Recently in RESEARCH AND STUDIES Category

Marcus Winters, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, argues in today's LA Times that since states continue to lower the academic bar for students, amendments should be made to No Child Left Behind. Changes allowing for uniform, stringent testing that would develop higher standards for public schools need to be created, Winters writes.

From the Op-ed:

A recent federal study noted that 15 states lowered at least one of their proficiency standards in math and reading between 2005 and 2007.

And there's more:

The law punishes a school when too few of its students meet math and reading proficiency targets each year. But the law has a gaping loophole: States get to define proficiency. A state can thus meet the law's targets by defining proficiency down; toughening its standards, by contrast, handicaps its ability to meet the federal requirements.

Of course, low standards have their own appeal. The lower the standard, the more students surpass it. State governments love to tell constituents that students are doing great on standardized exams; the public usually just assumes that the criteria used on those exams are meaningful.

We could make better progress toward an effective testing regime if we changed our goal from uniform national standards to high state standards, which two simple amendments to No Child Left Behind could help bring about.

The Manhattan Institute is a conservative think tank based in New York City.

More Chinese students than ever before are enrolling in U.S. universities, according to an annual report. Nearly 100,000 Chinese students studied in the U.S during the 2008-09 academic year, up 21 percent. Despite the rise, India remains the largest exporter of university students. Last year, 103, 260 students were enrolled in U.S. colleges, a nine percent increase.

From the New York Times:

Over all, the number of international students at colleges and universities in the United States increased by 8 percent to an all-time high of 671,616 in the 2008-9 academic year -- the largest percentage increase in more than 25 years, according to the report.
With the current recession, the influx of international students has been especially important to the American economy, according to Allan E. Goodman, president of the institute.

"International education is domestic economic development," Mr. Goodman said. "International students shop at the local Wal-Mart, rent rooms and buy food. Foreign students bring $17.8 billion to this country. A lot of campuses this year are increasing their international recruitment, trying to keep their programs whole by recruiting international students to fill their spaces."

In other China-related education news, Obama sat down and spoke with a large group of students Monday in Shanghai. Among the topics of discussion: Twitter and the world of social networking.

Princeton University researchers examining public college graduation rates and looking for ways to increase them have come to a startling conclusion: Many students who don't graduate simply lacked an academic challenge.

From USA Today:

Researchers studying how to improve graduation rates at public colleges and universities have come up with a surprising and counter-intuitive finding: Many students may fail to complete a bachelor's degree not because the work is too hard -- but because they're not challenged enough.

The findings underscore age-old advice: Students should enroll in the most selective college that will admit them. But the problem is not that qualified students are being rejected from academically demanding schools. "They never apply in the first place," Bowen* says. And the research found that those aiming too low were most likely to be minorities, low-income students and those whose parents never finished college.

* President emeritus William Bowen at Princeton, lead author of the study

Pat Brown Institute of Public Affairs at Cal State-L.A. has issued its annual "state of the city" report for Los Angeles (PDF). Among essays on politics, housing, jobs and the economy, urban planning and public health is an assessment of school reform in Los Angeles Unified.

Dominic Brewer, a professor at USC's Rossier School of Education and co-director of Policy Analysis for Calfornia Education, along with two doctoral students, looks at whether reform attempts within LAUSD are paying off. In short, they argue, reforms aren't showing enough progress nor paying off fast enough.

They write:

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the largest school district in California, has been subject to unrelenting criticism, tarred as overly bureaucratic, ineffective, and incompetent. With the backdrop of a sagging economy, state and city budget cuts, endemic gang violence, transportation gridlock, a chronic affordable housing shortage, a growing English language learner (ELL) population, and stringent state and federal accountability standards, LA's schools undoubtedly face significant challenges. But many of these same conditions apply in other urban districts across the country. .... Although there are signs of progress, LA has along way to go to match the promising efforts of other cities.

The authors write that though the district's performance academically has improved over the last five years, the pace of that improvement lags behind many other districts in Los Angeles County.

The district ranks 71st out of the 80 districts in the county, based on API scores. And, out of the district's 800-plus schools, more than 450 are "low-performing."

The report notes that many of the reforms made in the district have been focused on instruction, with little emphasis on structural change.

"LAUSD launches new programs at a dizzying rate with a wide variety of programmatic changes over the years," the authors write, citing a handful of examples.

To many observers (including us), the issue is not whether a particular reform or program is a good or a bad idea but, rather, that the district's governance and size rarely allow a course of concerted action, with the flexibility for resource allocation and the capacity on the ground, in which reforms can take hold.6 Currently, LAUSD is governed by an elected school board consisting of 7 members, often the focus of intense political struggle often between union and business-backed candidates.

Also of note: references to the rise of charter schools:

Although the number of students in public charters in Los Angeles is rising, it is still well below that of several major cities such as New Orleans (57%), Washington, D.C. (27%), Kansas City (20%) and Oakland (15%).

Ultimately, the authors conclude that LAUSD officials talk about change, but they fall behind when their approaches to innovation are compared to other large urban districts. Other districts have accomplished more due to four factors, the writers argue: mayoral or state control; opposing interests coming together; a portfolio approach to a variety of public schools; a willingness to try new strategies and "make hard choices."

This important shift away from the idea that a single urban district knows how to manage all schools has not been accomplished without significant struggle, but it seems much more promising that the petty oppositional politicking and endless programmatic initiatives in Los Angeles.

There a signs of hope, they write, but politics has stymied progress. If the district does not recognize, for example, the power and meaning of parents' choice of charters, LAUSD may have to face "the long talked about breakup, or it will die a natural death," the authors conclude.

A UCLA study reports nearly three in four teenagers say they were bullied online within a year but only 10 percent of them reported it to parents or other adults.

Reachers said the most prevalent forms of bullying online include name-calling, password thefts, threats, sending embarrassing pictures, sharing private information without permission and spreading nasty rumors.

According to UCLA:

Of those who were bullied online, 85 percent also have been bullied at school, the psychologists found. The probability of getting bullied online was substantially higher for those who have been the victims of school bullying.

The study used a survey of 1,454 between the ages of 12 and 17, who were recruited through a popular teen website. Nearly half the teens said they didn't tell anyone about the online bullying because they believed they "need to learn to deal with it" and 31 percent didn't for fear that doing so would restrict their Internet access.

A UC Riverside study concludes the majority elementary schools in the state won't meet No Child Left Behind standards by 2014, when all students are required to show proficiency in math and English.

The study reports about half of the state's elementary schools will fail to meet federal academic guidelines by 2011.

According to the Riverside Press-Enterprise:

The English proficiency standard is likely to trip up more schools than math, according to the study. Low-income students and English language learners are the two groups of students least likely to meet the proficiency standards.

And

Schools and districts in California had to have about one-fourth of students proficient in 2007. This year, the standard is 32 percent or higher, depending on the school and type of test. The required proficiency level will go up by about 10 percentage points each year from now until 2014, unless the law is changed.

The California State PTA wants parents to lobby lawmakers for a new budget deal that brings a more stable revenue stream to education. The legislature argues there is enough money for schools in the proposal --- at about $58.1 billion, up from $56.7 billion last year.

But the group backs Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plan to veto the current budget saying it only puts a short-term bandage on school finances. The proposed budget has about $9.3 billion coming through early tax collections.

According to the San Diego Union Tribune:

Critics complained that the tax speedups are gimmicks that "borrow from taxpayers" and push a chronic deficit into next year. Schwarzenegger called them "tax increases" with a "smoke screen" when he made his initial veto threat Tuesday.

Schwarzenegger and legislators don't seem to be backing down at this point. So is backing the Governor's impending budget veto a good idea as school programs continue to run without state dollars for nearly three months?

What do you think about this, fair educators out there?

There's an Associated Press story, which I found at USA Today, about a Tuesday-released survey by think-tank Education Sector that reveals: "More than half of teachers believe it's too difficult to weed out ineffective teachers who have tenure, and nearly half say they personally know such a teacher."

It also said: "About 70% of teachers in the Education Sector survey said receiving tenure was just a formality that has little to do with teacher quality."

Have any thoughts about this? Let me know: shelly.leachman@dailybreeze.com.

I came across a couple interesting stories this morning about math, both suggesting that commonplace teaching methods once believed to make the subject easier to understand in fact make it harder.

First up, MSNBC has a piece from Reuters about a new study in the journal Science, by a Ohio State University researcher, who found that students actually absorbed more via abstract than real-world examples.

The New York Times also posts a story with its take on the same study.

It's pretty interesting actually. What do you think, teachers?

Ever on top of things, I just came across the following, fascinating story today, although it was actually published about two months ago. (Props and thanks to Alexander Russo's This Week In Education blog for alerting me.)

Appearing in New York Magazine and penned by San Francisco-based writer Po Bronson, the intriguing piece titled "Learning to Lie" examines a load of recent research into lying by kids -- when they start doing it, why they do it, what they do it for, etc. -- that suggests they're simply following in their parents' footsteps.

Here's a short sample:
"The most disturbing reason children lie is that parents teach them to. According to Talwar, they learn it from us. “We don’t explicitly tell them to lie, but they see us do it. They see us tell the telemarketer, ‘I’m just a guest here.’ They see us boast and lie to smooth social relationships.”

Disclaimer: It's a long, beefy read. Also it's pretty interesting stuff. You make the call, people.

This should interest a lot of you, teachers and parents alike:

The Associated Press has an interesting story today about a new study that found that "(d)yslexia affects different parts of children's brains depending on whether they are raised reading English or Chinese."

The study's lead author, University of Hong Kong professor of linguistics and brain and cognitive is quoted as saying, "Our finding yields neurobiological clues to the cause of dyslexia."

Results were reported online Monday by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. I found the AP piece at the Washington Post.

In answer to the headline's question: Yes, they can and they do, says a Stanford professor who's been researching how human behavior is affected by their experience with avatars (you know, those virtual characters you can create online).

Jeremy Bailenson, an assistant professor of communications at the NorCal-based Ivy League school, tells the Chronicle of Higher Education this week that "Our virtual identity is not separate from our physical identity."

The magazine's feature goes on: "As the director of Stanford's Virtual Human Interaction Lab, Mr. Bailenson has explored ways that online behavior spills over to the real world. People assume that, if anything, online activities emanate from offline lives. But Mr. Bailenson and his colleagues have shown the reverse. Their experiments demonstrate, for instance, that people who watch their avatars — cartoonlike versions of themselves — gain weight from overeating are more likely to adopt a weight-loss plan in real life."

Let me start this entry by saying I find it highly depressing that the following study even exists and hopefully it's more a case of "you can reach whatever conclusion you want if you conduct the study just so" than it is accurate, but hey, what do I know?

Here's the dillyo:

The Every Child Matters Education Fund, a non-partisan nonprofit, today released a report that says the state a child lives in can adversely affect his or her life, so much so that kids in the state's that rank lowest according to "a wide variety of child well-being indicators" are...

* Twice as likely to die in their first year as children in the highest ranking state.
* Three times more likely to die between the ages of one-14.
* Roughly three times more likely to die between the ages of 15-19.
* Three times more likely to be born to a teenage mother.
* Five times more likely to have mothers who received late or no prenatal care.
* Three times more likely to live in poverty.
* Five times more likely to be uninsured.
* Eight times more likely to be incarcerated.
* 13 times more likely to die from abuse and neglect.

Tito, bring me a tissue. That is awful!

Among the factors used to arrive at this determination, and to rank the states accordingly, were poverty, race, educational achievement, political culture, taxes and weak federal policy on things such as health insurance, child abuse and poverty.

From the press release:
"Based on a wide cross-section of 10 major child well-being standards, the 10 bottom states identified in the Every Child Matters Education Fund report are:  Arizona (41); South Dakota (42); Nevada (43); Arkansas (44); South Carolina (45); Texas (46); Oklahoma (47); New Mexico (48); Mississippi (49); and Louisiana (50). 

The 10 top states for children by the same measures are:  Maine (10); Washington (9); Minnesota (8); Iowa (7); Hawaii (6); New Hampshire (5); Rhode Island (4); Connecticut (3); Massachusetts (2); Vermont (1)."

I guess our fair Golden State falls somewhere in the middle. Do you think we're nearer the Top 10 or the bottom? And why is New England so dominant?

To learn more about the report and the Every Child Matters organization, which is calling these "life and death" differences the "forgotten campaign issue" of 2008, visit this website.

A new study indicates that there's an ongoing and alarming growth of gangs in suburban neighborhoods. Actually, the U.S. Department of Justice report says gangs are on the upswing in every socioeconomic area across the country.

Commenting on the study, a gang expert from consultancy Seraph, which bills itself as a problem-solving company for schools, government agencies and more, asserts that suburban kids are being recruited in ever-larger numbers.

What do you think, South Bay school types? Is it happening in even the tonier neighborhoods here?

Two years after George W. commissioned a committee to determine why American kids essentially suck at math when compared to students in many other countries, the group's report is ready.

"In the end, they found a math instruction system that's "broken and must be fixed" if the USA is to compete with established economic powers or emerging ones such as China," reports USA Today.

Read the whole piece for all the dirty details.

The spring issue of American Educator is now available online and it includes some pretty in-depth stuff on with new and seasoned teachers alike weighing in on why state standards are necessary -- and why they're mostly lacking in clarity and specificity.

The cover tag reads "There's a Gaping Hole in State Standards." See for yourself.

The LA Times has a story this morning about a program that could revolutionize students' success in math. The article tells the story of a Hollywood school that has been using Singapore textbooks to teach math for the past two years and saw its test scores jump 31 points.

How did that happen?

It's a question with potentially big implications, because California recently became the first state to include the Singapore series on its list of state-approved elementary math texts. Public schools aren't required to use the books -- there are a number of other, more conventional texts on the state list -- but the state will subsidize the purchase if they do. And being on the list puts an important imprimatur on the books, because California is by far the largest, most influential textbook buyer in the country.

The decision to approve the books could place California ahead of the national curve. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel, appointed by President Bush, will issue a report Thursday that is expected to endorse K-8 math reforms that, in many ways, mirror the Singapore curriculum.

But of course, there's a problem.

You may have by now noticed my affinity for the New York Times, so frequently do I link to their stories. Here we go again, this time from their Sunday magazine. I just came across this at 5:30 this morning (yes, 5:30 a.m. and no, I don't usually come to work this early) -- an in-depth feature on a growing movement toward single-sex publication education, which argues that separating boys and girls helps both parties be more productive.

The lede: "On an unseasonably cold day last November in Foley, Ala., Colby Royster and Michael Peterson, two students in William Bender’s fourth-grade public-school class, informed me that the class corn snake could eat a rat faster than the class boa constrictor. Bender teaches 26 fourth graders, all boys. Down the hall and around the corner, Michelle Gay teaches 26 fourth-grade girls. The boys like being on their own, they say, because girls don’t appreciate their jokes and think boys are too messy, and are also scared of snakes. The walls of the boys’ classroom are painted blue, the light bulbs emit a cool white light and the thermostat is set to 69 degrees. In the girls’ room, by contrast, the walls are yellow, the light bulbs emit a warm yellow light and the temperature is kept six degrees warmer, as per the instructions of Leonard Sax, a family physician turned author and advocate who this May will quit his medical practice to devote himself full time to promoting single-sex public education."

And further down: "Separating schoolboys from schoolgirls has long been a staple of private and parochial education. But the idea is now gaining traction in American public schools, in response to both the desire of parents to have more choice in their children’s public education and the separate education crises girls and boys have been widely reported to experience."

It's pretty interesting stuff, though I will warn you: it is LONG.

A new study by Educational Testing Service concludes that teachers entering the profession now possess higher academic qualifications than their predecessors a decade back. Citing evidence that a teacher's effectiveness with students is directly linked to their own academic prowess, the report further asserts that student learning could improve as a result.

Read the study for yourself; or check out the Education Week article for a smart synopsis.