onthese scattered protests as evidence of wide-spread discontent; they are quick to turnthe discussion away from the benefits ofhigher expectations and toward the limita-tions of assessment. It is vital for states todraw distinctions between the unfounded

charges leveled by opponents of testing ingeneral and the more legitimate concernsraised by parents, teachers and othersabout specific aspects of testing andaccountability policies.

The most damaging misconceptionsspread by antitesting forces are that testingtakes up too much valuable class time andthat testing is “dumbing down” schoolingand forcing teachers to abandon “realteaching.” The facts:■ Testing represents a relatively minor

investment of time for a worthwhilegoal: to understand how studentsand schools are performing. Of thestates that specify the amount of timestudents are expected to spend onstatewide tests, testing time averagesfive hours and 19 minutes — less than1 percent of the typical school year.And parents do not believe that thereis too much testing. Both BRT andPublic Agenda found that 15 percent orfewer parents believe too much testingis done. In states where testing has notgone smoothly at first, the percentagesof parents who believe there is toomuch testing is higher but remains aminority view. Moreover, parentsbelieve that testing is useful. More than

■ eight in 10 parents agree that tests help

76%

Public Support for Graduationand Promotion Tests

Studentsshould have

to passpromotion

test

Studentsshould have

to passpromotion

test if summerschool isprovided

and retakeis possible

Studentsshould have

to passgraduation

test if retakeis possible

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%87%

81%

70%

Studentsshould have

to passgraduation

test

Source: The Business Roundtable, August 2000

NARROWING THE CURRICULUM OR

TAKING SHORTCUTS LIKE OVER-EMPHASIZING TEST PREPARATION

ARE INAPPROPRIATE WAYS TO RAISE

ACHIEVEMENT, BUT TESTS CANNOT

BE USED AS AN EXCUSE FOR BAD

INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICE.


■ schools evaluate how students are per-forming and that they help parentsevaluate school performance and mon-itor student progress.

■ Schools are trying to use standards toraise achievement, not to narrowinstruction. The goal of educationreform is teaching to standards to raiseachievement. Standards are raisingexpectations for student learning, andtests are the best way of measuringprogress toward the standards.Narrowing the curriculum or takingshortcuts like overemphasizing testpreparation are inappropriate ways toraise achievement, but tests cannot beused as an excuse for bad instructionalpractice. While some teachers andschools have resorted to shortcuts,those choices are misguided and by no means the norm.

Fortunately, only a minority of class-rooms are resorting to the inappropriateshortcuts. According to a national survey of teachers commissioned byEducation Week, less than one-fourth ofteachers reported using commercial test-prep materials, altering lessons to fitwhat’s on state tests or using practicetests provided by their state “a great

deal.” By comparison, fully 79 percentof teachers said their curriculum wasmore demanding today than three yearsago — and about two-thirds of thoseteachers said the increased rigor was aresult of standards.

Only 18 percent of parents toldPublic Agenda their child’s schoolspends so much time preparing fortests that real learning is sacrificed. (Seetable above.) Fifty-five percent saidthere is nothing wrong with spendingconsiderable time preparing for testsbecause they measure important skillsand knowledge.

Legitimate ConcernsWhile spurious claims are easily chal-lenged with facts, there are legitimate concerns that have emerged as states anddistricts have introduced new tests andaccountability provisions. States muststrengthen their policies in ways that pro-mote better teaching and more learning —the ultimate test of reform for parents andthe public. In this way, states that areresponsive to valid criticism are betterpositioned to weather any initial discon-tent from holding schools and studentsaccountable.

United Los New States Boston Chicago Cleveland Angeles York

Teachers are putting too much academic pressure 9% 9% 11% 13% 6% 8%on their child

Their child’s school requires 11% 18% 14% 18% 9% 9%too many standardized tests

Questions on their child’s standardized tests are so 12% 22% 15% 20% 17% 11%difficult that students can’t be expected to answer them

Teachers in their child’s school focus so much on 18% 24% 19% 27% 18% 21%preparing for the test that real learning is neglected

How Concerned Are Parents About Testing?

Source: Public Agenda, September 2000


The three polls show that parents andthe public have nuanced views of stan-dards and testing. The surveys show thatpeople understand the limitations ofassessment. Nearly half of the publicbelieves that some children will do poorlyon tests even if they know the material,and more than 70 percent believestatewide tests cannot measure manyimportant skills children should learn,BRT found. But weighing concerns againstbenefits, 68 percent told ETS they favorgreater use of testing as part of a broadereducation initiative.

At the same time, parents and the public may not know all that they shouldabout states’ standards and tests, despiteincreasing media coverage. Thirty-one per-cent of parents and 40 percent of the publicdo not know if their states have standards,BRT found. Half of parents told PublicAgenda they did not know enough aboutthe questions on their states’ tests to knowif they were fair. This lack of information,coupled with some misgivings about thelimitations of testing, creates the opportu-nity for antitesting advocates to erode exist-ing sentiments favoring standards, testingand accountability.

States can take steps to maintain and build broad-based public support.These actions should address misgivingsabout testing and help convince the publicand parents that testing and accountabilityare vital to raising standards and improv-ing schools — and are not simply policiesto embarrass and punish schools and stu-dents. To bolster public understanding andsupport, states should strive for:

■ Standards and tests that are clear toall. Parents and the public need toknow what the expectations are andhow they are being measured beforethey can be expected to fully supportthese policies and practices. One way toachieve this is by aligning standards andtests well. What is written in the stan-dards, which, in many cases, are distrib-

uted widely, should be what is tested. Inaddition, tests cannot be state secrets.Given their increased importance, testsshould be transparent to allow parentsand the public to satisfy themselves thatthe questions are challenging but fair.

■ Accountability that is fair on its face.The public demands that high stan-dards and tests that measure them notbe used simply to penalize students.Polls show that parents are reluctant to use a single test to determine if a stu-dent is promoted or graduates. Manystates already offer students severalopportunities to take tests that serve asgatekeepers for promotion or gradua-tion. Parents also remain unconvincedthat students thus far have been pre-pared well enough to succeed on statetests. As a result, finding ways to phasein consequences for students, whileoffering more support to those studentswho lag behind, can be vital to main-taining support.

■ Teachers who have more of whatthey need. Eighty-seven percent ofteachers told Education Week that rais-ing standards was a “move in the rightdirection,” but roughly two-thirdsexpressed concern about excessive focuson state tests and its impact on otherimportant content. (See chart on nextpage.)

In part, teachers are feeling unsup-ported in the push to raise standards.Most states still are working to giveteachers the tools and training theyneed to help students reach higher stan-

STATES MUST STRENGTHEN

THEIR POLICIES IN WAYS THAT

PROMOTE BETTER TEACHING

AND MORE LEARNING — THE ULTIMATE TEST OF REFORM

FOR PARENTS AND THE PUBLIC.


dards. In Education Week’s survey,fewer than half of teachers reportedhaving “a great deal” of access to cur-riculum, textbooks and model lessonstied to standards.

When it comes to professionaldevelopment, fewer than one-third ofteachers reported having “a greatdeal” of training on their states’ stan-dards and tests or on the use of testresults to improve classroom practice,despite the courses they took in uni-versities prior to entering teaching orsubsequently thereafter. EducationWeek found that the more trainingteachers had had, the more likely theywere to modify curriculum or lessonsto reflect what their states’ standardscall for.

■ Continued reinforcement of themessages that standards matterand are working to improveschools. When parents and the publiclack key information, they can be con-vinced more easily by misinformation.While states have worked to informthe public, the three recent surveysshow that an information gap stillexists. The public needs constantreminders of the “hidden” accountabil-ity students always have faced — theinability to succeed in college or on the job because they lack importantskills and knowledge. Business has animportant role to play in this regard.Business-led coalitions in a few statesprovide strong examples of how private-sector leaders can act to balance themedia coverage from a protest on theCapitol steps. Groups such as MassInsight (www.massinsight.com), a business-education coalition inMassachusetts, and the Partnership forLearning (www.partnership4learning.org) in Washington state explain expec-tations clearly and highlight schoolsthat are succeeding. In New Jersey, an

alliance of business, education andcommunity leaders — known as NewJersey United for Higher Standards —has taken the lead in convening a seriesof meetings around the state that pro-vide citizens an opportunity to learnabout the state’s efforts to raise stan-dards. The group also has conducted astatewide poll to gauge citizens’ under-standing of and support for NewJersey’s reforms.Beyond spreading the word, business

and higher education can make a strongstatement for high standards by usingstate test results in hiring and admissionsdecisions.

Oregon and Georgia are among thefew states where educational institutionshave forged alliances. Both have alignedthe admissions or scholarship require-ments for their public universities and colleges with their respective state’s K–12standards and tests.

67%

79%

87%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Raisingstandards isa “move inthe rightdirection”

Curriculum ismore demand-ing than three

years ago

Teacherexpectationsfor studentsare higher

than they were

Teachers’ Feelings Toward Standards

Source: Education Week, National Survey of Public School Teachers, 2000


The evidence is mounting that thequality of education studentsreceive depends first and foremoston the quality of instruction.

Standards place new demands on teachersby expecting them for the first time to edu-cate all students to high levels. To meethigher standards, all students need anddeserve teachers who are fully capable ofteaching to those standards and who arearmed with the curriculum and teachingtools they need to meet that challenge.

This is particularly important for students who are struggling. Too oftenlow-performing students are clustered in schools that perform inadequately.Turning around these low-performingschools is a critical step toward closing the achievement gap.

Fortunately, there are numerous exam-ples of schools that have turned themselvesaround. Although their student populationsresemble those of schools that tend to bedoing less well, these high-performing,high-poverty schools have transformedteaching and learning so that they can suc-ceed. Their examples suggest ways thatstates can help all schools follow their leadand improve teaching and learning so thatthe achievement gap is eliminated.

Researchers who have studied these suc-cessful schools have identified a number ofcharacteristics they share. These include:

■ A relentless focus on academic per-formance for all students. High-achieving, high-poverty schools alsofocus their resources and attention onone area, often literacy, rather than tryto tackle the entire curriculum.

■ A shared sense among the facultyand staff that they are all responsiblefor the learning of every student.These schools acknowledge that stu-dents face obstacles from their back-grounds and home lives but do notaccept these conditions as excuses forfailing to educate all students to highlevels.

■ Frequent and regular assessment ofstudent progress for diagnostic pur-poses. These schools continually moni-tor student learning to make sure thatstudents are keeping pace with instruc-tion and adjust the instructional pro-gram when assessments identify gaps.

■ Principals who are true instructionalleaders. They focus the school onteaching and learning, use data to planimprovements, supervise teachers’instructional practices, and providethem with the support they need toimprove practice.

■ A flexible use of time to modify andextend the school day and year asneeded to provide the time all studentsneed to reach challenging standards.How can state policies foster improved

learning for all students and close the

Teaching and Learning:Closing the Achievement Gap

ALL STUDENTS NEED AND DESERVE

TEACHERS WHO ARE FULLY CAPABLE

OF TEACHING HIGHER STANDARDS

AND WHO ARE ARMED WITH THE

CURRICULUM AND TEACHING TOOLS

THEY NEED TO MEET THAT CHALLENGE.


achievement gap? There are several princi-ples states should follow.

Creating a Supportive PolicyEnvironmentAlthough state policies on standards,assessment and accountability do not bythemselves improve teaching and learn-ing, they can contribute quite a bit. Bysending clear signals about instructionalgoals and providing useful data about per-formance, the state policy environmentcan help schools improve teaching andlearning.

Clear StandardsStandards can help improve teaching byproviding clear guidance about what allstudents are expected to learn. Ideally thestandards also should include suggestionsfor classroom activities that would enablestudents to demonstrate that they havemet the standards and samples of exem-plary student work that provide modelsfor teachers.

While virtually all states have set stan-dards for student performance, the qualityof these standards varies. Not all statestandards provide the type of guidanceteachers need to improve instruction.

The best standards are clear, are meas-urable and provide appropriate guidanceto teachers, parents and test developers.They are comprehensive yet allow for in-depth treatment of essential content. Theyachieve a balance between what studentsshould know and what they should beable to do with that knowledge. And theyare rigorous and expect what the highest-achieving states and nations expect oftheir students.

Since 1998, 12 states have sought toimprove their standards by enlistingAchieve’s help to compare them to thebest in the world. One was Indiana. In areport issued in January 2000, Achievefound that Indiana’s standards failed tomeasure up; they were less rigorous, they

underestimated what students could doand they omitted important content. Stateofficials took the report seriously and laterthat year produced revised standards thatare among the strongest in the nation.

Oregon also revised its standards afteran Achieve review pointed out ways theycan be improved. The new standards areexpected to be considerably stronger.

Ohio, meanwhile, is working toimprove its standards as part of a largereffort to redesign the state’s assessmentand accountability system and to ensurethe system is aligned to standards.

Disaggregated Assessment DataDisaggregated testing data — by race/ethnicity, income, special education statusand limited English proficiency — is essen-tial. Knowing that a certain percentage ofstudents in a school meets standards mayhide important differences among differentstudents that are never remedied. By know-ing the gaps within schools, teachers andadministrators can adjust instructionalstrategies to improve learning for all stu-dents. Disaggregation has been a powerfultool in Texas, where the accountabilitypolicy requires all groups of students tomeet standards for schools to earn “accept-able” status. Educators have said that therequirement forced them to pay attentionto gaps they might have missed if theylooked only at the school averages.

State reports also can help improveteaching by comparing the achievement ofschools against similar schools. If schools

THE BEST STANDARDS ARE CLEAR, ARE MEASURABLE AND PROVIDE

APPROPRIATE GUIDANCE TO TEACHERS, PARENTS AND TEST DEVELOPERS. THEY ARE COMPREHENSIVE YET

ALLOW FOR IN-DEPTH TREATMENT

OF ESSENTIAL CONTENT.


see that others with comparable studentpopulations are succeeding, they can learnwhat the high-performing schools aredoing well and begin to adopt similar prac-tices. The nonprofit group Just for the Kids(www.just4kids.org) has pioneered thisapproach in Texas: Its Web site charts theperformance of each school compared tosimilar schools that are the top performers.

Direct Assistance to Low-Performing SchoolsStates also need to develop and implementpolicies to provide direct assistance toenable low-performing schools to turnaround.

The first step is figuring out what assis-tance schools need. While low test scorescan signal a problem, the test results donot reveal how to address it. Only on-the-ground reconnaissance by trained educa-tors can help schools determine if theyneed to revamp the reading program,replace the staff or take some other step toimprove instruction and raise performance.

In Kentucky, the state trained a cadre of “distinguished educators” who wereassigned to help low-performing schoolsdevelop and implement improvementplans. In North Carolina, state-supportedteams serve the same function. These efforts have been effective in helping low-performing schools turn around. The key isto give the external support teams authorityto recommend significant changes and carryout their recommendations.

Stable, Unified LeadershipNothing kills schools’ efforts to improveteaching more than conflicting or shiftingsignals from the state. Yet sometimes stateofficials do not speak with one voice about

what all students are expected to learn, orthe expectations change when a newleader comes to the state capital.

It is no accident that the states thathave shown the most improvement overthe past decade — such as Connecticut,North Carolina and Texas — tend to bethe ones where state policy has remainedstable during that period. These states alsohave enjoyed stable and strong supportfrom the business community.

Improving the Quality of InstructionThe quality of teaching is perhaps themost important factor in turning aroundlow-performing schools, and states need toaddress head on policies that improve thequality of teaching and learning. Theseinclude policies for improving the qualityof teachers, enhancing teachers’ andadministrators’ knowledge and skills, andproviding them with tools to do their jobsbetter.

Attracting and Retaining QualifiedEducatorsToo often students who need the bestteachers end up with the ones with theleast experience and least preparation.This must change. If we are to close theachievement gap, students in low-performing schools need access to themost able teachers and administrators.

One way to attract well-qualified teach-ers and administrators to low-performingschools is to provide incentives, such ashigher pay. South Carolina does this byproviding a 50 percent salary bonus forteachers in low-performing schools.California has authorized bonuses forteachers who have earned certificationfrom the National Board for ProfessionalTeaching Standards (NBPTS, www.nbpts.org) and who agree to teach in suchschools.

However, states have found that thepay incentives may not be sufficient; even

THE QUALITY OF TEACHING IS

PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT

FACTOR IN TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS.


with higher pay, teachers still may notwant to teach in low-performing schools.For that reason, states also need to considerimproving the conditions in such schoolsto make them attractive places to work.

This means not only improving thephysical conditions of the schools andaddressing safety concerns, but also pro-viding amenities — like telephones andcomputers — that teachers in higher-performing schools tend to have.

In addition to creating these incen-tives, states and districts need to addressthe seniority policies that have allowedexperienced teachers to gravitate to high-performing schools and instead considerways for schools to select the faculties theyneed to strengthen instruction. Some pio-neering districts, notably Seattle, havenegotiated union agreements to allow prin-cipals to select their teaching staffs and togive teachers substantial roles in the hiringprocess. As long as states hold schoolsaccountable for performance, they need tomake sure schools have the authority torun themselves, including, where possible,the ability to select the faculty.

It’s one thing to attract teachers tolow-performing schools. The next chal-lenge is to keep them there. The turnoverrate for new teachers, particularly in strug-gling schools, is notoriously high. Butwithout a stable staff, such schools contin-ually will scramble to improve.

One reason teachers leave is becausethey see little prospect for growth. But

states can encourage teachers to remain inschools by enabling them to earn highersalaries by raising performance, and by pro-viding opportunities to take on additionalresponsibilities. A handful of districts, likeCincinnati, have created salary scales thatreward teachers who demonstrate improvedteaching abilities. Iowa is developing a sim-ilar pay-for-performance system. And 30states reward teachers who earn certifica-tion from NBPTS.

Arizona, meanwhile, has worked withthe Milken Family Foundation to pilot aTeacher Advancement Program, whichcreates opportunities for skilled teachersto coach and mentor their colleagues.The master teachers earn higher salariesbased on their level of skills and studentperformance.

High-Quality TrainingFor teachers and principals who enteredthe profession before the 1990s, the stan-dards movement represents a dramaticshift. Now for the first time they areexpected to teach all students to learn atlevels only a few had reached before. Tomeet this new challenge, teachers andprincipals need to acquire new knowledgeand skills. States need to provide themwith opportunities to do so.

Providing learning opportunities forskilled professionals is not new; businessesand other professions, like law and medi-cine, provide them routinely. These oppor-tunities help professionals hone their skillsand keep up with developments in thefield. In education, though, professionaldevelopment often has been ineffectivebecause it is delivered in ineffective ways— often one-shot workshops, which donot allow teachers to follow up on the les-sons by applying them in practice — orbecause it is unrelated to the contentteachers are expected to teach. For princi-pals, professional development has notalways kept up with the demands of theirjobs in standards-driven schools.

FOR TEACHERS AND PRINCIPALS

WHO ENTERED THE PROFESSION BEFORE

THE 1990S, THE STANDARDS

MOVEMENT REPRESENTS A DRAMATIC

SHIFT. NOW FOR THE FIRST TIME THEY

ARE EXPECTED TO TEACH ALL

STUDENTS TO LEARN AT LEVELS ONLY

A FEW HAD REACHED BEFORE.


To enhance teachers’ and principals’knowledge and skills — particularly thosein low-performing schools — states andschool districts need to invest heavily inprofessional development that works.

They can start by conducting an auditof the professional development they cur-rently provide to determine if it is address-ing the standards teachers are expected toteach. The Boston Public Schools, togetherwith a nonprofit group, the Boston Plan forExcellence, conducted such an audit andfound that 78 percent of the $23.7 millionthe district spent on professional develop-ment was not aligned with the district’sinstructional goals. In response, the districtshifted more than $3 million of the fundsfrom the central office to schools, requiredschools to write professional developmentplans and required “lead teachers” — spe-cialists who provide professional develop-ment in schools — to focus on instructionin reading and mathematics.

Another district that has revamped theway it operates professional development isCommunity District 2 in New York City,which, for more than a decade, has organ-ized itself around instructional improve-ment. The district sets aside 5 percent of itsbudget for professional development andprovides a wealth of opportunities forteachers to improve their knowledge andskills. But beyond the specific programs,professional development is embedded inthe district’s culture: Principals are chargedwith formulating professional develop-ment plans for their faculties, based onstudent performance data, and are heldaccountable for carrying out those plansand improving performance. As a result of the district’s efforts, District 2 hasimproved from 10th among the city’s 32community school districts in reading andmathematics performance to second.

California has invested considerably inimproving the ability of teachers to teachto high standards — particularly teachersin low-performing schools. Building on its

acclaimed Subject Matter Projects, the statein 1999 created Professional DevelopmentInstitutes aimed directly at providingintensive instruction for teachers in subjectmatter and teaching strategies around thestate’s content standards. The first insti-tute, on reading for elementary teachers,proved highly successful; 90 percent of thefirst group of first graders taught by teach-ers who attended the institute reachedstate benchmarks. Since then the state hasexpanded the institutes to include elemen-tary mathematics, prealgebra and algebra,high school mathematics, high schoolreading, writing, and English languagedevelopment.

Principals also need professional devel-opment, and a few states are beginning to provide them with opportunities toenhance their knowledge and skills. InOhio, a public-private partnership haslaunched the Ohio Principals LeadershipAcademy, which provides professionaldevelopment for hundreds of the state’sschool leaders. In North Carolina, theUniversity of North Carolina Center forSchool Leadership Development offersintensive three- to 20-day residential train-ing on numerous school issues, as well assmaller, focused institutes on particulartopics. Created by the state Legislature in1984, the center also conducts research toidentify the characteristics of effectiveschool leadership.

Tools to Support TeachingIn addition to training, teachers also needclassroom tools to help them teach to

TO ENHANCE TEACHERS’ AND

PRINCIPALS’ KNOWLEDGE AND

SKILLS — PARTICULARLY THOSE IN

LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS — STATES

AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS NEED TO

INVEST HEAVILY IN PROFESSIONAL

DEVELOPMENT THAT WORKS.


standards. Yet an Education Week survey ofteachers found that fewer than half saidthey have “plenty” of access to curriculummaterials or textbooks that match statestandards.

States need to find creative ways tomake materials available to teachersbecause in many ways, the state role in curriculum development is a limited one.Most teaching materials are produced bycommercial publishers, who try to tailorthem to the needs of many states and dis-tricts and, thus, produce materials that arenot aligned to any one set of standards. In addition, although some states haveauthority to establish statewide curricula orto approve textbooks for statewide use, inmost states, the decisions about curriculaare local matters.

One way states can help provide mate-rials is through the use of technology.Several states are building electronic toolsto disseminate lesson plans based on state

standards. One effective program in WestVirginia, developed in partnership withthe IBM Corporation, posts best practices,based on juried selections by teachers, onthe state education department’s Web site(www.wvdes.state.wv.us). The detailed les-son plans are matched extensively to statestandards.

Another option is to band together tocreate a market for curriculum materialsaligned with standards. One example ofstates banding together is the Mathemat-ics Achievement Partnership (MAP), a con-sortium of 14 states brought together byAchieve. MAP has developed a commonset of expectations for middle schoolmathematics, and participating states willadminister an eighth-grade assessmentbased on those expectations. The hope is that the partnership can stimulate ademand that will encourage publishers todevelop textbooks and other materials thatmatch the expectations.


Testing and accountability play avital role in any effort to improveteaching and learning. It’s unrea-sonable to ask schools to simply

meet higher expectations without givingthem the tools and information they needto succeed and the incentives to do so.Educators need regular information abouthow well standards are being met, whichclassroom strategies are succeeding andwhich students are struggling. Parents andstudents need to know if students aremaking progress and learning the skillsthey need to be successful. That’s why test-ing is such an important part of an overallstrategy to improve student learning.

At the same time, accountabilityencourages students and schools to continue improving performance. Byrewarding high levels of performance andsubstantial improvement and by makingclear the consequences for failing toimprove, states send a signal that resultsmatter. The pressure the accountabilitymechanisms exert may feel uncomfortableat times, but it is essential if schools are toenable all students to reach high standardsof performance.

Over the past few years, with leader-ship from governors and the businesscommunity, states have worked to collectbetter information about how well stu-dents are learning and to put in place sys-tems for holding students and schoolsaccountable for results. Nearly every statehas instituted a new testing system orrevised its existing one in order to get bet-

ter information about student learning andhow well students are meeting standards.Of the 48 states with statewide tests in2000 (all but Iowa and Nebraska), mostreport working to align their tests to moreclear, rigorous standards for what studentsshould be learning.

In addition, about half the states (23)now or soon will require students to passtests in order to graduate from highschool, according to Education Week andthe Consortium for Policy Research inEducation (www.gse.upenn.edu/cpre). Justover half the states rate school perform-ance, 20 reward schools for high perform-ance and 13 have the authority to imposetough penalties on persistently low-performing schools. More states are likelyto implement accountability systems inthe next few years to meet the mandatesof federal education legislation.

Yet, obviously, not all tests and account-ability systems are equally effective in providing the information and incentivesstudents and educators need. States nowneed to ensure that their tests and

Testing and Accountability:Using Data to DriveImprovement

SCHOOL SYSTEMS DO NOT TEST

FOR THE SAKE OF TESTING; THEY NEED INFORMATION THEY

CANNOT GET IN ANY OTHER WAY. BUT LIKE ANYTHING ELSE, TESTS CAN

SERVE THIS PURPOSE WELL OR POORLY.NOT ALL TESTS ARE EQUAL.


accountability systems are as good as theycan be — and need to be. Making neededchanges to ensure state testing programs areof the highest quality is both good policyand good politics. A rich, sophisticated andwell-designed test becomes a powerful toolto improve instruction — and to mute theconcerns of testing critics.

Making the Most of TestsAs tests have taken center stage in the edu-cation policy debate, the purpose they serve— providing information that helps stu-dents, parents, teachers and policymakersmake appropriate decisions about educa-tion — often has been lost. School systemsdo not test for the sake of testing; theyneed information they cannot get in anyother way. But like anything else, tests canserve this purpose well or poorly. Not alltests are equal.

QualityCheaper and faster tests are not necessarilybetter. The cheapest tests are usually ready-made and “off-the-shelf” — generic teststhat measure generic skills. But state stan-dards include, as they should, a broadrange of skills and knowledge — fromknowledge of basic facts to writing abilityand problem-solving skills. And state testsneed to measure this wide range of skillsand knowledge. If they don’t — if theyonly measure a few skills or the easiest skills— they risk narrowing the curriculum.

It is important not to take alignmentfor granted. Aligning tests to standards ishard work. It requires time and money,and it requires states to be diligent con-sumers with test publishers. Ready-made,off-the-shelf tests rarely provide a tight fitwith states’ standards. Even tests createdexclusively for states sometimes fail tomeasure the full range of standards. Yetalignment is essential. Without it, testresults will be misleading. And a lack ofalignment sends mixed signals to parents,students and teachers about what knowl-edge and skills are important.

Measuring rigorous standards usuallyrequires the use of open-ended and essayquestions as well as multiple-choice questions, and these written responses taketime and money to score. States need toweigh the educational benefits of the vari-ous types of tests, as well as the financialcosts, in making decisions about develop-ing tests.

The most effective tests are challeng-ing, measure important content and arealigned to standards. Among states withwhich Achieve has worked, tests inMichigan and New Jersey stand out.Those state tests are demanding, theymeasure the knowledge and skills the stateexpects all students to know, and theyencourage challenging instruction. Notsurprisingly, Michigan students outper-formed those of all other states on theThird International Mathematics andScience Study-Repeat in 1999.

TransparencyWhat states are testing should never be asecret. Teachers, parents, students andothers should understand clearly what isexpected, for reasons both of fairness andinstructional effectiveness. (Broad under-standing also can mute generic criticismsabout testing.) One way to achieve trans-parency is by aligning tests to standards;when tests truly are based on clear andpublic expectations for student learning,what’s being tested is not a secret.

In addition, states can ensure tests areas transparent as possible by releasingmost or all of the test questions every year.Texas has made the investment to releaseall of its questions each year, and the ben-efits are enormous. As Nicholas Lemann, awriter for The New Yorker magazine, notedin an article this summer: “Go on the Website and read a Texas Assessment ofAcademic Skills test — are you really com-fortable with kids’ not knowing that mate-rial?” Twenty-two other states also releaseat least some of their test items each year.


States also should distribute to teachersand parents student responses to individualquestions, particularly essay questions, asWashington state plans to do. Such effortshelp improve instruction by providingexamples of work at each performancelevel. Teachers gain a better understandingof how to evaluate students’ work and whatthey need to address to bring all students tohigher levels. And students can comparetheir work with excellent examples andknow what they must do to improve it.

UtilitySophisticated tests, with lots of open-ended questions, take time and carefulattention to score accurately. Nonetheless,states should strive to report test results asquickly as possible. The attention of par-ents and teachers — not to mention of thestudents themselves — has moved onwhen test scores from one year come backthe next. This does not mean, though,that states need to abandon the use ofopen-ended and essay questions; suchquestions are valuable for tapping skillsnot well measured by multiple-choicequestions. Involving teachers in scoring

exams also is extremely worthwhile.Massachusetts has addressed this issue byreleasing the results from the multiple-choice portion of its test quickly, whilemaintaining the open-ended portion andreleasing those results at a later date.

The most effective types of reports arethose that break down information to showhow different groups of students perform,so that teachers and administrators can

identify patterns that they can address. Inaddition, effective reports also enable com-parisons with other schools and districts, soeducators can see those that appear moreeffective and learn from their successes.

Technology can help improve thereporting of test information, and severalstates, such as Illinois and Maryland,have begun to develop innovative meth-ods of reporting test results through theInternet. The Maryland site (www.mdk12.org), which receives 1,600 “hits” a day,allows school teams to identify schoolswith similar demographics that are per-forming at significantly higher levels. Asimilar, privately run system widely recog-nized for effectiveness is Just for the Kids,a nonprofit organization in Texas. Createdin 1995, Just for the Kids has established aWeb site (www.just4kids.org) that providestest data for each school, broken down byrace, gender and other categories, andidentifies the highest-performing schoolswith similar populations of economicallydisadvantaged and limited-English-proficient students.

Another private organization, Standard& Poor’s (www.standardandpoors.com),has developed a system for providing use-able data for school districts. Michiganand Pennsylvania have contracted withthe firm to provide the service in thosestates. Policymakers, parents and educatorscan assess their spending and performancein relation to other districts statewide,neighboring districts and “peer districts”with similar geographic and demographiccharacteristics.

ComparabilityNew federal education requirements likelywill require annual testing for every stu-dent in grades three through eight in read-ing and mathematics. The goal is to createa coherent, comparable measuring toolthat can track student progress accuratelyfrom grade to grade and disaggregate dataover time. To accomplish this goal, state

TECHNOLOGY CAN HELP IMPROVE

THE REPORTING OF TEST INFORMATION,AND SEVERAL STATES HAVE BEGUN

TO DEVELOP INNOVATIVE METHODS

OF REPORTING TEST RESULTS

THROUGH THE INTERNET.


leaders will need to pay careful attentionto the alignment of the new tests with thestandards and the articulation of the testsfrom grade to grade.

According to Education Week, onlyseven states in 2001 measure student per-formance against standards in all thegrades that will be required. To fill in theblanks, Achieve estimates that 260 newtests will need to be created and usedacross the country. The easiest solutionwould be to use tests that are already inplace — to “mix and match” state andlocal tests or customized and off-the-shelftests — to provide measures for everygrade level. But unfortunately, this solu-tion will not answer the need. Resultsfrom completely different tests can’t becalibrated, experts say (most recently, theNational Research Council in a report toCongress), and can’t yield coherent, reli-able information about student progressfrom grade to grade and year to year. Inaddition, parents and teachers will be con-fused by tests that look different — and byresults that do, too.

CoherenceA state test cannot do it all. Yet a state canbuild a coherent assessment system. Anassessment system is richest when statetests provide a good snapshot that comple-ments information from local, teacher-administered, regular assessments given inthe classroom. Thus, while making statetests the best they can be — using some ofthe best practices described above — stateleaders should work with local leaders toexamine all the tests that students take tosee if they complement one another andprovide additional value. If a test does notadd value, it shouldn’t be used.

Local assessments can be valuable byproviding diagnostic information that statetests may not provide and by measuringsome standards that state tests do notaddress. To encourage the use of suchassessments, states should invest in the

development of assessments that schooldistricts can elect to use in the classroomthroughout the school year. Indiana isconsidering such an approach. Under aplan being considered in that state,Indiana will develop assessments for localuse, which will be administered and scoredlocally, but with quality controls to ensurethat the scoring matches state standards.

Creating a Fair and FirmAccountability System

Incentives for Students If we are to achieve our goal of preparingall students for the challenges they willface after high school, then the accounta-bility system must create incentives forstudents to work hard and achieve thestandards. Schools do students no favors ifthey allow them to graduate from highschool only to face limited opportunitiesbecause they lack needed skills. If studentsreach high standards, the high schooldiploma will stand for something that col-leges and businesses value, and studentswill strive to attain a diploma. At the sametime, states must be fair; they must givestudents a reasonable chance to meet thestandards.

Role for Business and Higher EducationIt is here that business and higher educa-tion have an important role. Educators in K–12 have shouldered the burden ofimplementing standards and holding stu-dents and schools accountable for results.The stage now is set for business leadersand higher education officials to do theirpart by using student performance ongraduation tests as a factor in hiring andadmissions decisions. It makes little sensefor students to do what they need to do tograduate from high school, only to findthat they are ill prepared to enter collegeor find a job. Only with a coherent systemthat links high school with college andwork can high stakes open doors to oppor-tunities for all students. Such a system also


can earn support from parents and stu-dents, since they know that the highschool graduation tests have value.

A few states, such as Oregon andGeorgia, have forged alliances betweenK–12 and postsecondary systems to alignthe expectations for high school graduationwith those for college admission and place-ment. As part of Georgia’s effort, the statehas created college scholarships for studentswith high achievement in high school andhas begun a campaign to communicate therequirements for the scholarships toyounger students to help them prepare forthe scholarships. In addition, Georgia alsohas launched a new effort to create incen-tives for younger students by ensuring thatstudents are promoted only after meetingstandards.

And some 20,000 businesses havesigned on to the Making Academics Countprogram by using high school transcriptsas part of the hiring process for entry-levelworkers. This campaign was created by theBusiness Coalition for Education Reform(www.bcer.org), a partnership of majorbusinesses and business organizations ledby the National Alliance of Business.

But the pace is too slow. Students in 23states soon will have to pass tough tests tograduate from high school. A commitmentfrom higher education and business to usethe results of high school tests could helpsustain support at a time when the stan-dards movement faces its greatest test.

To encourage higher education andbusiness to play a more active role inaccountability, four national organizations— Achieve, The Education Trust (www.edtrust.org), the National Alliance of Business (www.nab.com) and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (www.edexcellence.net) — have launched aneffort to determine the knowledge andskills entry-level workers and college fresh-men need to succeed. The AmericanDiploma Project will work with a select

group of states over the next two years tohelp them align their high school exitstandards to those requirements.

Giving students a fair shot. It isunreasonable to implement a graduation-testing requirement and expect students tomeet it right away — unless, of course, thestandard is so low that everyone can meetit. Schools need time to adjust their cur-riculum to meet the new requirements,and teachers need to upgrade their skillsto prepare all students to meet the stan-dards. Students also need multiple oppor-tunities to pass tests.

All states with graduation tests providemultiple opportunities, and virtually allstates have phased in their testing require-ments. New York, for example, laid out acareful strategy for its plan to require allstudents to pass Regents Examinations tograduate from high school; in the past, 40percent of students had taken the rigorousexaminations. The state initially requiredonly the English examination and loweredthe passing score from 65 to 55. The stateplans to revert to the higher passing scorein 2004 and to add additional tests asgraduation requirements over time.

Providing academic supports. If allstudents are to meet high standards, statesand districts must provide learning oppor-tunities beyond the traditional school dayand year. Not all students learn at thesame pace; some need extra help.

Maryland, which boasted some of thelargest increases in mathematics scores inthe 1990s, has developed a comprehensiveplan aimed at providing sufficient learning

A COMMITMENT FROM HIGHER

EDUCATION AND BUSINESS TO USE

THE RESULTS OF HIGH SCHOOL TESTS

COULD HELP SUSTAIN SUPPORT AT A

TIME WHEN THE STANDARDS MOVEMENT

FACES ITS GREATEST TEST.


opportunities for every student. The planincludes early intervention at the preKlevel, training for teachers in the diagnosisof learning problems and strategies fordealing with them, and individual learn-ing plans for students in elementary andsecondary school who fall behind. Becausethe Legislature provided only $19 millionof the $49 million the plan called for, stateofficials postponed implementation of ahigh school graduation test.

Accountability for SchoolsTo motivate schools to improve perform-ance, accountability systems need to focustheir attention on raising performance andproviding the right incentives. States wantto ensure that schools do the right thingto raise the performance of all students.

Appropriate measures. The first stepin holding schools accountable for per-formance is measuring their performancein appropriate ways and determining ifthey should earn rewards or if they needassistance. Just over half the states nowrate school performance, and out of those,10 identify low-performing schools only,according to Education Week.

To encourage schools to raise perform-ance for all students, states should meas-ure school performance in three ways:absolute performance, to determine if stu-dents are meeting standards; progress overtime, to see if schools are improving at anappropriate rate; and the effectiveness inclosing gaps in performance between highand low performers. States that rate schoolperformance generally use one or two ofthese methods, but a system under devel-opment in Delaware is promising becauseit incorporates all three. The Delaware sys-tem also looks at performance over a two-year period; this is important becauseschool performance often fluctuates fromyear to year.

Shining a spotlight. The ratings statesassign schools based on performance can beextremely powerful. Schools eagerly seek to

avoid a low rating and work hard to earn ahigh rating — even if there are no rewardsor sanctions associated with the ratings.Researchers who have studied schools inTexas, for example, have found that theratings themselves have served as powerfulincentives for change in that state.

Yet such ratings can work only if theyare public and widely known. Nearly allstates produce report cards on schools, but more states need to rate school per-formance so it is clear which schools aresucceeding and which need help. Andstates need to do a better job of publiciz-ing those ratings to maximize their effec-tiveness in encouraging change.

Providing assistance. Although somelow-performing schools can turn them-selves around when the spotlight encour-ages them to do so, most require someform of assistance. All of the 27 states thatrate and identify low-performing schoolsprovide some assistance to those schools,according to Education Week. The assis-tance varies; most states that provide suchassistance send a team to help schoolsdevelop and implement an improvementplan, while a few provide extra funds orrequire professional development. Threestates require low-performing schools toadopt a research-based reform program.

North Carolina’s effort to send stateteams to schools appears to be highly effec-tive. There, the state sends an assistanceteam to work full time for a year in aschool identified as low performing. The

THE RATINGS STATES ASSIGN

SCHOOLS BASED ON PERFORMANCE

CAN BE EXTREMELY POWERFUL.SCHOOLS EAGERLY SEEK TO AVOID A

LOW RATING AND WORK HARD TO

EARN A HIGH RATING — EVEN IF THERE

ARE NO REWARDS OR SANCTIONS

ASSOCIATED WITH THE RATINGS.


team is required to evaluate teachers andadministrators and work with them inimplementing an improvement plan. Theteam reports to the local superintendent,the local school board and the state boardof education. Since its inception, 88 per-cent of schools that have been identified aslow performing have moved off the low-performing schools list, with state assis-tance. And North Carolina was one of onlythree states where the lowest-performingstudents improved in reading achievementbetween 1992 and 1998.

Applying sanctions. States cannot letschools perform poorly with no schedule forimprovement. Without the prospect of dra-matic action, the lowest-performing schoolshave little real incentive to improve quickly.And this is terribly unfair to the students.They have one chance for a good education;they cannot wait.

As the Education Week survey found, 13states have the authority to impose penal-ties on chronically low-performing schools.As of 2000, only four states applied anytype of sanction at all. Possible penaltiesinclude replacing the staff, turning overcontrol to private management, convertingschools to charter status, allowing studentsto transfer to other public schools (or, inthe case of Florida, to private schools aswell) and closing schools. Although the few examples of state actions provide onlypreliminary evidence of whether theseapproaches are effective, it is clear that suchpenalties must be one of the tools stateshave at their disposal to ensure that stu-dents are not trapped in chronically low-performing schools.

Focus on continuous improvement.The state’s responsibility to schools doesnot end when it applies sanctions; nor doesit end when schools reach their targets.

The goal of an accountability system mustbe continuous improvement for all schools.Those that were in dire shape need to getbetter, and those that are succeeding stillcan strive for improvement.

In addition, the accountability systemitself needs to improve continuously. Statesneed to examine their assessments, rewards,assistance efforts and sanctions to see whatis working and what needs improvement.As they do so, they can learn from otherstates and the private sector. There is noreason for every state to invent an account-ability system on its own.

A number of states have taken on this challenge and looked outside theirborders for ways to improve their educa-tion systems. For example, states such asMaryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey,Ohio, Oklahoma and Texas have workedwith Achieve to examine their standards,assessments and accountability systemsand refine them. Their efforts will result in stronger education systems for all theirstudents.

www.achieve.orgAchieve’s expanded Web site providesadditional information on the follow-ing topics addressed in this section:■ Criteria for quality standards and

testing (Initiatives section) ■ Extensive background informa-

tion about why America needshigher academic standards andstronger assessments, featuringdata about how U.S. schools andstudents are performing (Call toAction section)

■ Policy tips on testing andaccountability, with advice forpolicymakers and examples ofpromising practices (Policy Tipssection)


Technology Demonstrations

Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

The Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

Accountability and Data for Decisionmaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

Education’s Web-Driven Solution to Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

GreatSchools.net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

The Grow Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

School Information and Improvement Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

Decision Support System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

Standard & Poor’s School Evaluation Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

Handheld Reading Diagnostic Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

Improving Instruction to Meet High Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

Carnegie Learning: The Cognitive Tutor™ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

Watch-me!-Read . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

Learning With the Library of Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

The Florida Virtual School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

EarthPulse Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

Real-Time Adventures on the Internet: Applying Knowledge in the Real World . . . .47

Providing Professional Development for Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47

Seminars on Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47

Designing Professional Development Solutions: The FreshPond Learning Network .48

IBM Learning Village — Online Jurying Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

Reinventing Education Change Management Toolkit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49

Classroom Solutions From Learning Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49

LessonLab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50

SchoolNet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50

Teachscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50


GoalsThe education technology demonstra-tions will showcase innovative educationtechnology programs, prototypes andproducts that seek to help improve stu-dent achievement. We expect thesedemonstrations will offer the governors,CEOs and educators attending the 2001National Education Summit a better senseof how technology can advance the educa-tion reform agenda, particularly in the fol-lowing areas:■ using accountability and data for

decisionmaking;■ improving instruction to meet high

standards; and■ providing professional development

opportunities for teachers.

The Review ProcessThe Center for Children and Technologyof the Education Development Center, anonprofit research and evaluation organi-zation located in New York City, coordi-nated the technology demonstrations forthe 2001 Summit. A review committeeselected the technologies according to afocused set of criteria that reflected thisyear’s Summit themes.

General questions regarding the tech-nology demonstrations can be directed to:

Deborah KeischThe Center for Children and TechnologyEducation Development Center96 Morton StreetNew York City, NY 10014(212) [email protected]

Accountability and Data forDecisionmaking Technology offers a powerful means ofincreasing accountability during a timewhen more and more schools, teachers andstudents are being held responsible forresults. Technology can widely distributetimely, comparative data on classrooms,schools, districts and states, giving a pictureof performance across subjects and grades.Using this data, stakeholders can demandspecific changes and showcase schools’ suc-cesses so that their specific improvementstrategies and practices can be replicated.

Education’s Web-Driven Solution toAccountabilitywww.ed-soft.comSponsor: EdSoft Software CorporationContact: Trey WhiteCEO(972) [email protected] Description: EdSoft facilitatesteacher, student and administratoraccountability through a Web-based, fully integrated curriculum, instruction,assessment and management solution.Educators can develop and deliver district-defined curriculum, online lessons andformative/summative assessments correlatedto standards and objectives. Students, par-ents, teachers and administrators haveimmediate access to recorded data on stu-dent performance and objective mastery.In academic year 2001–02, teachers, stu-dents and parents in 30 districts withmore than 40,000 students will use thebenchmark assessment module.

The solution has demonstrated the fol-lowing results:■ Real-time benchmark assessment

results allow teachers to address stu-dent performance immediately.

■ Systemic analysis capability immediatelyidentifies district, campus and gradelevel, and student performancestrengths and weaknesses.


■ Integrated curriculum captures “districtsubject matter best practices” and facil-itates subject matter development collaboration.

■ Teachers recapture more than sevenhours spent in administration andteacher preparation time per week.

GreatSchools.netwww.greatschools.netSponsor: GreatSchools.netContact: Bill JacksonPresident and Founder(415) 977-0770, ext. [email protected] Description: GreatSchools.net is anonprofit online guide to K–12 schoolsthat helps parents understand school per-formance and make informed decisionsabout their children’s education. Parent-friendly features include in-depth schoolprofiles, school search and comparisontools, and regular e-mail updates about theperformance of individual schools.

GreatSchools.net has been piloted inArizona and California. Using data pro-vided by the U.S. Department of Education,GreatSchools.net recently became the firstWeb site to incorporate results on state-level assessments for virtually every schoolin the nation. Over the next several years,GreatSchools.net plans to work with states,private foundations and other partners tobring its in-depth school guide to dozens ofstates across the country. GreatSchools.nethas been developed with the support of theHewlett, Pisces and Stuart foundations, aswell as Washington Mutual and the NewSchools Venture Fund.

The Grow Networkwww.grownetwork.comSponsor: The Grow NetworkContact: David ColemanCEO(212) [email protected] Description: The Grow Networkcommunicates relevant student assessmentinformation to educators and parents —and gives them the specific tools theyneed to help their students in primary,middle and secondary schools achieve athigher levels. The work is tailored to stateand local educational standards andreflects a deep commitment to enhancinglearning opportunities for children at allability levels.

Both in print and online, The GrowNetwork seeks to translate student andclass information into insights, makingassessments understandable and action-able. The Grow Network’s team of leadingeducators collaborates with key educationaland policy organizations in continuallyrefining its materials and professionaldevelopment strategies to ensure theachievement of three goals: helping teach-ers enhance their classroom practice,assisting principals in their roles asinstructional leaders, and enabling parentsto understand their children’s strengthsand weaknesses and to help them grow.

School Information and ImprovementProjectwww.just4kids.orgSponsor: Just for the KidsContact: Brad DugganExecutive Director(512) [email protected] Description: Just for the Kids (JFTK)is a nonprofit educational research organiza-tion that analyzes student achievementinformation and investigates educationalbest practices. The JFTK data analysis identi-fies the academic potential of a school by


benchmarking it against other schools thatserve similar student populations. The dif-ferences between high- and average-performing schools are investigated toidentify the most effective educational pro-grams with different student populationsover multiple years. More than 3,000schools have been trained to use the JFTKmodel, and foundations, communities,businesses and state governments use thisinformation to evaluate the effectiveness oftheir reform efforts.

The JFTK Web site currently links morethan 10 million individual student recordsfor more than 12,000 schools in six states:Texas, Washington, Tennessee, Florida,Arkansas and Minnesota.

Decision Support Systemwww.mdk12.orgSponsor: Maryland State Department ofEducationContact: Mark MoodyAssistant State Superintendent, Division ofPlanning, Results and InformationManagement, Maryland State Departmentof Education(410) [email protected] Description: The MarylandDepartment of Education and theMaryland Business Roundtable forEducation collaboratively created theSchool Improvement in Maryland Website, which allows all stakeholders toaccess, analyze and use data to improvestudent performance. The vision beganwith helping schools analyze and use theirstate assessment data for school improve-ment. It has expanded to helping themunderstand what the state assessmentsmeasure and what satisfactory perform-ance looks like so that they can teach andmonitor individual student progress onthe same outcomes and indicators.

The tools support schools and studentsin attaining high standards by helpingbuild the capacity of educational leadersand stakeholders to understand, teach and

assess the Maryland Content Standardsand to monitor individual studentprogress.

Standard & Poor’s School EvaluationServiceswww.ses.standardandpoors.comSponsor: Standard and Poor’sContact: William CoxManaging Director(212) [email protected] Description: Standard & Poor’sSchool Evaluation Services (SES) feature a unique synthesis of financial and aca-demic performance factors, including datatables that show where new dollars arebeing allocated, how those dollars areachieving results and where achievementgaps exist. The massive array of data andactions that result from this new level oftransparency promote the sharing of bestpractices among schools and districts.Standard & Poor’s analytical conclusions,independent of local or national politicalagendas, measure and assess the relative“return on investment” in education and,importantly, provide context for thisreturn. SES purposely does not generatesuperficial rankings of schools or schooldistricts. Standard & Poor’s aggregates datafrom a variety of sources and organizesthese data into a unique framework con-sistent across school systems and states.

Michigan and Pennsylvania are thefirst two states to employ SES. The SESWeb site, launched this summer, alreadydisplays Standard & Poor’s independentwritten analyses of the strengths and chal-lenges found in more than 1,100 schoolsystems. The Web site also displays hun-dreds of data trends and comparisons forevery school district. Users can create theirown comparisons to measure their dis-trict’s performance across hundreds ofachievement, financial and demographicvariables.


Handheld Reading Diagnostic Softwarewww.wgengroup.comSponsor: Wireless GenerationContact: Larry BergerCEO(646) [email protected] Description: Wireless Generation’splatform for mobile observational assess-ment solves one of the most crucial prob-lems in K–12 education — how to get acontinuous feed of meaningful studentperformance information outside the class-room so teachers and parents can act onthis information to improve studentachievement. These tools support real-timecapture, analysis, tracking and reporting ofinformation about student achievement,and at the same time, they streamlinenumerous unwieldy bookkeeping andadministrative tasks for teachers.

Wireless Generation’s product for earlyreading assessment replaces a widely usedassessment practice that traditionallyrequires pen and paper. By enabling theassessment system on inexpensive, easy-to-use handheld devices that synchronizewith Web-based servers, Wireless Gener-ation transforms this assessment from acumbersome, paper-generating system into a powerful engine for continuousimprovement. Teachers, administrators andparents can track student progress continu-ously. Teachers can target instruction toindividual student needs, and parents canprovide appropriate support at home. Theproduct currently is being piloted inMamaroneck, N.Y., and York, Pa.

Improving Instruction to MeetHigh Standards

Technology that is well integrated into theclassroom can help students reach highacademic standards. It can help teacherstailor instruction to meet individual stu-dent needs, allow students to learn at theirown pace to master complex skills, andgive students and teachers access to

instructional resources — such as real-timedata or scientists, historians and otherexperts — that can enhance the learningexperience.

Carnegie Learning: The CognitiveTutors™www.carnegielearning.comSponsor: Carnegie LearningContact: Bill HadleyVice President, Education Services andChief Academic Officer(412) [email protected] Description: The Cognitive Tutorprogram’s intelligent software follows andguides students step by step as they solverigorous, standards-based mathematicalproblems. By focusing on each student’sunique problem-solving process, the soft-ware helps students develop the mathe-matical skills and knowledge they need tocontinue to achieve at higher levels. TheTutor provides assistance (hints) when astudent appears to be having difficulty. Italso tracks each student’s mastery of specif-ic skills and uses this information to selectproblem-solving activities and adjust pac-ing to meet each student’s needs.

Because teacher preparation is criticalto the program’s success, all teachers musttake a four-day workshop before using it.The Cognitive Tutor program is in use in36 states and 668 sites, including urban,suburban, rural, private, public, parochial,charter, middle and high schools, as wellas junior and two- and four-year colleges.

Watch-me!-ReadSponsor: Don Johnston, IncorporatedContact: Hilda GentryReading Director, Houston IndependentSchool District(713) [email protected] Description: Watch-me!-Read(WM!R) software uses interactive IBMspeech-recognition technology to helpbeginning readers practice reading. Using


WM!R, a student can read aloud from pre-programmed books or from any storyscanned into the tool by a teacher. Thestudent is accompanied by a computerized“panda,” who plays the role of a teacheror parent, providing assistance as it isneeded throughout the reading session.The panda recognizes mistakes, asks thestudent to repeat a word he or she mis-read, and “reads” the correct word if nec-essary. At any time during the reading, thestudent can listen to what he or she hasread. Students also can create multimediapresentations, complete with video intro-ductions they can share with their peers orteachers. WM!R also captures informationfor teachers, including recordings of eachreading, time-on-task measurements, a cat-alog of missed words and student answersto comprehension questions.

An evaluation study found that stu-dents using WM!R were engaged morehighly in reading, read more challengingmaterial and comprehended reading mate-rial better than when they read alone. Inacademic year 2001–02, the fourth year ofthe project, approximately 150 first-gradeteachers will receive training on WM!R.

Learning With the Library of Congresswww.loc.govSponsor: Library of CongressContact: Susan VecciaManager, Educational Services(202) [email protected] Description: The Library ofCongress’ American Memory online collec-tions provides free access to a wide rangeof primary sources. Its more than 7 mil-lion items include photographs, maps,diaries, films, manuscripts, sound record-ings, song sheets and cultural ephemera.Because primary source material is notonly difficult to acquire but also requiresdifferent teaching methodologies, the col-lection’s Learning Page provides profes-sional development guides and highlights

common curriculum themes to make thesematerials more helpful to K–12 educators.

The Web site helps teachers and students learn to think like historians, find and analyze pieces of the historical record, and construct hypotheses for fur-ther research and study. The goal is tostrengthen life-long learning through thecontinual development of research andcritical-thinking skills. Teachers at all lev-els — elementary, middle and high school,as well as university — are using thesematerials to develop inquiry skills andsupport standards-driven lessons.

The Florida Virtual Schoolwww.flvs.netSponsor: The Florida Virtual SchoolContact: Julie E. YoungExecutive Director(407) 317-3326, ext. [email protected] Description: The Florida VirtualSchool (FVS), an online high school, wasdesigned to give every public, private andhome-educated student in Florida an equalopportunity for educational choice. But itquickly reached beyond the state borders.Last year, over 5,000 students in 13 statesearned credit toward graduation in one of66 FVS courses, most of which were notoffered at their traditional schools. BecauseFVS understands that teaching is aboutconnecting with students, online courseshave been designed to be interactive,engaging and challenging, while exceedingmost state and national standards.

EarthPulse Center www.riverdeep.netSponsor: Riverdeep Interactive LearningContact: Don McBurneyDirector, Implementation Services(800) 453-2449, ext. [email protected] Description: With Riverdeep’sEarthPulse Center, students and teachersuse the Internet to solve science problems


with actual scientists. Classes explore standards-based scientific topics togetherby analyzing up-to-the-minute scientificdata, and they are connected via Web sitesand e-mail to real scientists. The studentsthemselves interpret data, draw conclu-sions and make predictions based on theirown analyses. In this way, science andmath standards come alive as they areapplied to real-world problems.

Riverdeep currently is in more than53,000 schools — more than 40 percent ofthe elementary, middle and high schools inthe United States.

Real-Time Adventures on the Internet:Applying Knowledge in the Real Worldwww.k12science.orgSponsor: Stevens Institute of Technology,Center for Improved Engineering & ScienceEducation (CIESE)Contact: Edward A. FriedmanDirector of CIESE(201) [email protected] Description: Through Real-TimeAdventures on the Internet, students usethe Web’s resources — and multidisciplinaryskills — to act as scientists solving real-world problems. For example, by accessingreal data about the locations of merchantships at sea, students become navigators,plotting the ships’ courses and evaluatingthe effects of ocean currents and weatherconditions on their progress. This exerciserequires students to use mathematics skills,develop geography and mapping skills, anduse social and cultural information aboutcountries engaged in international trade.Writing and language arts skills come intoplay as students present their findingsthrough Web-based publishing and conducte-mail exchanges with other students inport cities around the world.

Materials were developed by the Centerfor Improved Engineering & ScienceEducation (CIESE) at Stevens Institute ofTechnology in collaboration with teachers

from a number of school systems. CIESEalso conducts teacher professional devel-opment programs that bolster teachers’content knowledge and help them deliverthese Internet-supported lessons in theirclassrooms. To date, more than 7,000teachers in Arizona, Florida, New Jerseyand New York have been trained on theuse of these materials. Through a $9.3 million U.S. Department of Education program known as Alliance+, Stevens isintroducing these materials and promotingteacher training in Miami, Phoenix andCleveland.

Providing ProfessionalDevelopment for TeachersA computer can never replace a goodteacher, and Internet access and computerlabs alone cannot improve instruction.However, technology can enhance pre-service and in-service professional devel-opment opportunities by removing theisolation teachers historically experience.Technology gives teachers access to effec-tive instructional practices and strategies,helps them better understand the linkbetween assessment and instruction, andconnects them with their peers and out-side experts for ongoing support and con-tinuous learning.

Seminars on Sciencewww.amnh.org/learn/pd/sos/index.htmlSponsor: American Museum of NaturalHistoryContact: Francine MillmanProject Manager(212) [email protected] Description: The Seminars onScience program has eight, six-week onlinecourses that connect teachers to scienceand give them the confidence and experi-ence they need to conduct inquiry-based,hands-on science with their students. Eachcourse is driven by an American Museumof Natural History scientist’s research inves-


tigation and encourages learners to wrestlewith the same questions and ideas thatengage the authoring museum scientist.Original course lectures by the scientistsprovide learners with an in-depth and per-sonal view of the topics. Online resources— such as virtual specimen, interactivesthat demonstrate scientific processes andtechniques, and videos — are developed incollaboration with the scientists to comple-ment the course lectures and engage learn-ers with the tools and techniques used inscientific investigation.

At the center of each course are learning activities, which include onlinethreaded discussions, assignments and afinal course project. All activities encour-age reflection and the practical applicationof the concepts emphasized in eachcourse. A highlight of every course is theoffline, investigation-based assignmentsthat provide learners with opportunities to observe, question, hypothesize, recordand analyze data, and communicate find-ings, similar to the daily work of museumscientists.

Designing Professional DevelopmentSolutions: The FreshPond LearningNetworkwww.freshpond.comSponsor: FreshPondContact: Rob RamsdellDirector and Founder(617) 864-2425, ext. [email protected] Description: The FreshPondLearning Network is a compelling alterna-tive to traditional professional develop-ment workshops. It uses Design Teams —focused teams of teachers using a study-group approach — to improve teachingand learning. Design Team participantscreate and critique standards-based modellessons, which will be used to improve stu-dent learning in an academic area thatteachers target for improvement.Freshpond.net provides a comprehensive

set of Web tools that helps teachersdesign, publish, share and evaluate high-quality lessons focused on improving stu-dent performance. FreshPond also helpsfacilitate district-level steering committees,and provides intensive training and sup-port of local facilitators who lead studygroups.

FreshPond has conducted professionaldevelopment programs in more than 100schools and districts throughout NewEngland and New York, ranging in sizefrom 1,000 to more than 20,000 students.

IBM Learning Village — Online JuryingProcessWest Virginia: http://reinvent.k12.wv.usSponsor: IBM CorporationContact: Donna LandinWVDE/IBM Reinventing Education GrantCoordinatorWest Virginia Department of Education(304) [email protected] York State: http://wfl.wnyric.orgContact: Nicole Sayer PutmanLearning Village Project CoordinatorFEH BOCES(518) [email protected] Description: Educators in WestVirginia and New York are using IBMLearning Village to give teachers the skills,knowledge and resources they need tointegrate state standards into instructionand assessment. Teachers are using thetechnology to create, share and find standards-based, online lesson plans.Using IBM Learning Village’s Jurying Tool,teachers who develop their own lessonssubmit them to a jury of their peers, whoreview the plans and suggest revisions tostrengthen them if necessary. These les-sons become part of a databank thatteachers from all over the state can use intheir classrooms as a way of sharing effec-tive practices. The Learning Village PrivateConference application facilitates commu-


nication among jury team members, moder-ators and Learning Village administratorsthroughout the lesson-approval process. Thetool also integrates a range of other func-tions, including teacher home pages, com-munication tools, authentic assessmenttools and professional development applica-tions — all designed to support instruction.

In West Virginia, the technology is avail-able in all middle and high schools, and,through a federal grant, the state is expand-ing the project into elementary grades andteacher education programs at 13 state col-leges and universities. In New York, thetechnology is being implemented in morethan 60 school districts, organizations andnonpublic school systems. An independentevaluation found that underperforming stu-dents in grades seven through 11 scored sig-nificantly higher in every core curriculararea when they were taught using the juriedlesson plans. For students performing abovethe average, use of the curricular materialsmaintained their performance lead.

Reinventing Education ChangeManagement Toolkitwww.reinventingeducation.orgSponsor: IBM CorporationContact: Robin WillnerDirector, Corporate Community Relations(914) [email protected] Description: The ReinventingEducation Change Management Toolkitoffers principals and other school leadersthe tools they need to successfully institutechanges in their schools. Based upon thework of Professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter ofHarvard Business School, a world-renownedexpert in organizational change manage-ment, this set of interactive online tools andmaterials has been customized specificallyfor educators focused on implementingstandards-based reforms.

Regardless of the specific initiative, theToolkit helps answer a number of criticalquestions: What is your vision for change?

How do you build a foundation of support?When is the right time to start, and at whatpace should you move? How do you holdteachers, administrators and other stake-holders accountable for results? Using theToolkit, principals and other users can takea diagnostic self-exam that leads them toinformation and strategies designed toaddress these and other questions. Or theycan simply browse through the Toolkit,which includes both specific change toolsand stories about real changes in schoolsand districts. What’s more, the Toolkitallows principals to collaborate with theiradministrators and teachers. Principals caninvite their site-based management teaminto the Toolkit, share information withthem, ask them to complete diagnostictools and review information they havesubmitted.

Classroom Solutions From LearningEffectswww.learningeffects.comSponsor: Learning EffectsContact: Dave DanielsVice President, Marketing & BusinessDevelopmentLearning Effects, Inc.(207) 781-8420, ext. 229 Project Description: Learning Effects pro-vides innovative, proven professionaldevelopment systems that help teachersand schools meet the challenge of higherstandards and raise student achievement.Learning Effects allows teachers to practiceassessment online using prescored studentwork. It then guides teachers as they eval-uate actual pieces of student work online,providing them with detailed informationon the specific skills students are expectedto demonstrate. Learning Effects also offers teachers opportunities to workonline collaboratively with their peers toscore student work — a powerful form ofprofessional development that helps raiseexpectations of student performance andimprove instructional practice.


Learning Effects offers programs forimproved performance in writing, mathe-matics, science and reading in grades threethrough 12 and currently is working inCalifornia, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine,New York and Ohio.

LessonLabwww.lessonlab.comSponsor: LessonLabMitch GordonVice President(310) 820-6612, ext. [email protected] Description: Using LessonLab’ssoftware, educators can create their owncase-based examples of effective teachingpractices. LessonLab’s Web-based toolsallow teachers and other professionals tostudy and discuss videos and other arti-facts of classroom practice, face-to-faceand over the Internet. Supplemental mate-rials, expert commentary and personallearning tools enrich this professionaldevelopment experience. The platformconsists of three components: LessonLabViewerT, which enables teachers and oth-ers to interact with cases in the digitallibraries; LessonLab BuilderT, the applica-tion for creating content for the digitallibraries; and the digital libraries them-selves, which form an expandable reposi-tory of case materials.

LessonLab is used at universitiesnationwide, including PepperdineUniversity and UCLA, states such asCalifornia and Connecticut, and schooldistricts such as Duval County in Floridaand the Los Angeles Unified SchoolDistrict.

SchoolNetwww.schoolnet.comSponsor: SchoolNetContact: Denis P. DoyleCo-Founder and CAO(310) [email protected] Description:As an education tech-nology solution provider, SchoolNet estab-lishes partnerships with school districts,offering a suite of easy-to-use, tailored mod-ules. SchoolNet’s suite — Account, Alignand Outreach — helps teachers andadministrators analyze and compare spe-cific student performance data in individ-ual classrooms and across schools and districts, develop standards-based lessonplans that are aligned with assessments,and engage community members onlinein the service of student learning.

SchoolNet’s solution was designedwith the guidance of teachers and some ofthe nation’s leading school reform figures.It is content-neutral, permitting a widearray of partnerships with contentproviders. At the same time, SchoolNetencourages teacher professionalism by pro-viding lesson-building and publishing toolsthat make teacher-designed and teacher-tested materials widely available.SchoolNet currently is working in Ohio,Pennsylvania and South Carolina.

Teachscapeteachscape.comSponsor: TeachscapeContact: Beth LiefSenior Vice President, Strategic Relations(212) [email protected] Description: Teachscape, an in-depth professional development system, isdesigned to help improve teaching and, as aresult, raise student achievement. It focuseson helping teachers and principals studycurrent, research-based instruction modelsin literacy, mathematics and science. Eachcourse includes videos of one or more


teachers using effective instructionalstrategies in their classrooms. Videos areaccessed online or on CD. They come withsupporting materials including lessonsplans, student work, teacher reflectionsand specialist commentary, and additionalreadings and Web sites.

All courses are correlated to nationaland state content and teaching standards.Online assessments and activities, individ-ual online journals, and facilitated on-siteand online learning communities assisteducators in acquiring, deepening andapplying knowledge of content, teachingstrategies and assessment. Teachscapeworks with local school district and stateand higher education leaders to introducethe Teachscape system and train thoseeducators who will work with teachers orstudent teachers.


Additional ResourcesThe following is a representative listing ofadditional resources for individuals seekinginformation on topics covered in the brief-ing book.

I. Progress ReportAmerican Federation of TeachersMaking Standards Matter 2001,November 2001Scheduled for release in early November,Making Standards Matter 2001 will report oneach state’s effort to implement standards-based reform systems in their schools.Academic standards, standards-based cur-riculum, aligned assessments and studentaccountability will be discussed andreviewed. A new online database — whichwill track each state’s efforts to implementa strong, standards-based reform system —also will be unveiled in November. Avail-able online at www.aft.org.

Ravitch, Diane (ed.)The Brookings InstitutionBrookings Papers on Education Policy,2000 and 2001This publication includes articles on edu-cation policy that help summarize the realstate of education in America, includingstandards-based reform efforts and wherethey are headed. These annual volumes areedited by Diane Ravitch, and a 2002 ver-sion will be available later this year.Available online at www.brookings.org.Click on “Publications,” then “Bookstore.”

Council of the Great City SchoolsBeating the Odds, May 2001This new city-by-city study of testing datashows that urban schools have made substantial gains in math and readingachievement, and they are showing signifi-

cant reductions in the achievement gapbetween white and minority students. Inat least half the grades that were tested, 23districts posted math gains that were fasterrates than those of their states. Seventeenpercent posted reading gains that werefaster. Overall, 92 percent of citiesimproved math scores in a majority of the grades tested — 80 percent in reading.Executive summary available online atwww.cgcs.org, along with ordering infor-mation for the full report.

The Education Trust“Education Watch Online”This site is a user-friendly source of stateand national data on educational perform-ance and equity by race and class, kinder-garten through college. Users can select,access and compare state and nationaldata in such areas as student achievement,teacher quality and investments. Availableonline at www.edtrust.org. Click on “EdWatch Data.”

The Education TrustNew Frontiers for a New Century: A National Overview, Spring 2001The latest report in The Education Trust’s“Thinking K–16” series reviews theprogress made in education reform anduses lessons learned to suggest reforms forthe new century. Available online atwww.edtrust.org/main/reports.asp.

The Education TrustYouth at the Crossroads: Facing HighSchool and Beyond, Winter 2001Prepared by The Education Trust for theNational Commission on the High SchoolSenior Year, this report looks at wheretoday’s students are as they leave high


school and examines whether they are bet-ter educated than their predecessors were11 years ago when the National EducationGoals first were conceived. In general, itfinds that student achievement has notimproved at the rates we hoped for, andindeed after decades of leading the worldin high school completion, the UnitedStates currently ranks 17th, with comple-tion rates that have remained stagnant for nearly 30 years. Available online atwww.edtrust.org.

Education Week“Quality Counts 2001: Gaining Ground,”January 2001Achieve and Education Week analyzed statestandards and assessments and discoveredthat while standards and assessments are stronger today than when they firstwere being developed in the early 1990s,they still aren’t strong enough to moveAmerica’s schools as far as most would like in the 21st century. The report alsoincludes findings from an in-depth analy-sis Achieve conducted of state standardsand tests in nine states. Available online atwww.edweek.org.

Finn, Chester E., Jr., and Michael J.PetrilliThomas B. Fordham Foundation The State of State Standards,January 2000This Fordham Foundation report is an in-depth study of state academic standards. Itincludes general reviews of English lan-guage arts, mathematics, history, scienceand geography standards. How good arethe standards? Compared with the organi-zation’s original research in 1997, thingsare looking much brighter. But, theauthors argue, the standards in general stillhave a long way to go before they can beconsidered anything more than average.Available online at www.edexcellence.net.

Grissmer, David, et al.RAND CorporationImproving Student Achievement: WhatState NAEP Test Scores Tell Us, 2000Using data from American student scoreson the 1990–96 National Assessment ofEducational Progress tests in math andreading, the authors of this RAND bookdetermine which states have made themost progress in improving studentachievement scores. The book includes anin-depth look at reform efforts — andresults — in Texas and California. Availableonline at www.rand.org. Click on“Publications.”

Mullis, Ina V.S., et alTIMSS 1999 International MathematicsReport, December 2000The follow-up to the original ThirdInternational Mathematics and ScienceStudy (TIMSS), this report analyzes the per-formance of eighth-grade students from 38countries — including 26 that participatedin the original study — in mathematicsand science. The study shows some discon-certing figures, including the fact that thesame American students who had scoredabove the international average in mathe-matics four years earlier as fourth gradersnow scored near the average as eighthgraders. While students from other coun-tries were improving their performance,American students actually were fallingbehind. Available online at www.timss.org/timss1999i/publications.html. Click on“Publications.”

National Center for Education Statisticsand the National Assessment GoverningBoardMathematics 2000: The Nation’s ReportCard, August 2001Math scores from the 2000 NationalAssessment of Educational Progress werereleased in early August. This study showsthat the scores of fourth- and eighth-gradestudents are rising, while the scores of12th graders declined. Many states have


shown improved performance, but fewhave narrowed the black-white achieve-ment gap. Available online at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/mathematics/results.

National Education Goals PanelRaising Achievement and Reducing Gaps:Reporting Progress Toward Goals forAcademic Achievement, April 2001The latest report by the NationalEducation Goals Panel provides analyses of achievement scores on the NationalAssessment of Educational Progress. Thestudy finds that while gains have beenposted by the highest-achieving students,low-performing students still are fallingbehind, and relatively few states have beensuccessful in reducing the achievementgap. The report does find that states aremaking progress in increasing achievementin mathematics — significant improve-ment when compared to reading gains.Available online at www.negp.gov. Clickon “Latest publications, reports and policyrecommendations.”

StandardsWorkThe Results Card, 2000The Results Card is a means for states todiagnose and monitor school performanceover time. It identifies more than 60 indi-cators that states and districts should col-lect and analyze to determine whethertheir new standards and associated instruc-tional initiatives are making a difference.StandardsWork, a nonprofit educationgroup, analyzes trends in the data in rela-tion to the states’ goals and policies. Adocument for each participating state andan overall national perspective — with achart comparing trends — is released pub-licly. The Education Leaders Council, agroup of reform-minded education chiefsfrom seven states, participated in the pilotproject. Available online at www.standardswork.org. Click on “Results Card.”

II. Public SupportAlexakis, Georgia N.“Test Prep,” The Washington Monthly,March 2001This article describes the lessons learnedfrom a school improvement effort inRevere, Mass. According to the magazine,the town’s attitude “has shifted fromgrudging acceptance to a full endorsementof the Massachusetts ComprehensiveAssessment System and the standards-based movement.” Available online atwww.washingtonmonthly.com. Click on“Archives.”

The Business Roundtable Assessing and Addressing the “TestingBacklash,” April 2001This Business Roundtable report evaluatesthe national “backlash” to testing — theprevailing perception that much of thepublic, including parents and teachers, iswary of standardized testing. While main-taining that concerns about testing andaccountability are neither a surprise norabnormal, the report advises businesscoalitions and standards advocates abouthow to best address this backlash — espe-cially in the face of a perceived media biasthat tends to “play up” opposition to test-ing. Available online at www.brt.org. Clickon “Education,” then “Academic Standardsand Testing.”

The Business RoundtableMaking Standards Work: Public AttitudesAbout Standards and Testing, December2000A summary of public opinion research andfocus groups with parents and teachers,Making Standards Work includes findings,plus communications and policy recom-mendations for policymakers, businessgroups and other advocates of standards-based reform. Available online atwww.brt.org. Click on “Publications.”


Educational Testing ServiceA Measured Response: Americans Speakon Education Reform, May 2001This survey, commissioned by theEducational Testing Service and conductedby the polling firm of Peter Hart andRobert Teeter, shows that while a majorityof Americans support greater accountabilityin public schools, they also are demandingincreased federal funding to help all stu-dents reach those goals. Available online atwww.ets.org. Click on “Policymakers.”

The Gallup Organization and Phi Delta KappaPublic Schools Get Highest Ratings in 30 Years, August 2001This survey from The Gallup Organizationand Phi Delta Kappa shows that Americansgive their local public schools the highestrating they have received in the 30-yearhistory of the poll, with over 50 percentsaying they are satisfied with the directionof the public school systems. Availableonline at www.gallup.com.

Public Agenda“Reality Check 2001”This is an annual report on the progress ofthe academic standards movement and theimpact of reform efforts on schools andthe work world. A joint project of PublicAgenda and Education Week, it surveys pub-lic school students, parents and teachers,and employers and college professors whowork with recent high school graduates.Ques-tions address education policies,efforts to raise standards, testing and pro-motion anxiety, standards, standardizedtests, preparedness for college and work,and computer use/technology support.Available online at www.publicagenda.org/specials/rc2001/reality.htm.

Public AgendaNational Poll of Parents of Public SchoolStudents, October 2000This survey of 803 parents of public schoolstudents in grades K–12 shows that news

reports of a parental backlash against aca-demic standards and standardized tests arehighly exaggerated. The report highlightsparents’ personal experiences with stan-dards and finds that, even among parentswho live in districts that are implementinghigher academic standards, support forcontinued reform is strong. Funding forthe survey was provided by the Thomas B.Fordham, George Gund, John D. andCatherine T. MacArthur, and John M. Olin Foundations. Available online atwww.publicagenda.org. Click on “AboutPublic Agenda,” then “Research Studies.”

Public Education NetworkAction for All: The Public’s Responsibilityfor Public Education, April 2001The Public Education Network’s (PEN) lat-est poll, conducted with Education Week,finds that many Americans are not asinvolved in public schools as they feelthey should be to help them improve.While education regularly tops the list ofvoter concerns in election years, fewerthan half of Americans say they areinvolved actively in public education. Atthe same time, most Americans are skepti-cal of how hard their communities areworking to improve the quality of publicschools in their neighborhood. Only 22percent of voters say people in their com-munity are taking “a lot” of responsibilityfor ensuring quality in public schools.Available online at www.publiceducation.org. Click on “Publications.”

III. Teaching and Learning: Closingthe Achievement GapAmerican Federation of TeachersResource Guide for Redesigning Low-Performing Schools, 2001This continually updated Internet resourceguide presents ideas, information andmaterials that teachers and local unionleaders can use to help foster sound tech-niques to help fix failing schools. This por-tion of the American Federation ofTeachers’ Web site includes its policy state-


ment on redesigning low-performingschools, as well as district profiles andexamples of promising practices. Availableonline at www.aft.org.

American Federation of TeachersDoing What Works: Improving Big-CitySchool Districts, October 2000This American Federation of Teachersreport profiles big-city school districts thatare having success producing measurablegains in student achievement. A numberof districts profiled — including Baltimore,Chicago, Philadelphia and Washington —all had sustained gains for at least threeyears. The report examines districts thatare having success and documents whatefforts made the results possible. Availableonline at www.aft.org. Click on “AFTreports.”

The Business Roundtable and NationalAlliance of BusinessPay-for-Performance: An Issue Brief forBusiness Leaders, July 2000This issue brief developed by The BusinessRoundtable and the National Alliance ofBusiness provides an overview for businessleaders describing how pay-for-performancesalary structures can reward teachers forimproving student achievement and sug-gesting ways in which business leaders cansupport new compensation systems likepay-for-performance through collaborativework with educators and policymakers.Available online at www.brt.org. Click on“Publications,” and select year “2000”from the pull-down menu.

Center for Reform of School SystemsHow Urban School Systems Can Succeed(Executive Summary and Report fromthe “Making the Grade” Conference),2001The history of urban school reform hardlypaints an optimistic picture, with toomany urban districts characterized asuncooperative. That is not the case in theHouston Independent School District. With

a reform agenda in place for over a decade,Houston schools have made remarkablegains. These reports explain what strategieswere used, why they were successful, whatchallenges remain — and how they mightbe replicated in other urban districts. Thereports are based on deliberations at the“Making the Grade” conference, whichconvened researchers and other experts tocritically examine Houston’s progress.Available by calling (713) 682-9888 or writ-ing mcadams@ crss.org.

Council for Basic EducationThe Eye of the Storm: Improving TeacherPractices to Achieve Higher Standards,October 2000The September 2000 Wingspread Confer-ence, held in Racine, Wis., brought togeth-er a small group of experts who debatedways to improve student achievementthrough identifying and investigating vari-ous institutional practices. The Council forBasic Education (CBE) has compiled thiscollection of papers, which describe thegoals of the conference and highlight thepromising practices studied by the partici-pants. Available online at www.c-b-e.org.Click on “Publications.”

Council of Chief State School OfficersGaining Ground, August 2001This issue of Gaining Ground recaps theHigh Poverty Schools Initiative held inBaltimore in May 2001. The conferencefocused on providing state and districtsupport to low-performing schools. The issue also includes a summary ofCalifornia’s efforts to develop a statewideinfrastructure in support of after-schoolprograms. Available online at www.ccsso.org. Click on “Publications.”


Education Commission of the StatesComprehensive School Reform: FiveLessons from the Field, 1999With funding from the AnnenbergFoundation, the Education Commission ofthe States started in 1995 to work withgovernors and other state and local policy-makers to raise public awareness about thenew generation of public educationreforms. This report shares lessons learnedduring the first five years and seeks toadvise legislators and educators on whatworks and doesn’t work in the classroom.Available online at www.ecs.org. Click on“Publications.”

Education Week and The Pew Charitable Trusts“Quality Counts 2000: Who ShouldTeach?,” January 2000The fourth annual “Quality Counts” reportpublished by Education Week looks at whatstates are doing to attract and keep themost-qualified and best-prepared teachers— and finds that they are not doingenough. While schools set standards forthose coming into the field, they oftendon’t hold teachers accountable for theirperformance during their careers. As aresult, millions of students sit down everyday before instructors who do not meetthe minimum requirements their states saythey should to teach in a public school.Available online at www.edweek.org.

Elmore, Richard F.Albert Shanker InstituteBuilding a New Structure for SchoolLeadership, 2000In this analysis, the author explores theproblems with the structure and leadershipof public education. The report includescases of exemplary leadership in publicschools, where principals and superintend-ents are making it possible for teachers toimprove instruction. Available online atwww.shankerinstitute.org. Click on“Education.”

Finn, Chester E., Jr., Marci Kanstoroom,Michael J. Petrilli and Sheila ByrdThomas B. Fordham FoundationThe Quest for Better Teachers: Gradingthe States, November 1999Using a state-by-state survey to gather data on teacher quality, this report findsthat despite intense public concern overteacher quality and preparation, manystates are failing in their effort to boostteacher quality. According to the study,only nine states received high grades fortheir efforts. Among other findings, thereport finds that only 12 states have vari-able teacher pay structures based on per-formance or marketplace conditions andonly eight have devolved personnel deci-sions to the school level — numbers that must improve in order to help raiseachievement for all students across the country. Available online at www.edexcellence.net. Click on “OurPublications.”

The Heritage FoundationNo Excuses: Seven Principals of Low-Income Schools Who Set the Standard for High Achievement, 1999This report profiles seven principals of low-income schools with records of achieve-ment showing that all children can learn,regardless of their families’ income levels.The book is a part of the No Excuses series,which can be found on the Web at www.noexcuses.org. Available online at www.heritage.org. Click on “Bookstore,” then“Publications Library.”

Just for the KidsPromising Practices: How High-Performing Schools in Texas Get Results,January 2001This report is based on Just for the Kids’study of Texas schools that are succeedingat helping low-income and ethnic minori-ty children succeed. Researchers foundthat while the approaches to reformweren’t exactly the same, they sharedcommon elements, including paying


attention to teaching quality and usingassessments to guide instruction. Availableonline at www.just4kids.org. Click on“Promising Practices Study Overview.”

National Alliance of BusinessInvesting in Teaching, January 2001Developed by the National Alliance ofBusiness in conjunction with The BusinessRoundtable, National Association ofManufacturers and U.S. Chamber ofCommerce, this report follows a year’sworth of research into how to get the best-qualified teachers into the classroom andelevate the teaching profession in general.Through interviews with teachers, admin-istrators, business leaders, policymakers,and college and university faculty, thereport makes recommendations includingthe creation of a rigorous new model forteacher training and professional develop-ment. Available online at www.nab.com.Click on “Education,” then “TeacherQuality.”

National School Boards AssociationInto the Classroom: Teacher Preparation,Licensure and Recruitment, 2001

Study after study demonstrates the essen-tial role that teachers play in determiningtheir students’ success, both in school andbeyond. Into the Classroom, the first in theNational School Boards Association’s newElements of Teacher Effectiveness series,examines the circumstances that have ledto increased demand for effective teachersand the policies that have contributed totheir diminished support. Based on a care-ful analysis of the research literature, thisnew study offers guidance to school boards,district administrators, state legislators andothers with a stake in the improvement of teacher preparation, licensure andrecruitment policies. Available online atwww.nsba.org/bookreports/bestsellers.htm.

National School Boards AssociationThe Key Work of School BoardsGuidebook, 2000This guidebook provides information forunderstanding and implementing theNational School Boards Association’s KeyWork of School Boards, an ambitious proj-ect designed to establish student achieve-ment as the top priority of school boards,staff and communities. The guidebookfocuses on eight action areas that success-ful boards have focused on in improvingstudent achievement: vision, standards,assessment, accountability, resource align-ment, climate, collaboration and continu-ous improvement. Available online atwww.nsba.org/keywork/guidebook.htm.

Partnership for LearningMaking Standards Work, October 2001This publication provides results from athree-year research project that investigatedstrategies used by rapidly improving schoolsas well as what prevents struggling schoolsfrom improving. The research findings pro-vide information about the programs andattitudes that make a difference for studentsand student learning. Partnership forLearning, a coalition of Washington statebusinesses committed to higher academicstandards, has distilled these findings intofive broad strategies that, together, can helpschool improve. The report also suggestschallenges — and possible solutions — tosustaining success. Available online atwww.partnership4learning.org. Click on“Free Resources,” then “Guides/Brochures.”

Solmon, Lewis and Michael PodgurskyMilken Family FoundationThe Pros and Cons of Performance-BasedCompensation, June 2000This paper analyzes current and historicalcriticisms of performance-based compensa-tion in K–12 education, including com-ments from a group of Milken Foundationaward recipients. The authors find that notonly is performance-based compensationfeasible in K–12 education, but it also is


necessary to attract the best candidates to the teaching profession and keep themin the classroom. Available online atwww.mff.org. Click on “Publications.”

Southern Regional Education BoardMaking Middle Grades Matter: A Planning Guide for School ImprovementThe Southern Regional Education Boardhelps schools develop and implementcomprehensive improvement plans thatcenter around the following: an academiccore aligned with rigorous content andperformance standards, high expectationsand a system of extra help, classroom prac-tices that engage students in learning,teachers working together, support fromparents, use of data, and strong leadership.Available online at www.sreb.org. Click on“High Schools That Work,” then “MakingMiddle Grades Matter.”

Stigler, James and James HiebertThe Teaching Gap, 1999This book provides a comprehensiveanalysis of international approachestoward teaching, including a comparisonamong math instruction practices in high-achieving countries such as Japan,Germany and the United States. In provid-ing their analysis and observations, theauthors suggest that education reformneeds to begin with teachers, from raisingthe level of requirements to improvingpeer review and interaction among teach-ers. Published by the Free Press.

Wenglisky, HaroldEducational Testing ServiceHow Teaching Matters: Bringing theClassroom Back into Discussions ofTeacher Quality, October 2000This report reviews and analyzes the impactof teachers on student achievement inmathematics and science. The study linksstudent achievement to three aspects ofteacher quality: teacher inputs (such as edu-cation level), professional development andclassroom practices. It finds that classroompractices matter more than the others and

in many cases outweigh independent fac-tors such as students’ socioeconomic status.Available online at www.ets.org. Click on“Researchers.”

IV. Testing and Accountability:Using Data to Drive ImprovementAchieve, Inc.Standards: How High is High Enough?,Spring 2001While states have used different strategiesfor phasing in higher standards, this policybrief makes the argument that high educa-tion and businesses need to send moreexplicit signals to students that higher stan-dards matter — and they can do this byaligning their admissions and hiring deci-sions to students’ high school performances.Available online at www.achieve.org. Clickon “News/Reports,” then “Publications.”

Achieve, Inc.Testing: Setting the Record Straight,Summer 2000This inaugural issue of Achieve’s policybriefs analyzes the strengths and weaknessesof the new generation of tests, debunksmany of the test-bashing myths and pro-files states that proactively are trying tostrengthen their systems. The brief containsexamples of promising practices. Availableonline at www.achieve.org. Click on“News/Reports,” then “Publications.”

Center on Reinventing Public EducationHow States Can Hold SchoolsAccountable, June 2000Based at the University of Washington in Seattle, the Center for ReinventingPublic Education examines and analyzesaccountability systems nationwide and, inso doing, seeks to identify lessons learnedfrom other states’ experiences with design-ing and implementing accountability systems and to use those examples to cre-ate a model for an accountability systemthat a state like Washington could use.Available online at www.crpe.org. Click on“Publications.”


The Charles A. Dana Center, The University of Texas at AustinEquity-Driven, Achievement-FocusedSchool Districts, September 2000The Dana Center’s report shows Texasschool districts that are working toimprove achievement for low-income stu-dents, a movement largely focused at theschool level. The study shows that district-level leadership in general and the state’saccountability systems in particular haveenabled educators to target those studentswho need the most help — then provide it.Available online at www.utdanacenter.org.Click on “Products and Publications.”

Committee for Economic DevelopmentMeasuring What Matters, February 2001Released at the crux of the congressionaldebate over new testing and accountabilityrequirements sought by the Bush adminis-tration, the Committee for EconomicDevelopment’s (CED) Measuring WhatMatters hails these policy instruments as akey to improving student learning, whilecautioning that tests are a means, and notan end, to effective school reform.Specifically, CED calls on business leadersto continue their wide-ranging support forassessments and accountability as anongoing step in developing long-term edu-cation reform. Available online atwww.ced.org. Click on “Education andEarly Childcare.”

Education Week“Quality Counts 2001: A BetterBalance,” January 2001The fifth “Quality Counts” report pub-lished by Education Week looks at howstandards-based reform is affecting theclassroom. The study shows that states’investments are paying off. There areexamples of rising test scores for studentsand higher expectations in schools, butthere also are fears that states may be mov-ing too quickly to hold schools account-able without providing enough support tohelp them improve. States need to strike

a better balance among standards, assess-ment, and tools for schools and studentsbefore education reform can be firmly inplace and long lasting. Specifically, policy-makers must ensure that state tests do not overshadow the standards they weredesigned to measure. Available online atwww.edweek.org.

Gandal, Matthew and Jennifer Vranek“Standards: Here Today, HereTomorrow,” Educational Leadership,September 2001This article by Achieve staff members describes the general public support for standards-based education reform andargues that successful reform depends onthree keys: clear standards, well-crafted testsand fair accountability. The article alsooffers educators several strategies for puttingthose critical pieces in place. Availableonline at www.ascd.org/readingroom/edlead/elintro.html.

Jerald, Craig D.The Business Roundtable and The Education TrustReal Results, Remaining Challenges: The Story of Texas Education Reform,April 2001Texas has become a touchstone in thenational debate about the merits of studenttesting and education accountability. Thispaper briefly summarizes the effects ofTexas policies to raise academic standards,measure student performance and imposeconsequences for results over the pastdecade. While Texas hasn’t yet achieved aneducation “miracle,” the state has takenseveral steps forward and achieved somereal successes. Available online atwww.brt.org. Click on “Education,” then“Academic Standards and Testing.”

Lemann, Nicholas“Testing Limits,” The New Yorker, July 2001This article reviews President Bush’s educa-tion reform efforts, from their inception


while he was Texas governor to the 2000presidential election and the recent debatein Congress. “Testing Limits” also analyzesthe politics surrounding the issues. Thebusiness community supports the effortsand sees standards as a way to produce abetter-educated workforce, yet educatorsand minority groups worry that the newtests will be used to designate minority stu-dents and their teachers as “subpar.” Theauthor argues that the goals of educationreform supersede the politics. Not availableonline.

Maryland State Board of EducationEvery Child Achieving: A Plan for Meetingthe Needs of the Individual Learner,October 1999Every Child Achieving provides the frame-work for state and local efforts to changethe fundamental systems that affect chil-dren’s development and learning to focusresources — including time and money —more sharply on individual students whoare struggling to meet the state’s increas-ingly rigorous standards. The plan recom-mends strategies to prevent student failurethrough academic intervention, strengthenteachers’ skills and administrators’ leader-ship by improving educator capacity, andenhance learning experiences for veryyoung children to ensure student readi-ness. Available online at www.mdk12.org/practices/ensure/initiative/index.html.

Massachusetts Educational ReformReview CommissionHow Massachusetts Schools Are UsingMCAS to Change Curriculum,Instruction, Assessment and ResourceAllocation, November 2000This report shows the results of a study ofstate educators to determine how teachersreceive MCAS results; identify commonpractices among Massachusetts schools anddistricts using MCAS results to change cur-riculum, instruction, assessment andresource allocation; identify and disseminateinformation about positive or initially suc-

cessful practices or possible negative impli-cations; and promote discussion and sharingof effective strategies for using MCAS results.Available online at www.massedreformre-view.org. Click on “Research.”

Mass InsightUncommon Wisdom, June 2001This is a review of effective reform strate-gies from Mass Insight’s 2001 VanguardSchools, which have made significantimprovements. The report includesdetailed performance data for the schoolsand insights from administrators andteachers as to what worked and why.Available online at www.massinsight.com/meri/index.html.

Mass InsightFor the First Time Ever, November 2000This report focuses on the extraordinaryefforts in Massachusetts schools to getextra help to the students who need itmost. The commonwealth has provided$80 million over the past three years tosupport “academic support programs.” The report poses the questions: “Are theyworking?” “How are they working?” And“What strategies seem to be working best?”The report includes studies of academicintervention programs in Attleboro,Boston, Quincy, Springfield and Worcester.Available online at www. massinsight.com/meri/e_pressnew.html#FirstTime.

National Center for Education StatisticsHigh School Academic Curriculum andthe Persistence Path Through College,August 2001Recently released by the U.S. Department ofEducation’s National Center for EducationStatistics, this report shows that the rigor ofthe high school curriculum has a strongimpact on whether kids go to college andhow long they stay enrolled, regardless ofother independent factors such as poverty,race and grade-point average. Availableonline at www.nces.ed.gov. Click on“Electronic Catalog.”

2001 national education summit · 2021. 3. 16. · three areas: teaching, testing and...

Documents