Equity in Achievement Remains a Hurdle for States Amid Progress; U.S. Earns C-minus and Massachusetts Ranks First in K-12 Achievement

Transcription

1 EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE UNTIL: Jan. 9, 2014, 12:01 a.m. EST CONTACT: Tim Ebner, (301) , Equity in Achievement Remains a Hurdle for States Amid Progress; U.S. Earns C-minus and Massachusetts Ranks First in K-12 Achievement Education Week Survey of School Leaders Examines Changing District Landscape Grades and Highlights Reports Issued for All 50 States and D.C. WASHINGTON Jan. 9, 2014 Recent years have seen the nation s schools buffeted by a host of forces, among them the Great Recession and subsequent halting recovery, long-term demographic trends, a push for higher and more uniform academic standards, increasingly polarized politics on education issues, heightened competition within the public sector, and burgeoning new technologies with the potential to reshape the way instruction is delivered. And, despite a national public dialogue that focuses on America s ranking on international tests, its place in the global economy, and concerns about what some see as the increasingly activist roles being taken by distant federal and state policymakers, public schooling remains a highly local affair in this country. As in the past, public school districts and their leaders are responsible for serving the vast majority of today s students. The 2014 edition of Education Week s Quality Counts report District Disruption & Revival delves into the powerful fiscal, academic, and social forces that are reshaping traditional school districts and the forms they can take. As the report s journalism documents, the impetus for change may come from within, as districts adapt to dramatic demographic shifts that can radically transform a community over the course of a single generation. Sometimes, change is imposed by outside forces, as when persistent budgetary, management, or performance problems prompt civic leaders to take action. There can be little doubt that the environment in which public schools operate is more complex today than ever before. With more pressure to perform and expanded options available to students and their families, business as usual is no longer good enough for local school leaders who must fundamentally rethink how their school systems operate, said Christopher B. Swanson, Vice President of Editorial Projects in Education, the nonprofit organization that publishes Education Week. But whether we will look back on this proliferation of new approaches as a great age of experimentation or a period of confusion, remains very much to be seen. LOCAL PERSPECTIVES To complement the report s examination of district transformation, the Education Week Research Center conducted an original survey of district administrators to gain a first-hand perspective on the range of management challenges and reform options confronting today s school systems. More than 450 superintendents, curriculum and instruction directors, and other district leaders weighed in on such issues as governance models, policy mandates imposed from above, competition from the private sector, expanded public schooling options, and the relationship between local officials and their state and federal counterparts. One clear pattern that emerged is that change is a constant in the dynamics of local schools, and likely has been for quite some time. Two-thirds of administrators reported that their district s superintendency had turned over at least once in the past five years. And 3 in 10 experienced a recent central-office

2 reorganization. Yet, the majority of respondents still felt that significant changes in the governance or organization of their districts were needed to better address the challenges they face. Although many factors have prompted local school officials to consider new approaches to district governance or structure, several stand out. Nearly 90 percent of administrators surveyed reported that economic and fiscal challenges were important drivers of change, with almost as many citing pressures related to accountability. More than 8 in 10 said that technological shifts have led them to consider changes. Most administrators also felt competitive pressure coming from a range of alternative schooling options, including the private sector, virtual or online programs, and public charter schools. Quality Counts 2014: District Disruption & Revival features detailed findings from the survey. It also examines school leaders support for various reform approaches, views on the effectiveness of several prominent structural and governance reforms, and the influence of various actors on local school policy. THE STATE OF THE STATES Against this backdrop, Quality Counts the most comprehensive ongoing assessment of the state of American education presents the Education Week Research Center s latest examination of key statelevel education outcomes. The 2014 edition of the report reflects a reconsideration of the framework that has guided the research center s work in past years. Recognizing that states have largely adopted elements of standards-based reform that Quality Counts set out to track nearly two decades ago, the center did not survey states in several policy areas that have long been mainstays of the report. However, the print and online editions of Quality Counts 2014 grade the states and the nation in three critical categories: the Chance for Success Index, K-12 Achievement Index, and School Finance. New results for the Chance-for-Success Index which captures the role of education in a person s life, from cradle to career show that the nation has started regaining some traction promoting an environment that supports positive learning experiences for youths and affords opportunities for adults to make good on a good education. Scores on the index increased a half-point point from last year and show signs of returning to pre-recession levels, although income growth remains weak across much of the country. This year, the U.S. as a whole receives a C-plus on Chance for Success. Massachusetts remains at the top of the national rankings for the seventh year running, earning the only A-minus, followed closely by Connecticut, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and North Dakota, each posting grades of B-plus. Mississippi and New Mexico receive grades of D-plus, while Nevada scores lowest with a D. The research center s K-12 Achievement Index assesses the performance of a state s public schools against a broad set of 18 indicators capturing: current achievement levels, improvements over time, and poverty-based disparities or gaps. This year, the nation earns a grade of C-minus and marked a slight improvement since Quality Counts 2012, the last time the index was reported. Massachusetts earns a B and again emerges as the top-achieving state, a position it has held since the index was first introduced in Maryland and New Jersey two other perennial top-scorers finish second and third with grades of B and B-minus, respectively. At the other end of the spectrum, the District of Columbia and Mississippi receive grades of F and 32 states earn grades in the D to C-minus range. Although the past two years have been a period of overall improvement in the achievement outcomes tracked by the index, a closer examination of results suggests that recent gains are not being enjoyed equally by poor and more affluent students. Poverty gaps in reading and math achievement have widened for the nation and most states during the past two years, with that widening most pronounced in the District of Columbia. Quality Counts 2014 also features new results from the Education Week Research Center s annual analysis of school finance, which examines educational expenditure patterns and the distribution of those funds within states using data from 2011, the most recent available. This year, the U.S. earns a C for school finance, with the national grade virtually unchanged from a year ago. For the sixth year in a row, Wyoming ranks first and posts an A-minus. The states claiming the next three slots West Virginia, New York, and Connecticut earn grades of B-plus. At the other end of the rankings, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah receive grades of D, and Idaho scores lowest with a D-minus. Overall, 12 states improved, with New Hampshire, North Carolina, and North Dakota making the largest gains since last year, each picking up at least 3 points and half a letter grade.

3 ONLINE EXCLUSIVES AVAILABLE AT EDWEEK.ORG The full Quality Counts 2014 report and interactive state report cards: State Highlights Reports for the 50 states and the District of Columbia featuring detailed, statespecific data and our comprehensive grading of the states across six categories of educational performance and policy: Interactive map and report card for delving into grading in the areas of educational policy and performance. # # # The Education Week Research Center is the research division of the Bethesda, Md.-based nonprofit Editorial Projects in Education. It conducts policy surveys, collects data, and performs analyses that appear in the annual Quality Counts, Technology Counts, and Diplomas Count reports. The center also conducts independent research studies and maintains the Education Counts and EdWeek Maps online data resources. The Research Center is on the Web at

4 MEDIA HIGHLIGHTS SCHOOL SYSTEMS RESHAPE TO COMPETE AND IMPROVE New Findings from Quality Counts 2014: District Disruption & Revival NOTE: Embargoed for release until 12:01 a.m. EST on Thursday, Jan. 9, 2014 About Quality Counts 2014 District Disruption & Revival: School Systems Reshape to Compete And Improve will be released on Jan. 9, This 18th annual edition of the report examines the impact of the increasingly complex fiscal, political, and technological forces that are challenging school districts and prompting efforts to cope with new pressures. Education Week s journalists take an in-depth look at the prominent developments including school choice initiatives, district mergers, and federal policy shifts transforming the traditional environment for education governance. To complement the report s journalism, the Education Week Research Center conducted an original survey of school district administrators, who shared their insights and opinions on factors influencing governance and operations in their systems, high-profile reform options, and non-traditional schooling models. Results from the study are featured in the report. To help guide your reporting, we have highlighted some of the key findings about the changing district landscape below. Key Findings The vast majority of the nation s public school students are educated by traditional school districts. However, considerable and growing complexity also characterizes today s public K-12 sector. In the school year, the nation s public schools were operated by and in conjunction with nearly 18,000 local education agencies (or LEAs), the collection of varied governmental bodies and organizations responsible for providing free and public educational services at the elementary and secondary levels. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of the nation s LEAs are traditional independent school districts, which operate within prescribed geographical boundaries under the management of a central office, superintendent, or similar authority. The other 27 percent of LEAs includes: charter agencies, regional service agencies, administrative centers of supervisory unions and their constituent districts, and state- and federally-operated agencies. Charter schools are the largest and fastest-growing segment of the nontraditional public sector. In , the nation s 5,500 public charter schools educated 1.7 million students. During the past decade, the number of charter schools has tripled and the number of students served has more than quadrupled.

5 Charter schools, which are often classified as their own local education agencies, can also be members of larger all-charter LEAs or part of districts that oversees both charter and traditional public schools. In , nearly 45 percent of charter schools were part of agencies that also included traditional public schools, a consistent pattern seen as far back as Although constant change is a fact of life on the ground for school systems, most district administrators feel that further structural or governance changes are needed to address the challenges they face, according to a survey by the Education Week Research Center. A majority of respondents (54%) agreed that significant changes to the governance or structure of their school systems were necessary to confront current challenges. Two-thirds of respondents reported that the superintendency in their district turned over at least once in the past five years. Thirty percent of administrators reported a recent reorganization of their district s central office. An expansion of public school choice options occurred in nearly half (48%) of respondents districts. Eighteen percent of administrators reported a district-led reform zone operating in their school systems. District officials reported that a range of factors such as fiscal challenges and accountability pressures have prompted consideration of significant changes to the governance or structure of their school systems. Nearly 9 of 10 respondents (89%) reported that economic and fiscal challenges were important drivers of changes. Similar numbers (86%) cited pressures related to school accountability systems. Eighty-three percent of administrators agreed that technological shifts have led them to consider changes. Low student achievement and changing demographics were cited as change drivers by nearly two-thirds of respondents. Another key driver of district change is heightened competition for educational services being offered in an expanded range of settings, often from within the public sector. Fifty-eight percent of district respondents indicated that local private schools influenced their school systems operations or governance. Slightly more than half of district leaders (53%) cited virtual or online schools as a factor, with an equal share (53%) noting the influence of home schooling. Almost half (48%) agreed that nearby charter schools exerted an influence. No more than 10 percent of respondents felt that any of those factors had a strong influence. District administrators voiced approval for some nontraditional educational models, although levels of support varied considerably across approaches. Nearly three-quarters of respondents (74%) supported or strongly supported virtual or online schooling. About 6 in 10 administrators voiced some level of support for charter schools and home schooling (59% and 58%, respectively) Only 14 percent had a favorable impression of voucher programs.

6 Local school policy can be shaped by a wide variety of actors and groups, ranging from community activists to federal officials. District administrators were asked to rate (on a scale of 1 to 5) the policy influence wielded by a set of key decision-makers and stakeholders. School system officials reported that the district administration has the strongest hand in school policy (with an influence score of 4.5 out of 5), followed closely by the local school board (4.4). State and federal policymakers exert somewhat less influence (with scores of 4.2 and 3.9, respectively). Parents and teachers were viewed as having nearly the same impact on policy decisions (scoring 3.7 and 3.6, respectively) Other local actors were generally rated as the least influential: local policymakers (3.0), business community (3.0), and local activists (2.9). Additional Resources The 2014 release of Quality Counts also includes: The Chance-for-Success Index, which grades the nation and states on 13 indicators capturing the critical role that education plays as a person moves from childhood, through the K-12 system, and into college and the workforce. The K-12 Achievement Index, which evaluates state educational performance on 18 individual indicators that measure: current achievement, improvements over time, and poverty-based disparities or gaps. The State of the States Report Card, an annual overview of national and state grades in key areas of performance and policy: the Chance-for-Success Index; the K-12 Achievement Index; the Teaching Profession; Standards, Assessments, and Accountability; Transitions and Alignment; and School Finance. State Highlights Reports, individualized online reports featuring state-specific findings from Quality Counts, including our comprehensive state report cards. All of these resources are available on the Education Week Web site:

7 GRADING SUMMARY Quality Counts 2014 Quality Counts 2014 Quality Counts 2014 Quality Counts 2012 Quality Counts 2013 Quality Counts 2012 Chance for Success K-12 Achievement School Finance Standards, Assessments, & Accountability Transitions & Alignment Teaching Profession grade rank grade rank grade rank grade rank grade rank grade rank Alabama C- 44 D- 46 C- 32 A- 13 B 14 C 19 Alaska C 34 D 44 B- 14 C 43 C- 42 D- 51 Arizona C- 47 D+ 38 D+ 43 B+ 25 C+ 26 D- 47 Arkansas C- 45 D+ 37 C 25 A 6 A 2 B+ 2 California C- 42 D+ 33 D+ 37 A 10 B- 20 C- 25 Colorado B 12 C 11 D+ 39 B- 32 B- 20 D 42 Connecticut B+ 4 C- 14 B+ 4 C+ 39 C+ 26 C- 29 Delaware B- 20 D+ 30 B- 15 B+ 26 C+ 26 C 22 District of Columbia B- 16 F 50 NA NA B 30 C+ 26 D- 48 Florida C 32 C 7 C- 36 A 5 A 4 B 4 Georgia C 38 C- 17 C- 31 A- 18 A 1 B- 10 Hawaii C+ 29 C- 18 NA NA B+ 22 C- 42 C+ 17 Idaho C 37 C- 23 D- 49 B+ 27 C- 42 D- 50 Illinois B- 18 C- 26 C+ 19 A- 19 C 36 D+ 34 Indiana C+ 27 C 12 C- 30 A 1 B+ 9 D 46 Iowa B 10 D+ 34 C 26 C 47 B- 20 C+ 13 Kansas B- 15 D+ 31 C 24 B- 34 C 36 D+ 37 Kentucky C 36 C- 19 C- 28 A- 20 A 4 B- 5 Louisiana C- 48 D- 49 C 22 A 2 A 4 B- 11 Maine C+ 25 C 13 B 10 C- 50 B- 20 D+ 35 Maryland B 8 B 2 B 8 B+ 24 A 2 B 3 Massachusetts A- 1 B 1 B 11 B+ 23 C 36 C+ 14 Michigan C 33 D 42 C 21 A- 17 B- 20 C 19 Minnesota B+ 5 C+ 6 C 23 C- 49 C- 42 D+ 36 Mississippi D+ 49 F 51 D 46 A 10 C 36 D 41 Missouri C+ 28 D 39 C- 34 C+ 38 C 36 D+ 33 Montana C 30 C- 25 C 27 C 41 D- 51 D+ 32 Nebraska B 11 D+ 35 C+ 17 D+ 51 D 49 C- 31 Nevada D 51 D+ 36 D 48 C 45 C 36 C- 28 New Hampshire B+ 3 C+ 4 B- 13 C 42 C+ 26 D 44 New Jersey B+ 2 B- 3 B 9 C 44 B- 20 D+ 38 New Mexico D+ 50 D- 48 C- 35 A- 15 B+ 9 C 23 New York B- 17 C- 20 B+ 3 A- 15 B 14 B- 7 North Carolina C 31 C- 24 D+ 42 A 10 B 14 C+ 16 North Dakota B+ 6 D+ 32 C+ 18 B 28 C+ 26 D+ 40 Ohio C+ 26 C- 16 C+ 16 A 4 C+ 26 C 18 Oklahoma C- 43 D 41 D 44 A 8 B+ 9 C- 24 Oregon C 35 D 40 C- 33 B- 35 B 14 D 45 Pennsylvania B 13 C 8 B- 12 C+ 40 C+ 26 C 21 Rhode Island B- 21 D+ 27 B 5 B 29 C+ 26 C- 27 South Carolina C 41 D 45 D+ 38 A 6 C- 42 B+ 1 South Dakota B- 22 D 43 D+ 40 C 48 D 49 D- 49 Tennessee C 39 D+ 29 D 47 A- 21 A 4 B- 9 Texas C 40 C- 21 D+ 41 A- 13 A 4 C+ 15 Utah C+ 24 D+ 28 D 45 B- 33 B+ 9 D 43 Vermont B 7 C+ 5 B 6 B 30 C- 42 C- 30 Virginia B 9 C 10 C 20 A 8 B 14 B- 6 Washington B- 23 C 9 C- 29 C+ 37 C- 42 C- 26 West Virginia C- 46 D- 47 B+ 2 A 3 B+ 9 B- 8 Wisconsin B- 14 C- 15 B 7 C 46 B 14 C+ 12 Wyoming B- 19 C- 22 A- 1 C+ 36 C+ 26 D+ 39 U.S. C+ C- C B B- C Note: States are ranked based on unrounded scores. The District of Columbia and Hawaii are single-district jurisdictions. As a result, it is not possible to calculate measures of financial equity, which capture the distribution of funding across districts within a state. The District of Columbia and Hawaii do not receive grades for school finance. SOURCE: Education Week Research Center, This table integrates findings reported in the 2012, 2013, and 2014 editions of Quality Counts.