Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Finding #11 ((McGuinn:The National Schoolmarm: "No Child Left…

- - - - • “In addition, a focus on state education politics and reform efforts can lead to the mistaken impression that it will be state policymakers alone who ultimately determine the fate of NCLB. It is important to recognize, however, that the law’s future rests in equal measure on political developments at the national level and that these developments are only partly related to state preferences and pressures.” (McGuinn, 2005, p. 46)
      - • “Although such issues were not insignificant, the focus on short- term factors ignores important longer-term developments in electoral politics and the partisan positions on federal education policy, which by 2000 had produced a strong bipartisan consensus about the need for an active, reformed federal role in education centered on standards, accountability, and choice.” (McGuinn, 2005, p. 44)
      - “Journalistic coverage of NCLB, for example, has generally implied that support for the law at the national level is tentative and emphasized the growing opposition to its mandates at the state level.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 44)
      - “Thus, before to NCLB, even in the states that had standards and tests in place, there were few consequences for schools that failed to perform well.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 46)
      - • “NCLB contained a number of elements that were strongly opposed by states, factions of the Republican and Democratic parties, and powerful interest groups” (McGuinn, 2005, pp. 45).
      - “NCLB's significance is in mandating that all states adopt a standards and testing regime, that they conform to federal timetables for achieving student proficiency, and that they suffer real consequences” (McGuinn, 2005, p.45).
      - • “Up to 150 districts may take part in flexibility demonstration projects under which they can pool all of their federal funding in exchange for meeting certain performance goals. The law consolidates a number of federal programs and creates a number of new ones such as Reading First and Mathematics and Science Partnerships.” (McGuinn, 2005, p. 43)
    - - “The U.S. Department of Education now functions as a national schoolmarm, hovering over state school reform efforts and whacking those states that fail to record satisfactory and timely progress toward federal education goals with financial penalties and mandatory corrective actions.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 68)
    - - “The political future of NCLB and the new, more assertive federal role in education will likely be determined by the extent and pace of school improvement, whether the public continues to support federal activism in schools, and the degree to which bipartisan consensus behind the law can continue to be sustained.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 63)
      - “Democrats and Republicans moved to the center on education – and endorsed a reform-oriented federal role based on standards, accountability, and choice – for both policy and political reasons.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 66)
    - - “Lingering conservative opposition to a strong federal role in education and the continuing liberal reservations about testing and accountability ensured that the 1994 reforms were relatively weak and weakly enforced.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 52)
      - “Though the new laws did not include many mandates for states, they nonetheless signified a sea change in federal education policy and codified the shift from the historical focus on ensuring equity for disadvantaged students and impoverished schools to a new commitment to improve the academic performance of all students and schools.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 52)
      - “In 1992, Bill Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee and a self-proclaimed New Democrat, called for a strong federal role in education, and the legislative enactments of the first two years of his administration helped to further nationalize politics and policymaking in education and to advance the cause of standards-based reform” (McGuinn, 2005, pp. 51).
    - - “Many educators and administrators have gone so far as to call for the law’s repeal, but this is not surprising given NCLB’s focus on accountability and its challenge to the established operating practices of schools, districts, and states.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 57)
        
        Only nineteen states were on schedule to release annual state report cards on school performance as required and fewer than half were meeting goals of making scientifically based technical assistance available to low-performing schools. (McGuinn,2005, p.58)
        
        The resolution declared that NCLB ‘‘represents the most sweeping intrusions into state and local control of education in the history of the United States’’ and will cost ‘‘literally millions of dollars that Virginia does not have.’’47 Fourteen other states petitioned the Department in March for permission to use alternative methods for calculating student academic progress. (McGuinn,2005, p.59)
    - - “The 1980s largely resulted in a stalemate as conservative proposals to abolish the Department of Education and to create private school choice programs were defeated and Democratic proposals for a significantly enlarged federal role were also blocked.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 50)
      - “Evidence also began to mount that that federal spending and programs had failed to result in improved achievement among disadvantaged students and that the performance of mainstream students had deteriorated.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 49)
      - “The Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 engaged the federal government directly in schools for the first time and the busing mandated by federal courts engendered vitriolic opposition in many parts of the country” (McGuinn, 2005, pp. 48).
    - - “If you go out there and ask soccer moms (or dads) whether they would rather have block grants or school computers, they're going to say school computers” (McGuinn, 2005, p.53).
      - “Polls showed that the public rejected Republican proposals to cut spending for the Department of Education and to eliminate the department altogether by wide margins, and these proposals permitted Democrats to depict the Republicans as hostile to education.” (McQuinn, 2005, p. 53)
        
        In addition to the intense policy fights in Congress, this period also saw a very public battle over ideas as Republicans devoted considerable time and energy to convincing the public that federal involvement in education was harmful, that funding was not the key element in improving schools, and that vouchers were not a radical idea. They largely failed on all three counts. (McGuinn, 2005, p.53)
    - - States also have to administer the math and reading portions of a national test, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), every other year to a sample of their students in grades 4 and 8 to check the effectiveness of state standards and to provide a measure of comparability of student performance across states. (McGuinn, 2005, p.42)
        
        Schools that fail for four consecutive years must implement corrective actions such as replacing staff or adopting a new curriculum, and in the fifth year the failing school must be reconstituted with a new governance structure (e.g., reopening as a charter school). (McGuinn, 2005, p.43)
    - - “In a question and answer session with education reporters in April 2000, for example, Clinton emphasized that "the fundamental lesson of the last seven years, it seems to me, is that education investment without accountability can be a real waste of money. But accountability without investment can be a real waste of effort. Neither will work without the other. If we want our students to learn more we should do both” (McGuinn, 2005, p.53).
        
        “The groups that were most interested in education were the key swing voters-independents, Catholics, married women” (McGuinn, 2005, p.56).
      - “In an effort to close the gap on education and appeal to swing voters-for whom education was a top issue-Bush adopted a pragmatic and centrist education agenda that called for an active but reformed federal role in promoting school improvement” (McGuinn, 2005, pp. 56)
        
        “Both advocated a stronger federal role in education and school improvement through higher academic standards, increased federal funding, expanded support for charter schools, and tests to allow the federal government to hold schools accountable for student achievement” (McGuinn, 2005, pp. 56).
- - - - “In addition to collecting test scores on sampled children in each school, self-applied questionnaires were given to the school principal, to the teachers, to parents (or legal guardians) of the tested children, and to the children themselves” (Gunnarsson, 2009, p.33).
      - Researchers gave students a test and used raw scores as an outcome measure.
    - - “In all four country cases, the gains from decentralization come mainly from schools that actually engaged in local school control (de facto autonomy) and not from all the schools that had the legal authority to manage schools (de jure autonomy).” (Gunnarsson, Orazem, Sanchez, & Verdisco, 2009, p.30-31)
      - “A general conclusion arising from these studies is that reforms that push the locus of decision making toward the school tend to produce improved student performance.” (Gunnarsson, 2009, p.30)
      - "In Latin America, as many of the developing regions of the world, efforts to encourage school autonomy and/or community participation are aimed at making schools more productive." (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 27)
      - “There are substantial differences across countries in how decisions are made regarding teacher hiring, evaluation, and compensation. In Argentina and Peru, hiring promotion and salary decisions are made at the state or provincial level, while in Bolivia and the Dominican Republic, it is the national authorities that manage personnel matters. In Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Honduras, teachers are hired at the state, municipal, or even school level, but salaries are set at the central level.” (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 28)
    - - “This study adds measures of local control over the school as additional inputs into the educational production function. To be precise, the observed test score for child i in school j in country k can be described by an equation of the form qijk p f(zijk, xjk, a1jk, a2jk, hijk)” (Gunnarsson. 2009. P.31)
      - “A sample encompassing eight Latin American countries shows no evidence that more autonomous schools perform better than less autonomous schools. These conclusions are not sensitive to controls for the plausible endogeneity of school autonomy. However, after correcting for endogeneity, the impact of parental participation on student test scores is consistently positive and significant. Reducing shortages in school supplies and infrastructure also improves student outcomes consistently” (Gunnarsson, 2009, p.47).
        
        “These findings should give pause to the widespread clamor for decentralization. It is highly likely that schools that willingly manage schools perform better than if they did not exert that effort"
    - - “The move toward more local control is motivated by the belief that de centralized control will result in better school outcomes, holding constant the level of resources devoted to the school. Local decision makers should have more information on local needs and conditions and can adjust resource allocations accordingly,” (Gunnarsson et al, 2009, p. 25-26).
      - School autonomy and parent participation vary more within countries than between countries
      - Schools with more educated parents and are more remote tend to act more autonomously
      - Devolution of power to local schools can't happen through central mandates alone
    - - Parents participating isn't random. "They are positively influenced by parental human capital and the size and remoteness of the community.” (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 47)
      - "after correcting for endogeneity, the impact of parental participation on student test scores is consistently positive and significant. Reducing shortages in school supplies and infrastructure also improves student outcomes consistently." (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 47)
    - - “Turning to our main interest, when treated as exogenous, school autonomy has no significant effect on test scores. Parental participation raises language test scores significantly but does not have a statistically significant effect on mathematics scores,” (Gunnarsson et al, 2009, p. 42).
      - “There is strong evidence that local school managerial effort is enhanced when the students have more educated parents. The joint test of the hypothesis that the three measures of parental attributes have no impact is strongly rejected in each equation."(Gunnarsson et al, 2009, p. 40).
      - “Jimenez and Sawada (1999) found that student attendance and test performance were higher in the EDUCO schools in El Salvador, schools that were managed by local parent committees,” (Gunnarsson et al, 2009, p. 30).
      - • “However, after correcting for endogeneity, the impact of parental participation on student test scores is consistently positive and significant. Reducing shortages in school supplies and infrastructure also improves student outcomes consistently.” (Gunnarsson, 2009, p.47)
- - - - Understanding teacher leadership through Teacher-Powered Schools
        
        “Over the past decade a growing body of research has confirmed that the quality of teaching is the single most powerful influencer of student learning. As a result, policymakers have turned their attention to increasing the effectiveness of teachers. The general consensus is our nation needs teachers who are ready, willing, and able to take on new, professional roles to transform teaching, schools, and schooling.” (Education Evolving, 2014, p. 3)
      - Teacher-Powered Schools
        
        “Teacher-powered schools are about fulfilling one of the nation’s greatest responsibilities: educating a citizenry that can meet the needs of the community and rise to the challenges of the 21st century global economy.” (p. 3).
        
        “The results are clear: schools thrive when teachers have the authority to lead collaboratively as partners and make the decisions that matter most for student success.” (Education Evolving,2014, pg 10)
        
        “For example, bringing responsibility and accountability together in teacher-powered schools gives teachers the opportunity to address in innovative ways the quality of entrants to the profession, tenure policies, evaluation, achievement, and assessment.” (Education Evolving,2014, pg 3)
        
        “They recognize that concepts of “teacher leadership” and “teacher professionalism” need not be stuck in the confines of the boss-worker framework, as is too often the case.” (p. 5).
        
        “In this way and others, these schools serve as a community-driven solution to improving student achievement while also elevating the possibilities of the teaching profession for teachers.” (p. 7).
        
        Located in 14 states
        
        suburban, urban, and rural settings
        
        70 teacher powered schools in the United States today
        
        “The types of teacher-powered arrangements vary widely. Teachers can secure authority to design and run whole schools, a department within a school, or a program that spans several schools.” (p. 3).
        
        autonomy secured by teachers also varies
        
        “Second only to increased parental involvement, teachers say that giving teachers more “voice” in school-based decisions is the single change that would most improve student learning.” (p. 6).
        
        Teachers who design and run teacher-powered schools:” (p. 10).
        
        “Collaborate to effectively lead” (p. 10).
        
        “Innovate” (p. 10).
        
        1 more item...
        
        “Accept ownership and accountability, and embrace a shared purpose.” (p. 10).
        
        1 more item...
        
        “Some teacher teams are charged with all decision-making responsibilities in ten identified areas of autonomy, including budgeting, selection and dismissal, evaluation, creating curricula, and developing school policy.” (p. 3).
      - Teacher-Powered Schools align accountability with authority in K-12
        
        “Teachers report having little influence on policy and even in their own workplaces frequently feel their experience and knowledge is not recognized or honored. A spring 2014 report from the Gallup organization found that, of 12 professions, teachers are least likely to agree with the statement, “My opinion seems to matter at work.”” (Education Evolving, 2014, p. 4)
        
        “The study noted that seasoned teachers often report that they can no longer teach a rich and varied curriculum because of fears their students’ test scores will suffer – their own fears, that their principals’ fears, and their district and state leaders’ fears.” (p. 4).
        “In short, teachers are being held accountable for the outcomes of decisions they do not make.
    - - “A grading policy handout and grade book entries both supported a change in grading based on an assessment rationale. After gaining administration approval, the grading change was presented to students and parents” (Cameron,2016, pg 44)
      - Methods
        
        “Classes were 40 min in length with 30 min of activity time per class on alternating school days. Observed physical education content during the study included volleyball, fitness, softball, Ultimate Frisbee, personal wellness, and team handball.” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 38)
        
        Setting and participants
        
        This study took place in a modernly affluent suburban community
        
        Data sources
        
        Data were collected in 2008. Researchers interacted with a group of students and teachers 4 times a week from 2008-2012
        
        Data Analysis
        
        Two researchers independently analyzed all the data
      - Teachers’ Perception of Change
        
        “There was also a perceived need for teachers to break out of the same old teaching habits. Even teachers who were highly experienced and had been working in the school for over a decade were able to change. It is apparently possible to have “veteran” teachers learn new tricks when there is a “perfect storm” of needing to change, wanting to change, having tools to change, and feeling supported to change:” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 46)
        
        • “If you focus on it and show the benefits of physical education that is when change will happen. I think it is a group effort and everyone is on the same front and we have assessments and will students complain about it? Of course they will. “Why am I writing in physical education?” You write in math, you write in history; I am not asking you to write every day; however, I need to see if you’re learning something. . . . I think change happens when a department as a whole is willing to make these changes and stick to them. [That’s when] I think change will happen in your classes.” (Cameron, 2016, p.46 )
      - “Two of the most often mentioned catalysts for change were students’ choices of content and grading.” (Cameron,2016, pg 44)
      - “In the current realm of educational reform, a model for successful change would tremendously benefit physical education teachers and their students” (Cameron,2016, pg 55)
      - “Teachers also believed that demonstrating that students are learning and that aligning content assessments and expectations with other high school subjects were important aspects of changing physical education.” (Cameron,2016, pg 45)
      - Students’ View of Change in Physical Education/Students’ Perspectives on Physical Education Experiences
        
        “Although students are obviously affected by changes, they appear to go along with these changes without much questioning or, perhaps, understanding. Their views on change are important, but they may have less to do with how change happens or continues. There were surprisingly no observations of students resisting change (whining about it), and in fact, many cases of students’ approval of new content were documented in field notes.” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 47) … “Students interviewed in this study appeared to see physical education as an enjoyable part of their school day. They also appreciated that it was different from other school subjects and liked being able to interact more with their friends and peers. For the most part, students reported that physical education was not a subject on their parents’ radar—none had been asked about physical education by parents or ever had a grading issue that required parental intervention.” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 49)
      - Discussion
        
        “Data from this study indicated that changes within all three Fullan phases were apparent: Program development was initiated, implemented, and institutionalized over 5 years beginning with the actions of two teachers who initially took the lead and continuing with all department teachers using assessments and a changed grading policy. This discussion is focused on highlighting how the results are and are not aligned with Fullan’s (2007) factors for successful school change.” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 50)
      - Results
        
        “Another important consideration for change related to instruction was raised by a teacher who described assessments as important tools to evaluate where students were and to adjust instruction accordingly.” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 42)
        
        “These teachers saw program change as a shared responsibility that included students’ assessment results as well as their views and took it upon themselves to adjust physical education content after analyzing results of students’ surveys.” (Cameron, et al, 2016, p. 45)
        
        • “Two of the most often mentioned catalysts for change were students’ choices of content and grading. Both are important in affecting students’ motivation and ownership of their physical education experiences. In many school reforms, the program and policy changes may be imposed in a top-down manner by administrators, but the MUs in this set seem to highlight that these changes were teacher generated.” (Cameron, 2016, p.44 )