MISSOURI EDUCATION NEWS
January 2007
Copyright © 2007 Queue, Inc.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Missouri Chosen for State Scholars Initiative
Missouri – Education Counts State
Highlights 2007
ChildrenÕs Chances for Success Vary
Dramatically By State, Report Warns
Missouri
Fails in 2006 NCEA Survey of State Data Collection Issues Related to
Longitudinal Analysis
Key Education Facts and Figures for Missouri
235 School Districts Earn Recognition For
"Distinction in Performance"
FREE STUDENT WORKBOOKS AVAILABLE FOR
PREVIEW (Advertisement)
Queue, Inc.'s latest Test Preparation Catalogue features many new
titles. We would be delighted to send catalogues and/or free review copies of
any of the student versions of these books at no cost to you. Call, fax, or
email your request.
In addition, weÕre
offering a wide array of curriculum-based materials in our New Curriculum Catalogue. We welcome you to
request free review copies of these books as well as a copy of the curriculum
catalogue.
We think you will
find QueueÕs test preparation materials to be great tools to prepare your
students for state assessment tests. In addition, we encourage you to sample
our curriculum workbooks to help engage and challenge your students.
For further
information on Queue, Inc. and our product line, visit
To order free
previews, please visit: http://www.qworkbooks.com/samplerequest.html
or call: 800-232-2224
or fax: 800-775-2729
or e-mail: jdk@queueinc.com
or write: Queue,
Inc., 1 Controls Dr., Shelton, CT 06484
For
back issues of this newsletter, as well as current and back issues of our other
newsletters, U.S. Education News and Education Research Report, please go to: http://www.queuenews.com/
For the latest education
research news on a daily basis, please visit our NEW Education Research Report
Weblog: http://educationresearchreport.blogspot.com/
Please don't forget to change your bookmarks!
Missouri Added
to Program Aimed at Increasing Number of Students Taking Rigorous High School
Courses
Four new states have
been selected for participation in the State Scholars Initiative, a national
business-education partnership effort designed to increase the number of
students who take a rigorous curriculum in high school, the U.S. Education
Department announced today.
The states are:
Missouri, New Hampshire, South Dakota and Wyoming.
Under the State
Scholars Initiative, each state will receive up to $300,000 during a two-year
period to implement scholars programs in at least four school districts. Local
business-education partnerships will work with students in those districts,
encouraging them to take a rigorous course of study—one that will give
them a boost no matter whether they go to college or straight to
work.
The Scholars Core
Course of Study includes:
á
Four years of English.
á
Three years of math
(algebra I and II and geometry).
á
Three years of science
(biology, chemistry and physics).
á
Three and a half years
of social studies (U.S. history, world history, geography, economics or
government). And,
á
Two years of a language
other than English.
"Students who
take rigorous courses in high school stand a far greater chance of succeeding
in college and the workplace," said U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret
Spellings. "We congratulate the states of Missouri, New Hampshire, South
Dakota, and Wyoming for recognizing the potential of this program and the
considerable benefit that it can provide young people."
Besides the State
Scholars Initiative, President Bush earlier this year launched two other
significant programs designed to encourage students to take challenging courses
in high school. In February, the president signed legislation setting aside
more than $790 million in Academic Competitiveness Grants and National Science
and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent (National SMART grants).
Those awards will
encourage students to pursue rigorous classes in high school and college majors
in high demand in the global economy, such as science, mathematics, technology,
engineering and critical foreign languages.
Academic
Competitiveness Grants will be available to students for their first and second
academic years of college, while National SMART Grants will help support
students in their third and fourth years of school.
In the State Scholars
Initiative, a high-impact strategy is used to motivate students to tackle
demanding high school courses that prepare them for college and careers. The
program features business people making presentations to eighth-graders just
before they select their high school courses.
Business volunteers
help students understand the career options and monetary benefits of taking
challenging courses. Students may receive academic support, incentives, and
special recognition that help ensure their success, especially in the more
difficult courses.
The four new states
announced today join 20 others previously chosen for participation. They
include: Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, New
Mexico, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and West
Virginia.
For more information
on the State Scholars Initiative, see the program's Web site, which includes a
brochure, fact sheet, newsletter, as well as links to state briefs and each of
the participating states' Web sites at www.wiche.edu/statescholars.
Details
on the Academic Competitiveness and National SMART Grants can be found at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/ac-smart.html.
The EPE Research
Center has examined state efforts to connect the K-12 education system with
early learning, higher education, and the world of work. Fifteen key policies
are considered in this highlights report. The states with the strongest
alignment policies – Maryland, Michigan, and West Virginia – each
have 12 of the 15 focal policies in place. At the other end of the spectrum,
Colorado, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania have each enacted a single alignment
Education
Alignment Policies
Early-Childhood
Education
Early learning – State early-learning standards aligned with
K-12 standards (2006-07) Yes
School-readiness
definition – State formally
defines school readiness (2006-07) No
School-readiness
assessment – Readiness of
entering students assessed (2006-07) No
School-readiness
intervention – Programs for
students not deemed ready (2006-07) No
Kindergarten
standards – Learning
expectations aligned with elementary (2006-07) Yes
Postsecondary
Education
College readiness – State defines college readiness (2006-07) No
College
preparation – College prep
required to earn a high school diploma (2006-07) No
Course alignment – Credits for H.S. diploma aligned with
postsecondary system (2006-07) No
Assessment
alignment – H.S. assessment
aligned with postsecondary system (2006-07) No
Postsecondary
decisions – H.S. assessment
used for postsecondary decisions (2006-07) No
Economy and
Workforce
Work readiness – State K-12 system defines work readiness
(2006-07) No
Work-ready
distinction – Work-ready
definition differs from college readiness (2006-07) No
Career-tech
diploma – State offers H.S.
diploma with career specialization (2006-07) No
Industry
certification – K-12 has path
for industry-recognized certificate or license (2006-07) Yes
Portable credits – K-12 pathway to earn career-tech. credits for
postsecondary (2006-07) Yes
State rank: 39
Elementary and
Secondary Performance
K-12 Achievement
Index
Quality CountsÕ new State Achievement Index gauges the achievement
of the public school system based on absolute levels of performance (status)
and improvements or changes over time in nearly equal measure. The index is
based on 15 individual indicators related to reading and math performance, high
school graduation rates, and the results of Advanced Placement exams. The EPE
Research Center employed statistical tests to evaluate state performance on
each indicator. States significantly exceeding the national average (for level
indicators) or improving over time (change indicators) received a point, or 2
points if they excelled by a particularly large statistical margin. Conversely,
low-performing states lost 1 or 2 points. A stateÕs final score was calculated
by tallying points across the set of 15 measures.
State rank: 33
Standards,
Assessments, and Accountability
Academic Standards
English/language
arts standards are clear, specific,
and grounded in content at all levels (2006) No
Mathematics standards are clear, specific, and grounded in
content at all levels (2006) No
Science standards are clear, specific, and grounded in
content at all levels (2006) Yes
Social
Studies/history standards are clear,
specific, and grounded in content at all levels (2006) No
Revision schedule – State has regular timeline for revising
standards (2006-07) No
Assessments
English/language
arts assessments are aligned to
standards at all levels (2006-07) Yes
Mathematics assessments are aligned to standards at all levels
(2006-07) Yes
Science assessments are aligned to standards at all levels
(2006-07) No
Social
studies/history assessments are
aligned to standards at all levels (2006-07) No
Vertically equated
scores on assessments in grades
3–8 in English and math (2006-07) No
School
Accountability (policies must apply
to Title I and non-Title I schools)
State ratings – State assigns ratings to all schools on
criteria other than AYP (2006-07) No
Growth models – State ratings for schools measure individual
student growth (2006-07) No
Rewards – State provides rewards to high-performing or
improving schools (2006-07) No
Assistance – State provides assistance to low-performing
schools (2006-07) No
Sanctions – State sanctions low-performing schools (2006-07)
No
State rank: 48
Complete Missouri Report:
http://www.edweek.org/media/ew/qc/2007/17shr.mo.h26.pdf
Study Examines State Efforts to
Connect Education & Training From
Birth to Adulthood; Launches State
Achievement Index for Grades K-12
A child born in Virginia is significantly more likely to
experience success throughout life than the average child born in the United
States, while a child born in New Mexico is likely to face an accumulating
series of hurdles both educationally and economically, according to an analysis
published by Education Week.
The analysis by the Editorial Projects in Education Research
Center is based on the ÒChance-for-Success Index,Ó which tracks state efforts
to connect education from preschool through postsecondary education and
training. The index was developed by the EPE Research Center for Quality
Counts 2007: From Cradle to Career, Connecting American Education From Birth to
Adulthood, produced by Education
Week with support from
the Pew Center on the States. The report is available online at www.edweek.org/go/qc07.
The Missouri report is available at:
http://www.edweek.org/media/ew/qc/2007/17shr.mo.h26.pdf
The Chance-for-Success Index provides a perspective on the
importance of education throughout a personÕs lifetime and is based on 13
indicators that highlight whether young children get off to a good start,
succeed in elementary and secondary school, and hit key educational and income
benchmarks as adults. Virginia, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, Maryland,
Massachusetts, and New Hampshire rank at the top of the index. Missouri ranked
33rd. Kentucky, Nevada, West Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi,
Tennessee, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, and New Mexico lag significantly behind
the national average in descending order.
The 13 indicators that make up the index capture key performance
or attainment outcomes at various stages in a personÕs lifetime or are
correlated with later success. For example, in the early-childhood years,
indicators include the percent of children living in families that earn a
decent wage and the percent of children with at least one parent who has a
postsecondary degree – factors that research shows have an impact on how
well children perform in school.
ÒOverall, the Index captures the cumulative effects of education
experience from birth through adulthood and pinpoints the chance for success at
each stage and for each state,Ó said Christopher B. Swanson, the director of
the EPE Research Center. ÒWe find that a childÕs life prospects depend greatly
on where he or she lives.Ó
Virginia, for example, earns the highest Chance-for-Success score.
The average child in Virginia starts out ahead of the curve: less likely to
live in a low-income family and more likely to have college-educated parents.
Those early advantages are amplified during the
elementary-through-postsecondary years, when the typical young person enjoys
higher achievement and is more likely to finish high school and continue on to
college than in other states. VirginiaÕs well-educated adult population and
strong economy offer ample opportunities to realize the returns to schooling as
individuals enter the workforce. Similar conditions prevail in other
high-ranking states, including Connecticut, Minnesota, and New Jersey.
A near-mirror image of this pattern occurs in the steadily
declining trajectories of states like New Mexico. There, weak school
performance is unable to overcome, and may exacerbate, the early
sociodemographic disadvantages of poverty, linguistic isolation, and low
parental education. Among adults in New Mexico, educational attainment, income,
and rates of steady employment all fall significantly below the national
average. Other low-ranking states, such as Louisiana, Arizona, and Texas, share
many of the same characteristics.
In preparation of the launch of the Data Quality Campaign, the National Center for Educational Accountability (NCEA) conducted a survey, with the support of The Broad Foundation and The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, about state data systems to determine the number of states that have built the infrastructure to tap into the power of longitudinal data. This report provides an overview of the findings of the August 2006 survey in addition to a state-by-state analysis of the policy implications of each state's data system.
The Power of
Longitudinal Data
Longitudinal data
matches individual student records over time, from pre-kindergarten through 12th grade and into
post secondary education. States are spending hundreds of millions of dollars
to improve student achievement. But without quality data, they are essentially
flying blind. Policymakers need to act now to put in place the policies and
resources to ensure that each state has a longitudinal data system and the
culture and capacity to translate the information into specific action steps to
improve student achievement. When states collect the most relevant data and are
able to match individual student records over time, they can answer the questions that are at the core
of educational effectiveness. Longitudinal data (data gathered on the same
student from year to year) makes it possible to:
á
Determine the
value-added of specific schools and programs by following individual students'
academic growth;
á
Identify consistently
high-performing schools so that educators and the public can learn from best
practices;
á
Evaluate the impact of
teacher preparation and training programs on student achievement; and
Based on
responses to the 2006 NCEA survey, only a few states can answer each of these
priority questions facing policymakers and educators today.
Which schools produce the strongest academic growth for their students?
(23 states can answer this question)
What achievement levels in middle school indicate that a student is on
track to succeed in rigorous courses in high school? (5 states can answer this
question)
What is each school's graduation rate, according to the 2005 National
Governors Association graduation compact? (26 states can answer this question)
What high school performance indicators (e.g., enrollment in rigorous
courses or performance on state tests) are the best predictors of students'
success in college or the workplace? (4 states can answer this question)
What percentage of high school graduates who go on to college take remedial
courses? (14 states can answer this question)
Which teacher preparation programs produce the graduates
whose students have the strongest academic growth? (9 states can answer this
question)
For
the complete report go to:
http://www.dataqualitycampaign.org/survey_results/
For
MissouriÕs results go to:
http://www.dataqualitycampaign.org/survey_results/state.cfm?st=Missouri
The Education Watch
State Summary Reports provide state-specific data on:
Achievement Gaps:
á
How many students are
proficient in reading and mathematics on state assessments? How do proficiency
rates on state assessments compare to proficiency rates on the National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)?
á
How do achievement gaps
between groups compare across states? Where are gaps the smallest? Where are
they the biggest?
á
What are the trends in
student achievement over time? Which states are making the biggest gains?
High School and
College Attainment Gaps:
á
What is the on-time
high school graduation rate for different groups of students?
á
How many high school
graduates enroll in college?
á
What is the college
graduation rate for different groups of students?
á
What are the
participation and success rates for different groups of students in high-level
courses such as Advanced Placement (AP)?
á
Which students are most
likely to have teachers who have even a college minor in the subject theyÕre
teaching?
á
How much state and
local per-pupil funding is provided to schools in low- versus high-poverty
districts? Which states provide the most funding to low-income districts? Which
states provide the least?
á
How affordable is
college for each stateÕs lowest income students?
A Deeper Look at
Achievement across States: NAEP Data Tables
While no state is yet
where it needs to be in terms of educating poor and minority students, some are
doing a much better job than others. To help state leaders, researchers, and
advocates explore these differences and identify states from which they might
learn, the accompanying NAEP Data Tables allow for easy state-to-state
comparisons of scale scores for different groups of students. They include
tables that look at student achievement and gap trends over time. For example:
á
Low-income
eighth-graders in Massachusetts score 21 points higher in math than low-income
eighth-graders in neighboring Rhode Island (273 vs. 252).
á
In 2003, reading scores
for African-American fourth-graders were 14 points higher in Connecticut than
in Delaware. Over the last five years, however, African-American reading scores
increased by 23 points in Delaware while in Connecticut, they decreased by 2
points. DelawareÕs African-American fourth-graders now read at higher levels
than their peers in Connecticut.
á
The gap in math
achievement separating Latino from White eighth-graders in Minnesota is 10
points larger than the gap in Virginia, a state educating a similar proportion
of Latino students (33 points vs. 23 points).
The wide variation
between states in achievement for the same groups of students demonstrates just
how important state policies and practices are. ÒIf race and poverty mattered
more than what happens in schools, then NAEP scores for low-income students and
students of color would be more consistent from state to state,Ó said Daria
Hall, senior policy analyst for the Education Trust.
Focus on Opportunities
to Learn
The data are clear:
what states do matters a lot when it comes to student achievement. But far too
often, state policies and practices work to the direct disadvantage of
low-income and minority students. For example:
á
In New York, schools in
the highest poverty districts have $2,065 less to spend per pupil than schools
in the most affluent districts.
á
In Illinois, students
in high-poverty secondary schools are more than three times as likely as
students in low-poverty schools to have a teacher lacking even a minor in the
subject theyÕre teaching (47 percent vs.15 percent).
á
In Michigan,
African-American students represent 20 percent of the stateÕs K-12 enrollment
but just 5 percent of the students enrolled in Advanced Placement English
Language and Composition courses.
Missouri Report:
http://www2.edtrust.org/edtrust/summaries2006/Missouri.pdf
More than 200
Missouri school districts have earned the stateÕs "Distinction in Performance"
award (http://dese.mo.gov/news/2006/distinction.htm
- Distinction_in_Performance_Awards)
for their academic achievement and progress during the last school year
(2005-06), state education officials announced today.
A total of 235 school
districts qualified for the Distinction in Performance award, presented
annually by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Of this
yearÕs recipients, 188 are K-12 districts; 47 are K-8 districts. Last year, 180
districts qualified for the award.
The Distinction in
Performance award is based on the 14 academic performance standards that are
now used in the accreditation of K-12 school districts. K-8 districts use a
portion of these standards.
For the past five
years, the award was based on 12 standards. The criteria were modified this
year to reflect changes in the stateÕs MAP testing program. A standard also has
been added to provide a measure of "adequate yearly progress," which
is one of the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind act.
To qualify for the
award this year, K-8 districts had to meet 6 of 7 performance standards,
including all of those based on the results of MAP tests. K-12 districts had to
meet 13 out of 14 standards, including all of the MAP-based measures.
Beginning this year,
a district may be recognized for distinction based on high achievement or on
improvement. To meet the "high achievement" standard, a district must
meet at least 12 of 13 performance indicators at a prescribed level.
Under
the stateÕs accreditation process, known as the Missouri School Improvement
Program (MSIP), each school district is evaluated at least once every five
years. The Distinction in Performance award is based on the same criteria used
in the accreditation process, but it provides an annual confirmation and
recognition of a districtÕs consistent performance.
2005-06
"Report Cards" For the State and Local Public Schools
A new report with
statewide statistics about MissouriÕs public school system (pre-kindergarten
through grade 12) during the last school year has been released.
The statistical
profiles about each school district, school building and charter school are
prepared annually by DESE as required by state law. The reports provide key
statistics and trend data about students, teachers, academic performance,
finances and other topics.
This year, for the
first time, DESE also has published a detailed "Special Education
Profile" about every school district. Required by federal law, the profile
provides data about achievement, graduation and other performance indicators
for children with disabilities. This report is available online.
The education agency
also released an updated profile of the state, called the Missouri Public
School Accountability Report. It
parallels the local school profiles to a great extent but includes some
additional state-level indicators.
Highlights of the
state-level report include:
Enrollment in
kindergarten through grade 12 increased slightly in 2005-06 (less than one-half
of one percent) to 900,021. Including preschool students (pre-kindergarten),
total public school enrollment increased to 928,768.
Preschool enrollment
has more than doubled in the past five years, growing to nearly 29,000 last
year. Public school districts are not required to offer preschool programs, but
a majority of the stateÕs 524 school districts now provide some type of
services for 3- to 5-year-olds.
Statewide, the
dropout rate increased slightly last year, up to 4% from 3.7% the prior year.
The dropout rate has inched upward for three years in a row after declining
steadily for several years.
There was no change
last year in the percentage of Missouri students eligible for free or
reduced-price meals at school (41.8%) or the percentage of students with
limited English-speaking ability (2.1%).
The number of
teachers in Missouri public schools increased to 68,557, and the average
teacherÕs salary increased by about 3.4% to $42,077.
To access the Missouri
Public School Accountability Report:
http://dese.mo.gov/commissioner/statereportcard/