Orwell Award Announcement SusanOhanian.Org Home


Big Surprise: Yet Another Ed Reform Turns Out to be Bogus


The classes necessary for entrance to the UC and Cal State systems include two years of history or social science; four years of English; three years of math (through Algebra 2); two years of lab science; and two years of foreign language.

The Los Angeles Times article is below Drum's.



By Kevin Drum


Do high schools with higher standards get better performance from their students? If you require everyone to take college prep classes, will more kids go to college? The San Jose school district has long been a poster child for this notion, but guess what? It turns out it was all a crock:


San Jose Unified has quietly acknowledged that the district overstated its accomplishments. And a Times analysis of the district's record shows that its progress has not, in fact, far outpaced many other school systems'....In 2000, before the college-prep program took effect, 40% of San Jose graduates fulfilled requirements for applying to University of California and Cal State University. In 2011, the number was 40.3%.

My cynicism about the ed reform community grows by leaps and bounds every time I read a story like this. And that's pretty often. Here's my advice for what you should do whenever you read an article about a school that's shown miraculous results by applying some reform or another (or by hiring a miracle worker of some stripe or another):

  • Don't believe it if it's based on a single school or other small sample.

  • Don't believe it if most of the evidence comes from the school itself.

  • Don't believe it if the reform in question was put in place only a few years ago.

  • Don't believe it if it hasn't been replicated elsewhere.

  • Don't believe it unless it's been rigorously tested by academics who didn't already support the idea in the first place.


  • And even if it passes all those tests, don't believe it anyway.

    The number of ed reforms that hold up when the evidence is looked at critically seems to be tiny. The number that continue to work when they're scaled up seems to be tiny. The number that continue to show results all the way through high school seems to be tiny. The number that can withstand critical scrutiny seems to be tiny. And of the ones that are left, the cost to keep them up usually appears to be prohibitive.

    I understand that I'm being too cynical here. I'm probably going to get the usual batch of emails from ed reformers telling me that there are too reforms that really and truly work. And I suppose there are. But I don't think you can go too far wrong by being almost boundlessly and annoyingly skeptical about this stuff. Don't worry about seeming unsophisticated. Just keep repeating that you don't believe it until and unless the evidence becomes simply overwhelming. You won't go too far wrong with that attitude.

    from the Los Angeles Times, Jan. 28, 2013

    L.A. Unified's college-prep push is based on false data

    San Jose's school district, which requires all students to pass the classes necessary to apply to California universities, initially reported strong results. But its success was overstated.

    By Howard Blume and Sarah Butrymowicz


    Eleven years ago, the San Jose school district began requiring all students to pass the classes necessary for admission to the state university systems. Educators elsewhere watched with enthusiasm as early results showed remarkable success.

    But San Jose Unified has quietly acknowledged that the district overstated its accomplishments. And a Times analysis of the district's record shows that its progress has not, in fact, far outpaced many other school systems' and, more important, that most San Jose students have never qualified to apply to a state college.

    Those results should raise warning flags for other school systems, including Los Angeles Unified, that based key policy decisions on San Jose's misreported data. The risk is that L.A. Unified's version of a college-prep policy could drive students to drop out or delay graduation.

    FOR THE RECORD:
    College-prep courses: A chart that accompanied a Jan. 28 article in the LATExtra section about the push for college-prep courses in L.A. Unified high schools incorrectly showed that 34% of San Jose students who graduated in 2011 had completed such courses. The correct number is 36%.

    In 2000, before the college-prep program took effect, 40% of San Jose graduates fulfilled requirements for applying to University of California and Cal State University. In 2011, the number was 40.3%. Latino and black students have done worse. Among those who entered high school in fall 2007, about 1 in 5 black and Latino students were eligible to apply to a state college four years later.

    Students could graduate without fulfilling college-prep requirements because of two escape hatches: Students were allowed to get only a D in these classes, whereas the state colleges demand a grade of C or better to be eligible. And students who are failing the rigorous classes could transfer to alternative schools and graduate from there.

    About 15% of traditional high school students in San Jose Unified don't finish the college-prep sequence, primarily because of credit deficiencies, according to the district. Some -- mostly minority students -- transfer to an alternative school as early as 10th grade.

    A notable difference was visible last spring at two graduation ceremonies in San Jose's Rose Garden.

    In the afternoon, seniors from Leland High School gave speeches about college and the world beyond, of curing cancer or pursuing world peace. They talked about the robotics club, the debate team presidential awards and National Merit Scholars.

    The school's enrollment is 85% white and Asian; less than 8% of students are from low-income families.

    Earlier that day, at a more sparsely attended affair, the district held its alternative education graduation for 304 mostly Latino students who had transferred out of traditional high schools. Students spoke about overcoming tough times and thanked those who believed in them.

    Compared with its traditional high schools, San Jose's alternative programs enroll nearly 50% more Latinos.

    The ethnic imbalance is ironic given that San Jose's college-prep program grew out of concern that far too many Latino students, the largest group in the district, were not on track for college.

    Taking simpler courses, they would "end up with a diploma that means very little in today's world," said former Supt. Linda Murray, who led the effort.

    Murray, who left San Jose in 2004, said the college-prep program was a success because many students took classes that they would not have otherwise. But it also was important, she added, to have an alternative program so that students who didn't pass all the rigorous courses were not pushed out of school.

    Overall scores on state standardized tests have improved, and the percentage of students taking Advanced Placement courses increased incrementally; the dropout rate did not worsen.

    "This policy raises expectations for our students," said San Jose Supt. Vincent Matthews, "which in and of itself is a compelling strategy to drive student achievement --especially for students who have historically not achieved success in educational institutions."

    The classes necessary for entrance to the UC and Cal State systems include two years of history or social science; four years of English; three years of math (through Algebra 2); two years of lab science; and two years of foreign language.

    The San Jose class of 2002 was the first required to take the minimum college-prep workload and pass each class with at least a D.

    For six years, the district misreported its results, counting seniors who were close to completing the college-prep requirements as having done so. San Jose claimed that the percentage of graduates who got at least a C in all these classes rose to nearly two-thirds from just over a third. The rate for Latino students rose to nearly 50% from 18.5%, and for black students to more than 50% from 27%, the district incorrectly reported.

    After the district corrected its errors, the district reported only incremental progress that was comparable to school systems without the requirements. Of that class of 2011, a little more than a third completed the college-prep sequence.

    Activists and educators elsewhere had used the inflated results to pressure their school districts to follow suit. Supporters saw the move as a way to reverse low expectations that had excluded or simply dissuaded generations of black and Latino students from pursuing college. Similar efforts have been underway in other states.

    In 2005, L.A. Unified passed a college-prep mandate that's being phased in over eight years. To graduate, this year's freshmen will, for the first time, have to pass the minimum number of college-prep classes with a D or better. Next year's ninth-graders must earn a C or better.

    If that policy were applied to San Jose's current results, only about a quarter of its black and Latino graduates would earn a diploma by the end of their senior year, the Times analysis found.

    In L.A. Unified, about 83% of students are black or Latino. Last year, about 20% of L.A. Unified high school students completed the college-prep requirements within four years.

    L.A. school officials said their program will include the support necessary to help students succeed. Supt. John Deasy has insisted that requiring students to get a C or better in these classes is necessary for a diploma to be meaningful and to ensure that low-income and minority students don't have to settle for coursework that is "orange drink" rather than "orange juice."

    "This is all about a kid's civil rights," Deasy said. "I am confident in our students, that they will rise to the challenge."

    Some experts, however, expressed concern.

    Given the economic consequences of dropping out, "there should be a reasonable chance for students who pass their courses at any level to get a diploma," said UCLA professor Gary Orfield, co-director of the Civil Rights Project. He added that getting more students prepared for college is the right goal.

    Long Beach Unified has adopted a different approach to increase the percentage of students who qualify for state universities. It sets annual improvement targets for schools, but no student is denied a diploma for not completing the college-prep classes.

    "Why should I deny a kid a diploma because he or she hasn't passed Algebra 2 with a grade of C or better?" Supt. Christopher J. Steinhauser said. "We set the bar really high and look at our progress and we will not be satisfied till we get to 100%."

    Long Beach is far from an unqualified success -- only 25% of Latino students and 27% of black students were eligible for state universities in 2011. Those results are somewhat better than in San Jose, according to state and district data.

    Recent San Jose graduate Alexander Dickerson, 18, shows the benefits and limitations of that district's efforts. Once, when his guidance counselor at Pioneer High summoned him to discuss his grades -- four Fs and two Ds -- he talked of dropping out. Instead, in the fall of 2011, he ended up at Broadway High, an alternative campus.

    Dickerson's grades were too low to qualify him for a state college, but the diploma "was a big thing for me," he said. "I am young, but high school was what's going to give me a future."

    Dickerson took some classes at Mission College in the fall -- a college-prep diploma isn't required for community college -- and is thinking about majoring in history.

    howard.blume@latimes.com

    butrymowicz@hechingerreport.org

    Butrymowicz is a reporter with the Hechinger Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan [sic] education news outlet based at Teachers College, Columbia University.

    — Kevin Drum
    Mother Jones

    2013-01-28

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/01/big-surprise-yet-another-ed-reform-turns-out-be-bogus

    na


    MORE OUTRAGES


    FAIR USE NOTICE
    This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.