Transcript First in Education, The Kansas Way

First in Education,
The Kansas Way
Regional Education Summits
October 2011
Kansas Association of School Boards
Measuring State Educational Attainment
• All data from national sources.
National Assessment of Education Progress, ACT and SAT tests, annual
Condition of Education report from U.S. Department of Education,
U.S. Census Bureau.
• Multiple measures rather than single test or statistic.
• Allows focus on states truly achieving at high levels
across all areas: “benchmark against the best.”
• Most recent data from 2008-10.
• Comparable over approximately 10 years, can be
updated.
Index: Average rank on 11 indicators
Mastering the Basics before High School
• Two indicators: % all students scoring basic or above on 4th and 8th grade
National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) reading and math
tests, plus free/reduced lunch only.
High School Completion
• Three indicators: two 4-year high school graduation rate estimates, plus %
of population under 25 with high school diploma or equivalent.
Preparation for College
• Three indicators: State average scores on college entrance test (ACT or
SAT) taken by most students in each state, percent taking majority test,
plus number of high scoring students per 1,000 graduates.
Adult Education Attainment
• Three indicators: % of population 25 and older with high school diploma or
equivalent, bachelor’s degree or an advanced degree.
Which Are the Top Seven States?
National Rankings in Ten State Region
•
•
•
•
•
Minnesota - 4
Kansas - 7
North Dakota - 8
South Dakota - 9
Nebraska - 10
•
•
•
•
•
Colorado - 11
Iowa - 15
Missouri - 24
Oklahoma - 38
Texas - 41
Kansas spends less than higher-ranking states
Current Spending Per Pupil, 2009
$16,271
$15,175
$12,118
$14,531
$11,932
$11,098
$9,951
Massachusetts
Vermont
New
Hampshire
Minnesota
Connecticut
New Jersey
Kansas
Kansas has higher child poverty than higher
ranking states
Percent School Age Children In Poverty
15.9%
13.0%
12.8%
10.6%
Massachusetts
Vermont
11.5%
12.6%
9.5%
New
Hampshire
Minnesota
Connecticut
New Jersey
Kansas
Key Findings
Unlike many, Kansas in Top 20 on all measures.
Examples: Florida and Texas rank 17th and 24th for mastering basics before high school,
but bottom 10 in graduation and bottom 5 for college preparation. Pennsylvania 11th
in high school completion but 35th in preparation for college.
Kansas ranks highest on national tests.
Mastering basics before high school: 9th for all students and 5th for low income; shows
positive impact of at-risk programs.
College preparation: 5th highest among ACT states, sixth best for high ACT and SAT
scores per 1,000 graduates.
Index recognizes states for percent of graduates taking either ACT or SAT; scores tend
to decline the more students tested. (Six states tested all graduates on ACT.)
Key Findings
Kansas lowest in high school completion: 15th
Most states ranking higher have less poverty, fewer minorities or spent more money.
Two measures of students who graduate in four years or less; third measure adds
students who graduate or get GED by age 24. Kansas does better in completion by
young adults; impact of “drop-out recovery” programs.
Missouri does better in 4-year graduation, much lower in graduates by age 24.
High attainment high school through college.
Kansas ranks 13th in adult attainment (16th for high school, 14th for bachelor’s degree,
16th for advanced degree). In region, only Colorado and Minnesota are higher.
Most states either high in high school and low in college completion, or the reserve.
Other regional states better in high school completion, but much worse in college
degrees.
Kansas has less of a “brain drain,” keeps or replaces college graduates.
Key Findings
More charter schools doesn’t improve results.
In top 10 states, 4 have no charter schools, 2 have lower percentage of students in
charter schools than Kansas; only three higher in charter enrollment.
In 11 states with most students in charters, six are in bottom half in performance and
six fell in national ranking since 2000.
Funding private schools doesn’t improve results.
In top 10 states, only 1 has vouchers for private schools (only for towns with no public
schools) and only 1 has tax credits for private school tuition or scholarships.
In 11 states with vouchers or tax credits, six declined in national rankings since 2000.
Why education matters:
U.S. average income by education level
$140,000
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
1999
2008
$60,000
$40,000
$20,000
$0
Not H.S.
Graduate
High School College, No Associate's Bachelor's
Only
Degree
Degree
Degree
Master's
Degree
Professional Doctorate
Degree
All Persons
Why education matters:
U.S. unemployment rate by education level
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
Not High School Graduate
High School Only
Some College or A.A.
Degree
Bachelor's or Higher
What education matters – state income
States Ranked by Adult Education Attainment
with 2008 Average Income Measures
$80,000
$70,000
$60,000
$50,000
Per Capita Income
$40,000
Household Inomc
Family Income
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
$0
Top 10
2nd 10
3rd Ten
4th Ten
Bottom 10
Why education matters – state poverty
States Ranked by Adult Education Attainment
with 2008 Average Poverty Measures
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
Individual Poverty Rate
8.0%
Family Poverty Rate
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
Top 10
2nd 10
3rd Ten
4th Ten
Bottom 10
Why education matters – regional income
States ranked by Adult Education Attainment
with 2008 Average Income Measures
$80,000
$70,000
$60,000
$50,000
$40,000
Per Capita Income
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
$0
Household Inomc
Family Income
Why education matters – regional poverty
States ranked by Adult Education Attainment
with 2008 Average Poverty Measures
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
Indivdual Poverty Rate
Family Poverty Rate
First in Education – the Kansas Way
• Kansas public schools stand out for high
achievement, high value for spending.
• Other states are also improving; Kansas
students must complete with the best in the
nation and world.
• Despite progress, many students still leave
school without all skills they need.
• We can’t be satisfied with 7th in the nationwe want to be first in education!
Reason for celebration
Kansas and U.S. Average ACT Scores 1994-2011
22.2
22.0
21.8
21.6
21.4
21.2
21.0
20.8
20.6
20.4
20.2
Kansas
U.S.
Reason for concern
Kansas Average ACT Scores by Racial Groups
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
White
African-American
Hispanic
2002
2011
Asian
Other
How do we become First in Education?
Working to answer that question:
• KASB Legislative Committee – 15 regional
representatives met July 9, meets Nov. 5 to finalize
report after hearing from members, and –
• KASB study committees of board members and
superintendents – reports to Board and Legislative
Committee on Nov. 5, PLUS last year’s Committee on
Funding Public Education.
• KASB Delegate Assembly Dec. 3 in Overland Park –
members should study, discuss, attend and vote!
What Kansans believe about education
• Review of state constitution.
• Kansas Conversation – thousands of Kansans
answered three questions:
• (1) What are schools doing to improve
education, (2) what do we need to add or
change, (3) what should we stop doing?
• Public opinion survey of 500 Kansas voters.
• Regional meetings of school leaders.
Key Constitutional Provisions
• Educational Improvement. Legislature shall provide
for educational improvement by establishing and
maintaining public schools. (Article 6.1)
• Suitable Finance. Legislature shall make suitable
provisions for finance of the educational interests of
the state. (Article 6.6.b)
• Local Leadership. Public schools shall be maintained,
developed and operated by locally elected boards,
under the general supervision of an elected state
board. No public education funds may be controlled by
religious organizations. (Article 6.5, 6.2.a, 6.6.c)
Kansans spoke about school improvement
• Overwhelming support for public schools, high
evaluations for quality, safety, citizenship.
• Support for broad curriculum, preparation for career
and life, extra-curricular programs and electives are
important – don’t narrow the focus.
• Provide more individual instruction to help all
students learn, improve teaching basics and life skills.
• Stop emphasis on narrow reading and math tests
under No Child Left Behind.
• Improve educator effectiveness and accountability.
• Increase public understanding and support.
Legislative Committee Recommendations:
Improvement
• Broader curriculum. Maintain the current breadth of courses and
activities and expand focus from college preparation to broader career
education and personal life skills.
• Individual student focus. Strengthen support programs based on
individual student needs, from early childhood to preparing all students
for success beyond high school.
• New Accreditation and accountability. Move from the current narrow
focus on annual reading and math tests to more meaningful assessment of
student growth and 21st century skills.
• Effective educators. Improve teacher training, licensure, evaluation and
retention policies while providing appropriate protections and benefits,
including the state retirement system.
• Public engagement. Increase public understanding of educational issues
and support for improvement.
Kansans spoke about suitable finance
• Funding for public schools should be top priority,
funding cuts are hurting quality.
• All students should have access to high quality
instruction, buildings and technology, regardless of
where they live.
• Funding to help students with learning deficits is
critically important.
• Public education is worth the investment in tax
dollars.
Legislative Committee Recommendations:
Suitable Finance
• State educational interests. Fund as state responsibility all educational
interests as defined by requirements of the Legislature, State Board of
Education and federal government, including educational outcomes.
• Funding Equity. Balance increased local funding options with increased
state equalization aid.
• At-Risk Students. Provide funding that recognizes the impact of economic
disadvantage and other factors in student success, and does not punish
students and schools for improving outcomes.
• Tax Policy. Improve understanding of the impact of narrowing the state
tax base, and support a tax system that balances economic development
with constitutionally suitable education funding.
Kansans spoke about local leadership
• Decisions about public education should be made at
the local level.
• Unfunded mandates should be funded or
eliminated.
• Schools have much more flexibility to be innovative;
should challenge the status quo.
Legislative Committee Recommendations:
Local Leadership
• State mandates. Review state mandates and identify candidates for
possible repeal.
• Local decision-making. Support local choices in education policy and use
of funding unless the school persistently fails to demonstrate
improvement.
• Innovation. Promote flexibility under supervision of local boards, rather
than outside of local accountability.
• State Supervision. Maintain an independent State Board of Education,
directly accountable to voters, with authority over the Commissioner and
Department of Education for general supervision of schools.
• Public funding and non-public education. Maintain both the
independence of religious and home schools from public funds and the
accountability of education funding through local boards.
Education Improvement Committee:
• Require boards to have local professional learning
plans for board members.
• Support basic directions of proposed new school
accreditation, focus on MTSS model and career/tech
education, will need funding and KASB input.
• Support increased parent engagement for success.
• Identified 8 priority issues from Governor Parkinson’s
Drop-out Prevention and Graduation report.
Tax, Education and Economic
Development Committee:
• Continue to favor balanced tax system – require solid
evidence of success before changing mix, phase-in
changes.
• Consider role of education and infrastructure in
economic development as well as “low taxes.”
• Work with business and economic development
leaders to ensure funding is provided for necessary
skills.
• Concern over cost of federal and state mandates.
District Partnerships for Increased
Efficiency Committee:
• Post Audit efficiency studies of peer groups helpful.
• Center for Innovative School Leadership efficiency
review – about 10 per year.
• KASB services: workers compensation, gas
purchasing.
• Recommendations to promote consolidation, shared
services, and implement efficiencies through
incentives.
What’s next?
• Local boards: discuss Legislative Committee
proposals for final action by KASB Delegate
Assembly; endorse by board action.
• Build partnerships with supportive organizations at
all levels.
• Work with State Board of Education, Board of
Regents, Governor and Legislature on specific
proposals.
• Create community plans to advocate for and
implement education improvement strategies.