Schools are under growing pressure to make sure that students are ready for work or job training, as well as college, when they graduate from high school. But employers say their young hires haven’t learned the reading, writing, and verbal-communication skills that are most important to a successful working life.
That gap between reality and expectations begs a boxful of questions about whether there’s a preparation problem and, if so, how to solve it.
Should K-12 schools add workplace-oriented literacy skills to their already-heavy lineup of classics like the five-paragraph essay? Who should teach young people how to write an environmental-impact report or explain quarterly business results to investors: High schools? Colleges? Or are such skills better learned at work or in job-training programs?
Surveys of employers paint a picture of discontent. Executives and hiring managers report that they have trouble finding candidates who communicate well. Good oral-communication skills, in particular, rank especially high on employers’ wish lists, alongside critical thinking and working in teams.
But do companies’ hiring struggles mean that K-12 schools, colleges, and job-training programs are doing a poor job of preparing students for work?
Some labor economists argue that the much-ballyhooed “skills gap” is caused not by inadequate career preparation but by companies’ refusal to provide the pay and training necessary to get the workers they need. And many educators argue that the primary purpose of schooling isn’t to create a jobs pipeline but to prepare young people to be informed, active citizens.
Education Week‘s new special report on literacy and the workplace won’t be able to resolve these arguments for you. But it can give you a glimpse of how some schools and employers are grappling with the workplace-literacy demands that young people face. Relatively few K-12 schools, it seems, are seriously exploring this kind of work…
Read full article click here, may require ED Week subscription
President Donald Trump repeated a few promises related to the Common Core State Standards and education governance from his 2016 campaign, and also praised Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, at a town hall of business executives in Washington on Tuesday.
In response to a question about college- and career readiness at the event, Trump sharply criticized the academic performance of students New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, while also praising charter schools. “I don’t call it an experiment any more. It’s far beyond an experiment,” he said of charters. (More on recent academic performance of students in Chicago and L.A. here.)
He then moved on to one of his key priorities for education: shifting control from federal to state and local leaders…
Mick Zais, President Donald Trump’s nominee to fill the No. 2 spot at the U.S. Department of Education, has some big things in common with his would-be boss, U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos.
They’re both believers in school choice and a smaller foot-print for the federal government in K-12. They both like the idea of a slimmer bureacracy.
By Dr. Elizabeth Primas (Program Manager, NNPA/ESSA Public Awareness Campaign)
Standards have always been a part of society. From standards of measurement and time to driver’s licenses, food preparation in restaurants and language, standards keep us healthy and safe and help us communicate with each other.
In the 1980s, the United States began to expand and formalize public education standards. This process was the driving force behind the education reform movement. Standards in education were supposed to set clear guidelines for what all students were expected to learn and be able to do. The curriculum and assessments were supposed to be aligned with established standards.
In 2001, with the signing of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) by President W. Bush, a significant emphasis on standards took on a life of its own. Under NCLB, all states were required to develop standards and assessments to measure student achievement. Problems occurred when states developed individual standards that measured knowledge and skill levels. There was no way to determine if a student passing one state’s standards was equivalent to a student’s level of accomplishment in another state. Test that were national, like the PSAT, SAT, ACT, and the National Educational Assessment of Progress (NAEP), all indicated that students with passing grades in high school, that met state standards, were not necessarily prepared to be successful in college and career.
In 2009, there was a state-led effort to develop the Common Core State Standards (CCSS); the effort was launched by state leaders, including governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, two territories and the District of Columbia; CCSS was supposed to remedy the differentiation in state standards under NCLB. The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) worked with educational agencies to create one set of standards that would be uniform for the country. That same year, the Obama Administration developed the Race to the Top Fund, a $4.35 billion dollar competitive grant program designed to ensure that all students graduated high school prepared for college, career, and life. Race to the Top used financial incentives to encourage states to adopt CCSS.
Along with common standards, came high-stakes testing. Most states adopted one of two assessments: the Smarter Balance Assessment or the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). Many stakeholders saw high-stakes assessments as unrealistic, because all children were required to perform at world-class levels, merely by raising expectations and imposing punishments and sanctions on schools and children who fell short of the standards. The standard implementation did not consider students with persistent challenges that could have impeded them from reaching high-levels of achievement. There was no flexibility in meeting these standards, regardless of socioeconomic status, age, race, gender, cultural or ethnic background, disabilities or family circumstances.
The discussions around the implementation of standards did acknowledge that student learning abilities were not homogeneous. Yet, schools seldom provided the range of training, personnel, and strategy needed to meet all students. Subsequently, when students didn’t meet the goals, they were retained and schools faced sanctions.
Research has indicated that minority students, including English Language Learners (ELL), students living in poverty, and students with disabilities are disproportionately represented in the group of students that do not make sufficient and significant growth to meet the standards and objectives promoted.
Under the “Every Student Succeeds Act” (ESSA), states have been given the leeway to: continue using the Common Core State Standards and/or create and adopt their own rigorous standards. Along with the freedom to select standards best suited for specific state demographics, states can also select what assessments they administer. As states submit their ESSA plans, many states have steered away from the CCSS. Several states have indicated that they will not continue using Smarter Balance or PARCC to measure standard mastery.
The only way to be sure what standards your child must meet is for you, the parent, to get involved, and stay engaged at every level. Your child is our future, and we ask all parents to remain focused in the pursuit of their education.
Every meeting that involves your child’s education is important. Be there, be vigilante, stay persistent, have your voice heard.
Dr. Elizabeth Primas is an educator, who spent more than 40 years working towards improving education for children of diverse ethnicities and backgrounds. Dr. Primas is the program manager for the NNPA’s Every Student Succeeds Act Public Awareness Campaign. Follow Dr. Primas on Twitter @elizabethprimas.
In December 2015, President Barack Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which replaced No Child Left Behind (NCLB), as the nation’s major law governing public schools. ESSA retains the requirement that states test all students in reading and math in grades three through eight and once in high school, as well as the requirement that states ensure those tests align with states’ college- and career-ready standards. However, the law makes significant changes to the role of tests in state education systems.
For example, ESSA requires states to include a broader set of factors in school accountability systems rather than just test scores; provides funding for states and districts to audit and streamline their testing regimes; and allows states to cap the amount of instructional time devoted to testing. It also eliminates the requirement under the Obama administration’s NCLB waiver program that states evaluate teacher performance based on, in part, student test score growth. Taken together, these provisions greatly reduce the stakes of state tests for schools and teachers. They also give states substantially more autonomy over how they define school success and the interventions they employ when schools fail to demonstrate progress.
The likely result would be a significant reduction in the level of angst regarding testing among teachers and parents. Today, states have an opportunity to use the new flexibility embedded in ESSA to develop stronger testing systems without the pressure of NCLB’s exclusive focus on summative tests. They also have the opportunity to innovate: Through a new pilot program that will allow seven states to develop radically new approaches to assessments, states can experiment with performance based and instructionally embedded tests and use technology to advance testing.
These pilot states will have the freedom to imagine a testing system of the future in which standardized tests taken on one day each year are no longer the typical way of assessing student learning.
Over a six-month span, researchers at the Center for American Progress (CAP) interviewed dozens of parents, teachers, school leaders, system leaders, advocates, assessment experts, and policy leaders in an attempt to identify what can be done to ensure that tests are being used in service of teaching and learning. Although they are few and far between, models of coherent, aligned teaching and learning systems do exist.
In these systems, the curriculum and end of year summative assessments are aligned with high academic standards. Interim tests, administered at key points throughout the year, provide a check on whether students are on track to meet the grade level standards. Short, high-quality formative tests give real-time feedback to teachers and parents so that they can use the results to inform instruction and to course correct when needed. School and system leaders use data to determine if all students receive the high-quality education they deserve and to provide more support or intervention if the results show that individual students, entire classrooms, or schools are off track.
Unfortunately, these models are the exception. Because the problems with testing are structural and systemic, they do not lend themselves to an easy fix. Nevertheless, ESSA provides an opportunity for a fresh start, and system leaders can capitalize on the flexibility in the new law to make changes in the short and long run to develop a system of better, fairer, and fewer tests.
What’s important to keep in mind is that in the new education policy world of ESSA, testing systems continue to need to be refined–not discarded. Parents and teachers want annual standardized testing to continue. Despite media reports to the contrary, there remains significant support for tests. But parents also want tests to be useful and to provide value for their children. Within this changing policy landscape CAP recommends that states:
Develop assessment principles;
Conduct alignment studies;
Provide support for districts in choosing high-quality formative and interim tests;
Demand that test results are delivered in a timely fashion; and
Increase the value of tests for schools, parents, and students.
CAP also recommends that schools should provide parents with the data from all assessments–including formative, interim, and summative assessments-along with individualized resources to help their children improve. CAP recommendations for school districts, schools, and the U.S. Department of Education are also detailed in this report.
A national survey of teachers finds that a plurality believe that the Every Student Succeeds Act won’t ultimately help schools, while a majority don’t think state education agencies have sought enough input from teachers in developing their state ESSA plans.
The survey was commissioned by Educators for Higher Standards, a project of the Collaborative for Student Success (which has advocated on behalf of the Common Core State Standards and aligned assessments), and released on Wednesday. It also found that teachers have mixed views on whether states will ultimately make big changes thanks to ESSA, as well as whether ESSA’s increased flexibility for districts will create improved conditions for educators. And in general, teachers said they are pessimistic about the general direction of the nation’s public schools.
The Educators for Higher Standards polled 800 teachers, and broke out separate results for “teacher advocacy leaders” who are engaged in education advocacy work. The survey also asked the general public certain questions about education. On a few key questions, those educators involved in educators expressed more optimism about what could happen under ESSA…
The Senate education committee is meeting Tuesday to vote on President Donald Trump’s nominee for education secretary, Betsy DeVos, a billionaire school choice advocate, best known for her work chairing the American Federation for Children.
A broad contingent of civil rights organizations, educators, and advocates have come out against DeVos’ nomination.There’s a huge social media campaign to defeat her, and in-person protests across the country. At the same time, she has the support of Republican policymakers, like former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, and even some Democrats and former Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.
After a bumpy confirmation hearing, committee Democrats asked DeVos about 800 questions to flesh out her views on key K-12 issues. The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Patty Murray, of Washington, asked DeVos some 140 questions, and made the answers public. (You can read them here.)…
President Donald Trump’s nominee for education secretary understands states’ desire for stability as they head into the Every Students Succeeds Act era, according to the executive director of the Council of the Chief State School Officers.
CCSSO leader Chris Minnich also said that after having a conversation with Betsy DeVos on Tuesday, he had the impression that she understood states’ desire to take the lead in decisions about school choice, but did not spell out how she planned to approach school choice as it relates to states.
“We do want flexibility in the states to customize [school choice]. She clearly said to me that the states need to be in control of…
Schools are under growing pressure to make sure that students are ready for work or job training, as well as college, when they graduate from high school. But employers say their young hires haven’t learned the reading, writing, and verbal-communication skills that are most important to a successful working life.
Mick Zais, President Donald Trump’s nominee to fill the No. 2 spot at the U.S. Department of Education, has some big things in common with his would-be boss, U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos.
The Senate education committee is meeting Tuesday to vote on President Donald Trump’s nominee for education secretary, Betsy DeVos, a billionaire school choice advocate, best known for her work chairing the American Federation for Children.