Leaders and Laggards?
Thursday, February 21st by carlaThe United States Chamber of Commerce has released Leaders and Laggards: A State-by-State Report Card on Educational Effectiveness, stating, “Despite decades of reform efforts and many trillions of dollars in public investment, U.S. schools are not equipping our children with the skills and knowledge they-and the nation-so badly need.”
One feature of the report is a color-coded interactive map of the United States. The color of each state is based on its “grade” in one of nine areas:
- academic achievement
- academic achievement of low-income and minority students
- return on investment (The Chamber believes no one else has assessed using this criterion.)
- truth in advertising about student proficiency
- rigor of standards
- postsecondary and workforce readiness
- 21st century teaching force
- flexibility in management and policy
- data quality
Perhaps the most interesting feature of this report is its methodology. The Chamber of Commerce admits to grading on a curve, for example: “The top 10 states received As, the next 10 states received Bs, and so forth” in the area of academic achievement. This methodology requires 10 states to receive an F. A close look at the bar graph across the bottom shows there is often almost no difference between, say, the bottom C and the top D. (That is why I abandoned curves in my classroom years ago.) In a report of this nature, the distinction between a C and a D should be clear.
The Chamber of Commerce report relies heavily on the controversial NAEP scores and on the number of students taking Advanced Placement tests. It does not consider program alternatives to AP such as dual-credit/”early college” classes; it just buys into the name brand. Both of these choices are unfortunate, because they distort the data negatively.
Under the heading “21st Century Teaching Force,” the criteria are based on teacher candidates passing subject matter tests. They do not consider the candidate’s ability to make that subject engaging and lively for students. Almost everyone has seen a teacher who knew the material but couldn’t explain it to anyone but gifted students. Is the ability to pass a standardized test really the best measure of teacher quality?
The good people at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce mean well, and certainly they have a vested interest in quality education — we all do. The girl in the back row who never pays attention in class may work at my nursing home someday. You’d better believe I want her to be prepared.
So read this report carefully, recognizing both its strengths and limitations. Don’t let the (admittedly, very cool) graphics become the whole message. Don’t stop at the letter grade; find out how the letter grade was assigned.
A lot of good people are giving their all every day in the classrooms of states that this report labels “laggards.”
February 21st, 2008 at 7:46 am
Carla, thanks for posting this. I’m particularly interested in the D received by my state (Wyoming) on “21st Century Teaching Force.” Our certification agency has advocated for years against requiring a pedagogy or content test for certification. Recently, however, we’ve found that we MUST require a test in order to get through accreditation hoops. Like you, I am dubious about the potential for a test of content to tell me much about teacher quality. And certainly those tests don’t prepare teachers in ANY way for teaching in the 21st century, since the content in them seems to be fairly reminiscent of ways of thinking about content in the 60s…