CAN ACCESS BALANCE THE EFFECT OF POVERTY?
Predictors
of NAEP grade 4, 2007, 51 states
|
predictors
|
beta
|
t
|
P
|
|
Poverty
|
-0.72
|
7.42
|
0
|
|
Access
|
0.53
|
1.62
|
0.055
|
r2 = .63
Access = bks/student in
school libraries, circulation in public libraries
Predictors of PIRLS:
Predictors
of the reading test: PIRLS 2006
|
predictor
|
|
P
|
|
poverty
|
-0.41
|
0.005
|
|
independent
reading in school
|
0.16
|
0.14
|
|
library:
500 books
|
0.35
|
0.005
|
|
Instruction
|
-0.19
|
0.085
|
r2 = .63
Krashen,
S., Lee, S.Y. and McQuillan, J. 2012. Is the library important? Multivariate
studies at the national and international level. Journal of Language and
Literacy Education, 8(1): 26-36.
Replication: PIRLS 2011
|
Predictor
|
beta
|
p
|
|
SES
|
0.52
|
0.01
|
|
library: 5000 bks
|
0.20
|
0.08
|
|
class libr
|
0.08
|
0.28
|
|
parent read
|
0.065
|
0.31
|
|
early lit
|
-0.26
|
0.04
|
|
Instruction
|
-0.016
|
0.5
|
r2 = .62
Note: Parental reading and classroom library correlated with
PIRLS reading scores, but the effect disappeared in the multiple regression.
Note: Poverty and access are the main predictors of reading
achievement in all studies.
Some
Disturbing Data: In
general, countries with high SES have high PIRLS reading scores and people
(children and adults) say they like to read:
"baseline" data –
|
Country
|
HDI
|
parent
likes
|
child
likes
|
PIRLS
|
|
Hong
Kong
|
0.898
|
14
|
21
|
571
|
|
Taiwan
|
0.882
|
17
|
23
|
553
|
|
Italy
|
0.874
|
24
|
23
|
541
|
|
Singapore
|
0.866
|
21
|
22
|
567
|
|
MEANS
|
.88
(.01)
|
19
(4.4)
|
22.3
(.96)
|
558
(13.7)
|
|
Baseline
|
.9
(.02)
|
43.7
(5.2)
|
33
(2.5)
|
538.4
(9.7)
|
But in
some countries with high SES and high PIRLS scores, there is much less
enthusiasm for reading (Hong Kong, Taiwan, Italy, Singapore).
"Test-prep"
countries? PIRLS scores = true compentence?
Loh,
E.K.Y. and Krashen, S. 2015. Patterns in PIRLS performance: The importance of
liking to read, SES, and the effect of test prep. Asian Journal of Education
and e-Learning 3(1). http://ajouronline.com/index.php?journal=AJEEL
An allergy
to SES and access to books? Fryer & Levitt (2004): SES accounts for 2/3 of
gap, books in home accounts for the rest.
Fryer,
R. & Levitt, S. 2004. Understanding the black-white test score gap in the
first two years of school. The Review of Economics and Statistics 86(2):
447-464.
Meanwhile library funding is
being cut in the US. School library cuts greater in high poverty areas (American
Library Association, 2010. The State of America's Libraries; Kelley, M. 2010,
Budget survey: Bottoming out? Library Journal, 2010.).
What
about e-books?
Major increase in the US: 28% of adults! http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/01/16/e-reading-rises-as-device-ownership-jumps/
Who owns e-book readers?
|
Income
|
tablet
|
e-reader
|
|
under 30,000
|
26%
|
14%
|
|
30 to 49,999
|
45%
|
35%
|
|
50 to 74,999
|
47%
|
42%
|
|
75,000+
|
65%
|
53%
|
Pew report. Adults age 18 or
over.
The cost: $80 to $200. http://ebook-reader-review.toptenreviews.com/
The cost of e-books: average best-seller - $10 to $15 http://www.howmuchisit.org/ebooks-cost/
To provide real access, e-books
and e-book readers need to be A LOT cheaper.
THE
COMMON CORE AND THE MOVEMENT TO "TEST THE WORLD"
THE
US: A CASE STUDY
THE COMMON CORE = standards plus
tests [NOTE: standards and tests go together. Tests are the spawn of the
standards (Alfie Kohn and Jeb Bush!)]
Rationale
for Common Core standards & TESTS: American schools are “broken”
Evidence
= Performance on international test scores. We are "taking a
shellacking." - an odd view of
economics
BUT:
American raw scores – not spectacular but not
horrible, tied for 10th/60 on PISA 2009 reading (15 yr olds)
When researchers control for
poverty, American scores are excellent:
Carnoy,
M and Rothstein, R. 2013a, What Do International Tests Really Show Us about
U.S. Student Performance. Washington DC: Economic Policy Institute. 2012. http://www.epi.org/),
plus many other studies.
Carnoy and Rothstein (2013b) Response from Martin Carnoy and Richard Rothstein to
OECD/PISA Comments (by Andreas Schleicher, OECD Deputy Director for Education
and Special Advisor on Education Policy to the OECD’s Secretary-General,
January 14, 2013) regarding our report “What do
international tests really show about American student performance?”
(Economic Policy Institute 2013)
If US had same
social class distribution as top three (Canada, Finland, Korea), US score would
be 518. Social class accounts for about a third of the math gap, one-half of
reading gap.
Rank improves
from 14 to 6 in reading, from 25 to 13 in math (Carnoy and Rothstein, 2013b)
Does not consider high
concentration of high-poverty students in many schools. (Carnoy and Rothstein, 2013a). Berliner: Not
just percent high-poverty but their concentration in schools. High levels of poverty concentrated = less
access to books, other services provided by better-funded schools and neighborhoods.
Percent US children in
poverty: now 25%. When only 23%, it was 2nd highest of all
industrialized countries. Finland =
5.3%. The problem is poverty. NOT: teaching, schools of ed, unions, parents,
lack of national standards/tests
POVERTY: Improve schools to
cure poverty (US Dept of Education), or cure poverty to improve schools? "We are likely
to find that the problems of housing and education, instead of preceding the
elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first
abolished.” (Martin Luther King, 1967,
Final Words of Advice)
Dr. King was right: Devastating effect of aspects of poverty on school
achievement (Berliner, 2009)
a. Food deprivation/nutrition
b. Environmental toxins (eg the case of lead)
c. Lack of health care (eg school nurses in high and low poverty schools)
d. Lack of access to books: home, school, community
SOLUTION
1. Full employment at a living wage for honest work
2. Short term: protect children from the effects of poverty
a. No child left unfed (S. Ohanian)
b. Improved health care at school (eg school nurses)
c. Provide access to books: support libraries
WHERE WILL WE GET THE MONEY? REDUCE TESTING (NUT = no unnecessary testing)
Current level of CC$$ testing, compared to NCLB
NCLB: end of year: CC$$: end of year, interim (formative), possible
pretest
NCLB: math, reading: CC$$: math, writing, sometimes science > test
everything (standards being created for other subjects)
NCLB: 3-8, once in HS: CC$$: P-12
"How much testing?"
http://sdkrashen.com/articles.php?cat=4
Evidence
supporting increased testing? NONE
More standardized high stakes tests do not
mean better performance: Nichols, Glass & Berliner, 2006.
Adding SATs to grades does not improve
prediction of college success: (Bowen, Chingos, & McPherson, 2009; Geiser
& Santelices, 2007) = teacher evaluation of students might be more valid?
The great testing boondoggle:
all tests must be online. connect all students/provide
computers/upgrade and replace/new "innovations"
The .01% invests very little, and takes NO RISK: Taxpayers pay for
everything, and if it fails: students/teachers suffer, teachers blamed, but
corporations win: Call for more tests and more technology.
We can
protect children from much of the impact of poverty for a fraction of the cost
of new tests. A modest proposal: Keep (an improved) NAEP, drop the rest.
The
current debate: renewal of Elementary & Secondary Education
Act (ESEA)
The opt-out movement: http://unitedoptout.com/about/
The impact on proposals for the new law:
-
Keep NCLB levels
-
Test only every few years: A real
change or "expanding the floor of the cage."
-
Conjecture: amount of testing
deliberately made excessive, so it could be cut back a little, enough to
satisfy some critics. The profits remain = online testing, bleeds legitimate
school programs.
TESTING
THE WORLD: http://edushyster.com/?p=3559
WORLD-WIDE testing: Learning Metrics Task Force: http://www.brookings.edu/about/centers/universal-education/learning-metrics-task-force "to
improve learning we must be able to measure and monitor its outcomes" (p.
30).
Seven areas to be tested: physical well-being
(eg nutrition, exercise), social & emotional (eg conflict resolution, civic
values, mental health), culture and the arts (eg awareness and respect for
diversity, creative arts), learning approaches and cognition (reasoning and
problem-solving, critical thinking), numeracy and mathematics, science and
technology, and: literacy and communication
Combined test to be given at
the end of primary school; reading also at end of grade three
"Ready to learn"
testing on entry to primary school:"five of the seven domains: physical well-being, social
and emotional, literacy and communication, learning approaches and cognition,
and numeracy and mathematics."
p.26: Citizen of the World: Measuring among youth the demonstration of values and skills necessary
for success in their communities, countries and the world. Beyond reading
and numeracy …
Literacy and communication
testing
•
Early childhood level:
Receptive language, Expressive language, Vocabulary, Print
Awareness
•
Primary: Oral fluency, oral comprehension, reading
fluency, reading comprehension, receptive vocabulary, written
expression/composition
•
Post-primary: Speaking and listening, writing and
reading
Co-Chairs of Learning Task Force
Pratham – Rukmini
Banerji, Director of Programs
Pearson – Michael
Barber, Chief Education Advisor
UNICEF – Geeta
Rao Gupta, Deputy Executive Director (Programmes)
The long term goal: The end of the teaching profession - http://skrashen.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-end-of-teaching-profession.html
The
US education budget, K-12 – $600 billion, much is teacher benefits, retirement,
salary
To
elminate benefits/retirement
- hire temps
- Flipped classrooms and glorify technology in general
- Eliminate due process
- No raise for seniority
- Stress importance of evalution (sends message that teachers are
incompetent)
- Attack unions
- Claim schools are failing because of bad teaching
More
money left for computers, with no supporting data, obsolete by the time they
are installed
National Education Technology Plan, 2010: US Department of Education insists that we
introduce massive technology into the schools immediately, because of the
"the pressing need to transform American education ...", even if this means doing it imperfectly:
Repairs can be done later: "... we do not have the luxury of time: We must
act now and commit to fine-tuning and midcourse corrections as we go."
Assumptions:
(1) our schools are really really
inadequate, and we must rush to fix them;
(2) technology is the major part of the fix;
and
(3) imperfect technology is better than no
technology.
-
No comments:
Post a Comment