The National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) has released a new report that finds that only 13% of undergraduate education schools require sufficient amounts of relevant math coursework for prospective elementary teachers. NCTQ rated 77 education schools in 49 states by studying entrance and exit requirements, course syllabi, textbooks, tests, and state licensing tests. The results of NCTQ’s study shed new light on why American kids fare so poorly on international comparisons. Math scores for American fourth graders haven’t improved since 1995 on the world’s “report card” (the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS), leaving U.S. students 12th out of the 25 countries whose students took the test (right above Cyprus). Kate Walsh, president of NCTQ stated, “As a nation, our dislike and discomfort with math is so endemic that we do not even find it troubling when elementary teachers admit to their own weaknesses in basic mathematics. Not only are our education schools not tackling these weaknesses, they accommodate them with low expectations and insufficient content. We simply must begin to appreciate the critical importance of elementary teachers gaining the knowledge and skills they need to effectively teach mathematics. It is what our children need in order to keep up with their peers around the world – and what our country needs in order to produce a skilled workforce that can compete in today’s global economy.”

The new report, “No Common Denominator: The Preparation of Elementary Teachers in Mathematics by America’s Education Schools,” is the most comprehensive picture to date of how education schools are preparing – or failing to prepare – elementary teachers in math. NCTQ found that the combination of state and individual school requirements result in very few teacher candidates taking a sufficient number of courses that prepare them well for teaching in elementary classrooms. This study is the second in NCTQ’s series about the quality of elementary teacher preparation; an earlier study looked at how well elementary teachers were prepared to teach young children to read.

Some of the report’s findings include:

Ø Low Expectations: Compared to other countries, the expectations for mathematics knowledge that aspiring teachers must have before they are admitted into a teacher preparation program are exceedingly low. One out of six schools in the study admits teachers without ever asking if they can successfully do grade school arithmetic. Nearly all of the remaining skills verify only that the teacher knows the math learned in middle school.

Ø Low Standards: The exit tests administered by states to award a teaching license assess virtually the same math used on admission tests. In other words, the math knowledge needed to get out is little more than the math knowledge needed to get in.

Ø Lack of National Consensus: Across the United States there is no consensus on how institutions should prepare elementary teachers in mathematics. Given that the job description of the elementary teacher does not vary much from state to state, there is an inexplicable range of course requirements from one institution to the next, from those that require none to those that require up to six.

Ø Irrelevant Coursework: Few programs cover the mathematics content that elementary teachers need. Only one in eight schools actually requires a sufficient amount of the coursework that elementary teachers will need.

Ø Haphazard State Guidance: State regulation and guidance for the preparation of elementary teachers is haphazard, further compounding the variation in institutional requirements.

Ø Algebra MIA: The nation's goal of building the foundation for algebra in elementary grades is not evident in the preparation that elementary teachers receive. In no other area of mathematics are aspiring elementary teachers more shortchanged.

The report includes specific recommendations to help states and education programs develop more focused and rigorous coursework ensuring that teacher candidates become skilled, confident mathematics educators well prepared to teach our nation’s children. These include:

Ø World Class Math Standards: Creating coursework standards for aspiring teachers that lay the foundation for teacher preparation that is truly world class.

Ø Tougher Admission Standards: Establishing higher admission standards for education schools that will ensure that only individuals who have a high-school level of math knowledge are admitted.

Ø New State Licensing Tests: Creating new state licensing tests for elementary school teachers in mathematics that would essentially force institutions to prepare teachers to get it right.

To view the full report, including all of the findings and recommendations, go to:

http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/nctq_ttmath_fullreport_20080626115953.pdf

State Test Scores in Reading and Mathematics Continue To Increase, Achievement Gaps Narrow

Positive Trends in State Test Scores Seen Since 2002

Student scores on state tests of reading and mathematics have risen since 2002, and achievement gaps between various groups of students have narrowed more often than they have widened, according to the most comprehensive and rigorous recent analysis of state test scores. These improvements have occurred during a period when the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), state education reforms, and local school improvement efforts have focused on raising test scores and narrowing achievement gaps.

The report, Has Student Achievement Increased Since 2002?: State Test Score Trends Through 2006-07, was released today by the nonpartisan Center on Education Policy (CEP). It analyzes state test data from all 50 states as well as trends through 2007 on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the only federally administered assessment of reading and math achievement. While expanding on a similar report from last year, this study continues the focus on two main questions: whether reading and math achievement has increased since 2002 and whether achievement gaps between subgroups of students have narrowed. The number of states included varies depending on the type of trend being reported. CEP excluded state data from years that should not be compared because a state introduced a new test, changed the passing score on its test, or made other major test changes. CEP also looked at two indicators of achievement on state tests – the percentage of students scoring at or above the “proficient” level and a statistic called “effect size,” which avoids some limitations of percentages proficient.

The report’s analysis found that, among the states with sufficient data, 21 states made moderate-to-large gains in math in both percentages proficient and effect sizes at the elementary level, while 22 states showed gains of this size on both indicators in middle school and 12 states posted such gains for high school. In reading, 17 states had moderate-to-large gains in percentages proficient and effect sizes at the elementary level, 14 states made such gains for middle school, and eight states showed gains for high school. Additional numbers of states made slight gains on one or both indicators or showed improvement on one indicator but lacked data on the other.

In general, the overall trends on state tests and NAEP moved in the same direction, though gains on NAEP tended to be smaller (NAEP tests are not aligned with any specific state’s academic standards). The most agreement was in grade 4 math. Of the 33 states with sufficient state test and NAEP data, 31 showed gains on both assessments. Achievement gaps have also narrowed more often than widened on state tests and NAEP, according to CEP. The exception to the pattern of more gaps narrowing was in grade 8 math, where gaps widened on NAEP more than they narrowed. In general, NAEP tended to show larger gaps between different demographic and economic groups than state tests.

It is impossible, notes the report, to determine the extent to which these trends in test results have occurred because of NCLB. Since 2002, many different but interconnected policies and programs have been undertaken to raise achievement and close achievement gaps – some initiated by states or school districts on their own, and some in response to federal requirements. Other possible explanations for increased test scores and narrowed gaps include, among others, districts and schools devoting more instructional time to reading and math, and students and teachers becoming more familiar with the content and format of state tests.

Full report:

http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document_ext.showDocumentByID&nodeID=1&DocumentID=241

CHILDREN LEARN SMART BEHAVIORS WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THEY KNOW

Young children show evidence of smart and flexible behavior early in life – even though they don’t really know what they’re doing, new research suggests.

In a series of experiments, scientists tested how well 4- and 5-year-olds were able to rely on different types of information to choose objects in a group. In some situations, they were asked to choose objects based on color and in some cases based on shape.

Results showed children could be trained to choose correctly, but still didn’t know why shape or color was the right answer in any particular context.

The findings go against one prominent theory that says children can only show smart, flexible behavior if they have conceptual knowledge – knowledge about how things work, said Vladimir Sloutsky, co-author of the study and professor of psychology and human development and the director of the Center for Cognitive Science at Ohio State.

“Children have more powerful learning skills than it was thought previously,” he said. “They can show evidence of flexible learning abilities without conceptual knowledge and without being aware of what they learned.”

Sloutsky conducted the study with Anna Fisher, a former graduate student at Ohio State now an assistant professor of psychology at Carnegie Mellon University. The study appears in the current issue of the journal Child Development.

Sloutsky gave an example of how children can show flexibility in thinking and behavior.

In a previous study by other researchers, 3- and 4-year-olds were found to be more likely to group items on the basis of color if the items were presented as food, but on the basis of shape when they were presented as toys.

“The argument has been that children couldn’t do this without understanding the properties of food and the properties of toys. So in order to be flexible you really need to understand what things are.

“But what we demonstrated is that children can acquire this flexibility without this deeper knowledge, and without realizing how they are being flexible.”

In their study, Sloutsky and Fisher had several groups of 4- and 5-year-olds participate in several experiments. In all of these experiments, children played a guessing game involving choosing objects on a computer screen. The game was played either in the upper right corner on the computer screen (with a yellow background) or in the lower left hand corner of the computer screen (with a green background).

They were shown one object and told it had a smiley face behind it. They then guessed which of the other two objects also had a smiley face behind it. In each case, one of the other objects had the same color but different shape as the original, while the other had the same shape but a different color.

The key was that when the game was in the upper right corner of the computer screen, the smiley face was always hidden behind the same-shaped item. When the game was presented in the lower left corner, the smiley face was hidden behind the item with the same color.

Some children were given training: after making a guess, they were told whether they were correct or not. These children soon learned where to find the smiley face.

Later, during testing, these children had no trouble correctly guessing where the smiley face was hidden, even though no feedback was given during the actual test.

But, Sloutsky said, “these children were not aware of what they learned. They didn’t know how they were making the correct choices.”

In several related experiments, the researchers tested whether children discovered the “rules” of this game – that shape was important when the game was played in the upper-right corner of the screen, and color was important when it was played in the lower-left corner– and whether they could follow the rule on their own.

The answer was that they did not figure out the rule or know how to use it.

Sloutsky said children in the experiments didn’t know the rules, but simply used associative learning – they figured out that in certain areas of the computer screen, they were better off choosing by shape, and in other areas by color.

“Children developed a running statistic about where they should choose color and where they should choose shape,” he said.

This type of learning goes on all the time with children, Sloutsky explained. For example, children learn that larger animals are generally stronger and more powerful than smaller animals, even though they know nothing about the biological reasons behind this.

The findings have implications for theories of how children learn and develop their cognitive abilities, he said.

“Children learn implicitly. They don’t need complex conceptual knowledge to show evidence of smart, flexible behavior.”

Most California Children Attend Center-Based Preschools; Educational Quality of Programs Falls Short

More than half of California's preschoolers attend center-based early care and education programs, but the children who have the most to gain from preschool frequently are those least likely to participate in the programs, according to a new RAND Corporation study.

Researchers found that children from lower-income families, children whose mothers have less education and Latino children are significantly less likely than others to attend center-based early care and education programs, even though they are among the groups that consistently show a lack of readiness for school.

While research has demonstrated that high-quality preschool can help children prepare for kindergarten and later grades, RAND researchers found that the quality of preschools in California is mixed.

Most center-based programs meet quality benchmarks for class size and child-staff ratios. But only one in four children participates in a classroom that provides instruction that promotes thinking and language skills, key features that prepare children for kindergarten. Children from more-affluent families were no more likely to experience high quality environments -- especially those features linked to early learning -- than children from low-income families.

The findings are from the latest report in an ongoing research project intended to outline the adequacy and effectiveness of preschool education in California.

"It is now the norm for California's 3- and 4-year-olds to spend at least part of their day in a center-based early care and education program," said Lynn Karoly, the study's lead author and an economist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. "Unfortunately, relatively few of the centers we studied provide the types of high-quality early learning experiences that can help prepare children to succeed when they enter school."

The RAND study is based upon a survey of more than 2,000 households of children eligible to enter kindergarten in the fall of 2007 or 2008. Researchers also conducted interviews with preschool teachers and administrators from more than 600 programs. In addition, researchers visited about 250 of the center-based programs to observe the nature of the interactions and activities in the classroom and check other measures of quality such as group sizes and child-staff ratios.

The study found that an estimated 59 percent of preschool-aged children in California attend center-based early care and education programs, including two-thirds of 4-year-olds and half of 3-year-olds. Participation is linked primarily to a family's socioeconomic standing, rather than race or ethnicity, according to the study.

Just 45 percent of children whose mothers have less than a high school diploma attended center-based programs, while 80 percent of children whose mothers have graduate degrees were in such programs. The chances a child will attend a center-based early care and education program also rise with a family's income.

More than 70 percent of the center-based programs evaluated by the RAND research team met quality benchmarks for class size and child-teacher ratios, but other quality benchmarks were achieved less often.

While two-thirds of children attended a program where teachers had an associate degree, only one in four children were taught by teachers with a bachelor's degree in the early childhood field or a related discipline. In addition, just 22 percent of children were in classrooms that were rated between good and excellent for space, furnishings and activities, according researchers.

The RAND study provides details about the nature and quality of California preschool programs that has not been available previously. Among the reports other findings are:

- Among children who could benefit the most from quality preschool, no more than 15 percent are enrolled in classrooms that meet quality benchmarks for instructional supports that promote higher-order thinking and language skills.

- Among 3 and 4-year-olds who did not attend a center-based preschool program, about 25 percent were cared for by parents and 16 percent were cared for by a nonparent in a home setting.

- About 22 percent of California's preschool-aged children attend publicly funded center-based programs such as Head Start, the California State Preschool program, or a public school prekindergarten; 28 percent attend private-school prekindergartens, preschools, or nursery schools; and 9 percent participate in a child care center.

- Public preschool program such as the California State Preschool and public prekindergarten programs were more likely to meet some of the quality benchmarks than private centers. Half of the children in public programs had a teacher with a bachelor's degree in early childhood education, compared to one in eight children in private prekindergartens or child care centers.

"These findings should be useful to policymakers who are interested in improving the quality of early care and education programs in California," Karoly said. "This study provides the best information to date on the quality shortfalls that affect all groups of preschool-age children in California, and the missed opportunity that results from the low rates of participation among groups of children who stand the most to gain from a high-quality early learning experience."

The report is the third from the California Preschool Study, which was requested by the California Governor's Committee on Education Excellence, the state Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Speaker of the California Assembly and the President pro Tempore of the California State Senate. Two studies released in 2007 examined gaps in school readiness and academic achievement in the early elementary grades and the system of publicly funded care and early education programs in California.

The study, "Prepared to Learn: The Nature and Quality of Early Care and Education Experiences for Preschool-Age Children in California," is available at

http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR539/

How To Educate English Language Learners

The staggering number of English language learners in the United States presents a profound challenge to our public schools. The summer issue of American Educator, a quarterly publication of the American Federation of Teachers, takes on the often contentious question of how best to help these students master English and meet academic standards.

The highly charged debate over how to teach English language learners often overlooks the available research. In his article in American Educator, Stanford University professor Claude Goldenberg highlights the most promising instructional approaches and discusses important questions that research has yet to answer. Based on the research, Goldenberg suggests the following instructional framework:

· If feasible, teach children to read in their native language and in English.

· Teachers should help students transfer knowledge from their native language to English.

· What we know about good instruction and curriculum for all students holds true for English language learners. However, modifications will be necessary as students master academic English.

· English language development is crucial but must be addressed in addition to—not instead of—academic content instruction.

American Educator is online at www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator

High-Achieving Students in the Era of No Child Left Behind

This publication reports the results of the first two (of five) studies of a multifaceted research investigation of the state of high-achieving students in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) era.

Part I: An Analysis of NAEP Data examines achievement trends for high-achieving students (defined, like low-achieving students, by their performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP) since the early 1990s and, in more detail, since 2000.

Part II: Results from a National Teacher Survey gives teachers' own views of how schools are serving high-achieving pupils in the NCLB era.

Here are the key findings:

While the nation’s lowest-achieving youngsters made rapid gains from 2000 to 2007, the perfor-mance of top students was languid. Children at the tenth percentile of achievement (the bottom 10 percent of students) have shown solid progress in fourth-grade reading and math and eighth-grade math since 2000, but those at the 90th percentile (the top 10 percent) have made minimal gains.

This pattern—big gains for low achievers and lesser ones for high achievers—is associated with the introduction of accountability systems in general, not just NCLB. An analysis of NAEP data from the 1990s shows that states that adopted testing and accountability regimes before NCLB saw similar patterns before NCLB: stronger progress for low achievers than for high achievers.

Full report:

http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/20080618_high_achievers.pdf

Attitude determines student success in rural schools

Study investigates qualities of high-achieving schools

While most of the country focuses on ACT scores, student-teacher ratio and rigorous curriculum to increase student success, it may be the commitment to excellence that determines student achievement in rural schools. This is an overlooked, yet critical, factor when considering nearly half of American school districts are in rural areas, educating nearly 21 percent of all students.

Perri Applegate, a researcher at the University of Oklahoma K20 Center, recently investigated the qualities that differentiate a high-achieving school and low-achieving rural high school, focusing on high-poverty high schools with at least 51 percent of the population eligible for free or reduced lunch.

Applegate compared the scores on Oklahoma's Academic Performance Index, the state's annual school report of 367 Oklahoma high schools ranging from large, urban to small rural schools. She found no significant difference in achievement of rural schools and those in other settings.

Surprisingly, the top factors that did impact student achievement in urban high schools, ACT scores and dropout rates, did not determine student success in rural schools. Community involvement and the school's commitment to student excellence were the determining factors in whether a rural school was high- or low-achieving.

"In small-town America, the school and the community are dependent upon each other for success," said Applegate. In rural areas, schools tend to be the center of the community, acting as a gathering place and often social services. In larger towns, students have access to resources and support outside of their schools.

"Rural schools in the study listed the same factors as impacting student achievement: poverty, parental support, community, extracurricular activities and a caring school culture," said Applegate. "The difference between a high- or low-achieving rural school was how they -- both the school and the community -- met those challenges."

High-achieving schools had educators that embraced the role of being a rural teacher, which typically means wearing many hats and being creative with necessary resources. The schools had shared and supportive leadership, empowered stakeholders to take leadership roles and did not accept the idea that students were destined to fail based on their address. As one rural teacher pointed out, "Intelligence isn't geographically based."

Other factors included parents and community members who support the teachers, or if necessary, the school enacted programs to increase support. Another key factor was high-achieving schools gave students many opportunities to connect their learning to the well-being of the community, reinforcing the school-community bond.

While affected by the same variables, low-achieving schools felt that being a rural school was a handicap for student achievement and the lack of resources was a burden to school administration and the community. This attitude reflected in the educational approach of the school and in the student's probability to go to college.

According to Applegate, these finding have serious implications beyond education. Research shows that schools can save communities. The success of one can determine the success or failure of the other.

"We can't assume that student success in all schools, large and small, is impacted by the same issues," said Applegate. "So the question becomes how do we help schools in their environment become successful?"

For rural schools, Applegate suggests preparation programs need to provide specialized training for those who will serve in this setting. Policymakers need to acknowledge that rural schools have particular strengths and weaknesses. Finally, reform programs aimed at improving rural schools need to be tailored to meet their unique needs.

Complete study:

https://k20portal.ou.edu/Web_Documents/AERA%20Rural%20Paper.pdf

Engaging teachers means engaged students

To encourage and help teachers become more involved and enthusiastic about "inclusive teaching", the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) recently funded an action research based project. Action research can be explained as making changes and studying the impact of those changes in order to bring about an environment where students feel included in their learning process.

According to the project's Co-director Dr Susan Davies, of Trinity College, Carmarthen, "Action research is an opportunity for teachers to look at their practice, reflect on it, and improve on it."

Dr Davies explained "Good action research can enable teachers to see their pupils differently and be a step towards creating a richer pupil–teacher relationship, which challenges the limitations of current teaching methods. For this to happen, there needs to be a model of action research which involves teachers developing shared ownership of an issue, taking action and paying attention to the consequences for pupils' engagement."

As part of the ESRC's Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP), the project sought to explore how this approach could be used to assist teachers to put into practice the principle of 'inclusion' i.e. to increase the participation and achievement of pupils who may be marginalised as a result of circumstances such as disability, ethnicity, gender and social disadvantage.

The starting point for the TLRP project is that many secondary school teachers are unfamiliar with action research, and may be reluctant to become involved because it can be perceived as unfamiliar and too difficult. The researchers found that, unless teachers were given a real sense of ownership, action research became just another imposition on their time and energy. However, if that ownership was successfully developed, then teachers' energy and creativity was released.

Working with seven schools in Wales and England, the outcomes revealed that:

· collaborative action research can help engage all their pupils in learning,

· action research, as an aid to inclusion, can be stimulated by giving teachers a strong sense of ownership of the research and its outcomes, and

· the role of school leaders and educational psychologists as the research facilitators is crucial to the success of using action research to stimulate inclusive teaching.

The project involved asking questions about the engagement of young people in their learning and then taking appropriate action in terms of the organisation of schools, subjects and lessons. This includes:

· asking questions about how a school adapts to and works with the diversity of its student population,

· finding out about, and working with, what pupils bring with them to school rather than viewing differences in terms of deficits, and

· taking account of the understandings that young people have of school and education, rather than seeking only to engage more young people in existing school practice.

Dr Davies continued: "Conceived in this way, inclusion is not a quick fix that can be bolted on, but requires ongoing dialogue between teachers and learners. It requires teachers' active engagement, because inclusion and exclusion are processes that happen minute by minute and lesson by lesson. Also, crucially, senior management needs to appreciate this is a practice that needs to be given space to happen."

Can Middle School Reform Increase High School Graduation Rates?

Conclusions from this report:

Declines in motivation and school engagement are prevalent among students moving from 6th to 7th grade, except for those students in K-8 schools.

During early adolescence, declines in motivation may occur because typical intermediate schools— middle and junior high schools—are not providing appropriate educational and social environments.

Failing a single course in the middle grades substantially increases the likelihood of dropping out of high school. There is no stronger predictor of students' confidence in their academic ability than the grades they receive.

Many intermediate school teachers feel less effective as teachers, especially for low ability students, than elementary teachers and teachers in K-8 schools.

· When student engagement is accompanied by high quality instruction, academic failure should be preventable.

Full report:

http://lmri.ucsb.edu/dropouts/download.php?file=policybrief12.pdf

MORE CLASS TIME, EARLIER ALGEBRA AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION, TOUTED FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS

Middle school students need additional class time and more rigorous math instruction at earlier grades, according to a report being released today.

“The Critical Middle: A Reason for Hope,” the work of the Maryland Middle School Steering Committee, includes 16 recommendations designed to ignite greater academic improvement in grades six through eight.

The report also calls for increased instruction in foreign languages, improved programs in reading and writing, better teacher preparation, and integrated instruction in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).

Educational progress slows across the board in Maryland during the middle school years, mirroring a pattern found nationally. For example, 80.5 percent of Maryland third-graders score in the proficient range in reading and 78.6 percent in mathematics, while just 68.3 percent of eighth-graders score proficient or better in reading and 56.7 percent in math. Moreover, while all students are improving, the increases in achievement have been less dramatic at the middle-school level.

Strengthening student performance in the middle grades has been a desire among educators for decades. The advent of school accountability systems over the past 10 years pinpointed the fact that academic improvement slows once students leave elementary school. “Too many 8th graders are leaving middle school without the knowledge and skills they need to do high-school-level work,” the new report says.

To prepare students for the difficulty of secondary school, the middle school years need an upgrade in rigor. Additional instructional time, through an extended school day or more summer programs, is one way to accomplish this. As local systems add instructional hours, the report says there also should be increased professional time for teachers, so that interdisciplinary teams may engage in collaborative work and plan instruction.

Steering Committee members acknowledged the critical role that caring adults must play during the middle years. “While a connection to caring adults alone has been shown insufficient to promote achievement gains in the middle grades, a balance between supportive relationships and academic demands promotes both achievement and social/emotional well-being—a balance that is particularly important for the adolescent learner,” the report says.

The report calls for all Maryland middle school students to complete algebra by the end of the eighth grade. “The best preparation for the 21st Century’s global economy is a strong background in math, for today’s science and technical subjects require advanced mathematics, and algebra is the gatekeeper course for it,” the report says.

Among the other recommendations included in the report:

· Provide students integrated math, science, and technology instruction with a focus on problem-solving and real-world application.

· Enroll every middle school student into a world language course by the sixth grade.

· Provide all students instruction in the fine arts that develops literacy in music, dance, theater, and visual arts.

· Teach information literacy and use technology in all subjects.

· Provide accelerated and enriched instructional pathways for gifted and talented learners.

· Ensure that teachers are prepared to work specifically with middle school students.

The full report is available at:

http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/0000430a/nkjeqaqerynbvdvvdjsmhrkgbxzbvvtw/Middle_School_Task_Force_Report_6_4_08.pdf

Middle School Predictors of High School Achievement in Three

California School Districts

Conclusions from this report:

Academic achievement in middle school strongly predicts high school achievement and graduation.

Early middle school signals of academic success or failure include: grade retention, course failures, grades and test scores, and enrollment in algebra by 8th grade.

In each district in this study, only 1/3 of students who failed two or more courses in 7th grade graduated from high school.

Higher scores on the English portion of the 8th grade California Standards Test are strong predictors of passing the CAHSEE on the first attempt.

Schools and districts have the necessary information in middle school to identify students at risk of not completing high school or passing the CAHSEE.

Policymakers need to make sizeable investments for early interventions if they want to improve graduation outcomes and CAHSEE passing rates.

You can view the report at:

http://lmri.ucsb.edu/dropouts/download.php?file=policybrief13.pdf

What Happened to Seniors Who Did Not Pass the California High School Exit Exam?