April 11, 2018

NAEP Results Again Show That Biennial National Tests Aren’t Worth It

Once again, new results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) show that administering national math and reading assessments every two years is too frequent to be useful.

The 2017 NAEP scores in math and reading were largely unchanged from 2015, when those subjects were last tested. While there was a small gain in eighth-grade reading in 2017 — a one-point increase on NAEP’s 500-point scale — it was not significantly different than eighth graders’ performance in 2013.

Many acknowledged that NAEP gains have plateaued in recent years after large improvements in earlier decades, and some have even described 2007-2017 as the “lost decade of educational progress.” But this sluggishness also shows that administering NAEP’s math and reading tests (referred to as the “main NAEP”) every two years is not necessary, as it is too little time to meaningfully change trend lines or evaluate the impact of new policies.

Such frequent testing also has other costs: In recent years, the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), the body that sets policy for NAEP, has reduced the frequency of the Long-Term Trends (LTT) assessment and limited testing in other important subjects like civics and history in order to cut costs. NAGB cited NAEP budget cuts as the reason for reducing the frequency of other assessments. However, though NAEP’s budget recovered and even increased in the years following, NAGB did not undo the previously scheduled reductions. (The LTT assessment is particularly valuable, as it tracks student achievement dating back to the early 1970s and provides another measure of academic achievement in addition to the main NAEP test.)

Instead, the additional funding was used to support other NAGB priorities, namely the shift to digital assessments. Even still, the release of the 2017 data was delayed by six months due to comparability concerns, and some education leaders are disputing the results because their students are not familiar enough with using tablets.

That is not to say that digital assessments don’t have benefits. For example, the new NAEP results include time lapse visualizations of students’ progress on certain types of questions. In future iterations of the test, these types of metadata could provide useful information about how various groups of students differ in their test-taking activity.

Animated GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

However, these innovative approaches should not come at the expense of other assessments that are useful in the present. Given the concerns some have with the digital transition, this is especially true of the LTT assessment. Instead, NAGB should consider administering the main NAEP test less frequently — perhaps only every four years — and use the additional capacity to support other assessment types and subjects.


April 10, 2018

Superhuman and Running on Empty: What Equal Pay Day Means to Teachers

messy stack of teacher supplies, including books, chalk, and applesToday, April 10, may be Equal Pay Day, but teacher pay has been making headlines for weeks. We’re seeing massive, organized walkouts across the country as teachers stand up for increased education funding. But there’s more to the story: teacher pay is a gendered issue. If we want to truly examine teacher compensation, we can’t do so without acknowledging the demographic makeup of the nation’s educator workforce, 76 percent of which are women.

Teaching is the most common occupation for women in this country, and not only are their earnings predictably lower than male teachers (8.7 percent lower, according to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research), but the field as a whole is compensated worse than other similarly educated professions. In fact, in the United States, teachers overall earn less than 60 percent of the wages of similarly educated peers.

Even within the teacher workforce, we see disparities: in early childhood settings — which employ a higher percentage of women, especially women of color — teachers earn less than they do in high school roles. Finally, when speaking broadly about equal pay, women of color are particularly marginalized: research from the American Association of University Women reveals that black women must work until August 7 for their earnings to catch up to men’s earnings from the previous year, and Latinas until November 1.

I asked two Kentucky teachers, Annabeth Edens, a fourth grade teacher in Georgetown, and Vilma Godoy, a high school teacher in Shelbyville, what they thought about the state’s teacher walkouts. Both women told me how much they love teaching and their students. They want to show up for the choir concerts and after-school tutoring — being there for their kids matters to them. But they also want to be respected and treated as professionals, and paid fairly for their work. Godoy explains: “This work is rewarding, yes, but it is difficult and demanding and outsiders truly have no idea the amount of hours that go into it, after school and on weekends. It feels like we have to be superhuman. Superwomen.”

Edens spoke to me on the way to one of her side jobs at a children’s boutique — it was a Friday morning, a shift she wouldn’t typically work, except she was hoping to pick up some extra hours over spring break.

She’s not alone in putting in extra hours. Says Edens: “In order to teach in Kentucky, you need to get your master’s; you have to start it within five years of teaching. It’s not uncommon for teachers to have three or more degrees…they’re taking on student loans to cover it, not because they necessarily want to, but because the government mandates it.”

Godoy, a product of Los Angeles public schools, was drawn to teaching as an opportunity to provide her students with the foundational love of learning her own teachers instilled in her. She argues: “Women are taken for granted. It’s expected that women are just willing to sacrifice. In any other field, with the level of degrees required, we would be getting paid so much more than what we are.”

When teachers like Edens and Godoy advocate for fair salaries, they’re arguably setting the stage for other predominantly female fields to follow suit. Can teacher walkouts pave the way toward progress for women in all sectors?


April 5, 2018

Confused About Teacher Walkouts and Pensions? We’ve Got You.

Still from our pension explainer video

Teacher pay and benefits have made headlines over the past few weeks, with walkouts and strikes by teachers in Kentucky, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. A New York Times piece from earlier this week quotes a teacher who likens the movement to a wildfire. Indeed, with so much unfolding so quickly, it can be hard to keep up.

A few publications have provided context for what’s happening: EdWeek, the Washington Post, and Fortune have tackled the broad topic of teacher compensation with varying levels of detail. And my colleague Chad Aldeman weighed in on teacher pensions for an NPR panel on Tuesday, which you can listen to here.

But education issues are heavily state and local; the variances across state lines make high-level discussion of educator benefits especially difficult to tackle in traditional explainer pieces. Teacher retirement benefits, in particular, can be especially complex. Those looking to learn more about the intersection of teacher salaries, teacher pensions, and school budgets may be interested in our additional resources:

  • Our simple, 3-minute video explains how teacher pension plans work and how they affect millions of public school teachers.
  • Kentucky teachers (and those in 14 other states) aren’t covered by Social Security. More on that in our explainer video here.
  • Want to know what teacher retirement looks like in your state? There’s an interactive map for that.
  • Knowing your state’s “average teacher pension” can provide context for larger teacher compensation conversations – this chart captures that, but be sure to account for the listed caveats.

We’re always open for additional questions at teacherpensions@bellwethereducation.org.

A version of this post also appears at our sister site, TeacherPensions.org.

 


March 30, 2018

Will States Keep Student Growth in Teacher Evaluation Systems After ESSA?

Photo via Wikimedia Commons

Shortly after the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) passed in December 2015, I predicted that the lack of federal requirements on teacher quality issues in the law would cause states to make changes to their teacher evaluation systems and laws. I was particularly concerned states would roll back the use of student growth measures — gains in student learning as shown through progress on assessments and/or student learning objectives over time, which are then used as one measure of teacher effectiveness. I argued that student achievement is a more robust and predictive measure of teacher quality than other measures such as classroom observations.

A little over two years later, a new policy snapshot from the Education Commission of the States (ECS) shows my prediction was partially right: In the 2017 legislative session, at least 20 bills/resolutions were enacted or adopted in 16 states addressing the purpose, design, authority, and progress of teacher evaluation systems. And while student growth measures are being reconsidered, they are largely not being abandoned.

Some of these newly introduced bills do not hamper the progress of teacher evaluation systems. For example, in Idaho, House Bill 300 provides funds to help districts comply with the state’s teacher evaluation requirements. But Arkansas, Kentucky, Michigan, and Utah completely removed student growth from teachers’ evaluations. While those are extreme cases, even Florida — a pioneer in the teacher evaluation space — made changes to its student growth component. Florida House Bill 7069 maintains the requirement that at least one-third of teachers’ evaluation be based on data and indicators of student performance, but removes the requirement that student growth be derived from the state’s value-added model — leaving the measure to district discretion.   Continue reading


March 29, 2018

Three Reasons to Expect Little on Innovative Assessments — and Why That’s Not Such a Bad Thing

Photo by Josh Davis via Flickr

Next week is the deadline for states to submit an application for the innovative assessment pilot to the U.S. Department of Education (ED). If you missed this news, don’t worry, you haven’t missed much. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) allows ED to grant assessment flexibility to up to seven states to do something different from giving traditional end-of-year standardized tests. The best example of an innovative state assessment system is New Hampshire, which allows some districts to give locally designed performance-based assessments. These assessments look more like in-class activities than traditional standardized tests, and are developed and scored by teachers.

Two years ago, Education Week called the innovative assessment pilot “one of the most buzzed-about pieces” of ESSA because it could allow states to respond to testing pushback while still complying with the new federal law. But now only four states have announced they will apply, and expectations are subdued at best.

Why aren’t more states interested an opportunity to get some leeway on testing? Here are three big reasons:

  1. Most states are playing it safe on ESSA and assessments are no exception

When my colleagues at Bellwether convened an independent review of ESSA state plans with 45 education policy experts, they didn’t find much ambition or innovation in state plans — few states went beyond the requirements of the law, and some didn’t even do that. Even Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, who has approved the majority of state plans, recently criticized states for plans that “only meet the bare minimum” and don’t take full advantage of the flexibility offered in the law.

Several states responded that they were actually doing more than they had indicated in their plans. As my colleague Julie Squire pointed out last year, putting something extra in an ESSA plan could limit a state’s options and bring on more federal monitoring. If most states were fairly conservative and compliance-based with their big ESSA plans, there’s little reason to think they’ll unveil something new and surprising in a small-scale waiver application.

Additionally, the law includes several requirements for an innovative assessment that might be difficult for states to meet. For example, innovative tests have to be comparable across school districts, they have to meet the needs of special education students and English learners, and the pilot programs have to be designed to scale up statewide. If states have any doubts they can meet that bar, they probably won’t apply. Continue reading