Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence

Teach For America has generated glowing press reports, but the evidence regarding whether this alternative teacher-training program works is very unclear, according to a policy brief released today by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. The brief, Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence, is written by professor Julian Vasquez Heilig of the University of Texas at Austin, and professor Su Jin Jez of California State University, Sacramento. It offers a comprehensive overview of research on the Teach For America (TFA) program, which recruits graduates of elite colleges to teach for two years in hard-to-staff low-income rural and urban schools. Overall, Jez and Heilig argue, the impact of TFA teachers on student achievement is decidedly mixed and dependent upon the experience level of the TFA teachers and the group of teachers with whom they are compared. Studies show that TFA teachers perform fairly well when compared with one segment of the teaching population: other teachers in the same hard-to-staff schools, who are less likely to be certified or traditionally prepared. Compared with that specific group of teachers, TFA teachers "perform comparably in raising reading scores and a bit better in raising math scores," the brief's authors write. Conversely, studies which compare TFA teachers with credentialed non-TFA teachers find that "the students of novice TFA teachers perform significantly less well in reading and mathematics than those of credentialed beginning teachers," Heilig and Jez write. And in a large-scale Houston study, in which the researchers controlled for experience and teachers' certification status, standard certified teachers consistently outperformed uncertified TFA teachers of comparable experience levels in similar settings. The evidence suggests that TFA teachers do get better -- if they stay long enough to become fully credentialed. Those experienced, fully credentialed TFA teachers "appear to do about as well as other, similarly experienced, credentialed teachers in teaching reading ... [and] as well as, and sometimes better than, that comparison group in teaching mathematics," Heilig and Jez write. However, more than half of TFA teachers leave after two years, and more than 80 percent after three. So it's impossible to know whether those who remain have improved because of additional training and experience -- or simply because of "selection bias:" they were more effective than the four out of five TFA teachers who left. The authors note that this high turnover of TFA teachers also results in significant recurring expenses for recruiting and training replacements. Heilig and Jez urge schools and districts to devote resources to a number of proven remedies for improving achievement, including mentoring programs that pair novice and expert teachers, universal pre-school and reduction in early grade class size. The authors conclude, "Policymakers and stakeholders should consider TFA teachers for what they are -- a slightly better alternative when the hiring pool is comprised primarily of uncertified and emergency teachers -- and continue to consider a broad range of solutions to reshape our system of education to ensure that all students are completing schools with the education they need to be successful."This policy brief was produced by the Education and the Public Interest Center (EPIC) at the University of Colorado and the Education Policy Research Unit (EPRU) at Arizona State University with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. About The Great Lakes Center The mission of the Great Lakes Center is to improve public education for all students in the Great Lakes region through the support and dissemination of high quality, academically sound research on education policy and practices

Política universal de vouchers no Chile: Compreendendo seu impacto sobre a educação pública municipal chilena

Findings from this study show that educational and mobility opportunities for families and students participating in the Chilean voucher system are not homogenously distributed. Some families and students use and benefit from the system, while others will remain marginalized. The quantitative results in this study demonstrate that students of relatively higher SES living in mid-high or mid-low poverty districts receive the benefit from vouchers. These students may move from one public school to another, from a public school to private-voucher school in the same area, from one district to another, or from a public school in an area to a private-voucher school in another district. Meanwhile, low-income counterparts living in high-poverty areas are excluded from the system and tend to remain at their public neighborhood school.El presente estudio muestra que las oportunidades de movilidad educativa y elección de escuela de familias y estudiantes que participan del sistema de vouchers chileno no están homogéneamente distribuidas. Algunas familias y estudiantes se benefician del sistema, mientras otros se ven segregados o marginalizados. Los resultados cuantitativos de este estudio muestran que los estudiantes de clase media que poseen una posición relativamente más aventajada, y que viven en áreas urbanas de nivel socioeconómico medio-alto o medio-bajo, son quienes más se benefician. Estos estudiantes pueden trasladarse de un establecimiento educacional público (municipal) a otro, de un establecimiento público a uno privado (subvencionado) en la misma comuna, de un municipio o distrito escolar a otro, o de un establecimiento público (municipal) de una comuna a uno privado (subvencionado) de otra. Como contrapartida, los estudiantes de menor nivel socioeconómico, y que viven en las zonas urbanas de mayor pobreza, son quienes más excluidos están del sistema y quienes tienen las menores posibilidades de moverse y elegir un establecimiento educacional, por lo que permanecen estudiando en la escuela pública (municipal) de su barrio, altamente segregados y marginados, y sin generar vínculos sociales con otros.O presente estudo mostra que as possibilidades de mobilidade educativa e a escolha de escolas por famílias e alunos que participam do sistema de vouchers chileno não estão homogeneamente distribuídas. Algumas famílias e alunos se beneficiam do sistema, enquanto outras se veem segregados ou marginalizados. Os resultados quantitativos do estudo mostram que os alunos de classe média que vivem em áreas urbanas de nível socioeconômico médio-alto ou médio-baixo são os que mais se beneficiam. Esses estudantes podem se movimentar de um estabelecimento público (municipal) a outro, de um estabelecimento público a um privado (subvencionado) na mesma área, de um município ou distrito escolar a outro, ou de um estabelecimento público (municipal) de uma área a um privado (subvencionado) de outra. Em contrapartida, os alunos de menor nível  socioeconômico,  que vivem nas zonas urbanas de maior pobreza, são os que estão mais excluídos do sistema e os que têm as menores possibilidades de deslocar-se e escolher um estabelecimento educacional, tendendo a permanecer estudando na escola pública (municipal) de seu bairro, altamente segregados e marginados, como dificuldades para criar vínculos sociais com outros

Entendiendo el Sistema de Vouchers en los Distritos Públicos Urbanos de Santiago de Chile: Respuestas de los Administradores Educacionales al Mercado Educativo

In this study we examine how school leaders in urban districts have responded to the Chilean universal school voucher system. We conducted interviews with public district school officials and principals in Santiago, Chile. We found that school leaders in the wealthy public schools have confronted the market policy by implementing similar cream-skimming measures as private-voucher schools. In comparison, the poorer public-municipal schools are not able to select their students. The respondents in our study elucidated that parent and student choice is limited because specific family and student characteristics (i.e. SES background, test scores), as well as the family/student residence within the city (in a relatively wealthy or poor section of the city) influence the spectrum of opportunities a student will have and the school he/she will enter. As a result, the voucher system introduces educational opportunities for students who have the capital (pecuniary and non-pecuniary) to enable a move from one public school to another within an area, from a public school to private-voucher school within an area, from one district to another, or from a public school within an area to a private school within another district.En este estudio examinamos cómo han respondido los líderes escolares de distritos urbanos al sistema de vouchers universales en Chile. Hemos hecho entrevistas con funcionarios y directores de escuelas públicas en Santiago, Chile. Vemos que los líderes escolares en las escuelas públicas ricas han afrontado la política de mercado con la aplicación de medidas de cream-skimming similares a las de las escuelas privadas. En comparación, las escuelas públicas municipales más pobres no pueden seleccionar a sus estudiantes. Los participantes apuntan a que la elección de padres y estudiantes es limitada porque las características específicas de la familia/estudiante (e.g. nivel socioeconómico, resultados de exámenes), así como la residencia de la familia/estudiante en la ciudad (en un área relativamente rica o pobre) influyen en las oportunidades de un estudiante y en la escuela a la que accederá. Como resultado, el sistema de vouchers genera oportunidades educativas para aquellos estudiantes que tienen el capital (material e inmaterial) que les posibilita un movimiento de una escuela pública a otra en su misma área, de una escuela pública a una escuela privada en su misma área, de un distrito a otro, o de una escuela pública en un distrito a una escuela privada en otro distrito

Examining the Myth of Accountability, High-Stakes Testing, and the Achievement Gap

In this article we outline how notions of accountability and the achievement gap have relied upon the massive expansion of high-stakes exams in our nation’s schools. Texas-style test and punish accountability manifested in various ways within schools and school culture across the nation via NCLB, which undermined notions of trust within education. More than decade of national education policy focused on high-stakes testing and accountability—despite that the fact that the rise of high-stakes testing also involved considerable legal, ethical, and social considerations. We argue the practice of spending large amounts of time on test preparation and test taking must be reversed lest we continue on the path of maintaining schools solely as machinery for stratification. We conclude that market- and business-oriented ideology, has reinforced the racist under- and overtones of testocracy in the United States and has neither closed the achievement gap nor fomented meaningful accountability or success

NEPC Review: Bigger Bang, Fewer Bucks? (University of Arkansas Department of Education Reform, February 2018)

A report released by the University of Arkansas Department of Education Reform contends that charter schools produce more achievement per dollar invested, as compared to public schools. This newest report is focused on city-level analyses in eight US cities (Atlanta, Boston, Denver, Houston, Indianapolis, New York City, San Antonio, and Washington D.C.) and uses cost effectiveness and Return on Investment (ROI) ratios. It concludes that charter schools deliver a weighted average of an additional 4.34 NAEP reading points and 4.73 NAEP math points per $1000 invested. The report also argues that that charter schools offer an advantage of$1.77 in lifetime earnings for each dollar invested, representing a ROI benefit of 38%. However, there are a variety of methodological choices made by the authors that threaten the validity of the results. For example, the report uses revenues rather than actual expenditures &ndash; despite well-established critiques of this approach. The report also fails to account for the non-comparability of the student populations in charter and comparison public schools. Three other problems also undercut the report&rsquo;s claims. First, even though the think tank&rsquo;s earlier productivity report included a caveat saying that causal claims would not be appropriate, the new report omits that caution. Second, the report&rsquo;s lack of specificity plagues the accuracy and validity of its calculations; e.g., using state-level data in city-level analyses and completely excluding race and gender. Finally, the authors again fail to reconcile their report with the extensive literature of contrary findings.</p

Graduate Student Persistence: Evidence from Three Decades

This article conducts a meta-analysis of results of studies by Andrieu (1991), DeAngelis (1998), and Liseo (2005) to assess changes over time in the effects of financial aid and other factors on graduate student persistence. These findings present policy implications for improving graduate student retention

“Coign of Vantage” e ação: Considerando a responsabilidade local e planos de financiamento de escola da Califórnia para estudantes de inglês

Local control has been a bedrock principle of public schooling in America since its inception. In 2013, the California Legislature codified a new local accountability approach for school finance. An important component of the new California Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) approach is a focus on English learners (ELs). The law mandates that every school district produce a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) to engage the local community in defining outcomes and determining funding for ELs. Based on an exploratory analysis of a representative sample of LCAPs, we show that, although California’s new approach offered an opportunity to support locally-defined priorities and alternatives to top-down accountability, few if any districts had yet taken full advantage of the opportunity. That is, the school districts in our sample had not yet engaged with the local community to facilitate significant changes to accountability or redistribution of funding and resources to support educational equity for ELs.El control local ha sido un principio fundamental de la educación pública en América desde su creación. En 2013, la Legislatura de California codificó un nuevo enfoque de responsabilidad local para las finanzas escolares. Un componente importante del nuevo enfoque de California Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) es un enfoque en los estudiantes de inglés (ELs). La ley exige que cada distrito escolar produzca un Plan de Responsabilidad de Control Local (LCAP) para involucrar a la comunidad local en la definición de resultados y la determinación de fondos para ELs. Basado en un análisis exploratorio de una muestra representativa de LCAPs, mostramos que, aunque el nuevo enfoque de California ofreció una oportunidad para apoyar las prioridades definidas localmente y las alternativas a la responsabilidad de arriba a abajo, pocos o ninguno de los distritos habían aprovechado la oportunidad. Es decir, los distritos escolares de nuestra muestra aún no se habían comprometido con la comunidad local para facilitar cambios significativos en la rendición de cuentas o la redistribución de fondos y recursos para apoyar la equidad educativa para los EL.O controle local tem sido um princípio fundamental da educação pública na América desde a sua criação. Em 2013, a Califórnia Legislativo codificada uma nova abordagem à responsabilidade local para as finanças da escola. Um componente importante da nova abordagem local fórmula de financiamento Controle Califórnia (LCFF) é um foco em estudantes de inglês (ELS). A lei exige que cada distrito escolar para produzir um Accountability Plano de Controle Local (LCAP) para envolver a comunidade local na definição de resultados e determinação de fundos para ELs. Com base em uma análise exploratória de uma amostra representativa de LCAPs, mostramos que, embora a nova abordagem da Califórnia ofereceu uma oportunidade para apoiar as prioridades definidas localmente e alternativas a responsabilidade de cima para baixo, poucos ou nenhum dos distritos tinha tomado a oportunidade. Ou seja, os distritos escolares em nossa amostra ainda não tinha sido comprometida com a comunidade local para fazer mudanças significativas na prestação de contas ou redistribuição de fundos e recursos para apoiar a equidade educacional para ELs.

Choice without Inclusion?: Comparing the Intensity of Racial Segregation in Charters and Public Schools at the Local, State and National Levels

We conduct descriptive and inferential analyses of publicly available Common Core of Data (CCD) to examine segregation at the local, state, and national levels. Nationally, we find that higher percentages of charter students of every race attend intensely segregated schools. The highest levels of racial isolation are at the primary level for public and middle level for charters. We find that double segregation by race and class is higher in charter schools. Charters are more likely to be segregated, even when controlling for local ethnoracial demographics. A majority of states have at least half of Blacks and a third of Latinx in intensely segregated charters. At the city level, we find that higher percentages of urban charter students were attending intensely segregated schools

Teach for America: A Return to the Evidence

Teach For America (TFA) receives hundreds of millions of public and private dollars and has garnered acclaim for sending college graduates, who do not typically have an education background, to teach in low-income rural and urban schools for a two-year commitment. The number of TFA corps members has grown by about 2,000% since its inception in 1990. The impact of these transitory teachers is hotly debated. Admirers see the program as a way to grow the supply of “outstanding” graduates, albeit temporarily, as teachers. Critics, however, see the program as a diversion from truly beneficial policies or even as a harmful dalliance into the lives of low-income students who most need a highly trained, highly skilled, and stable teacher workforce. Despite a series of non-peer-reviewed studies funded by TFA and other organizations that purport to show benefits of TFA teachers, peer-reviewed research on their impact continues to produce a mixed picture. The peer-reviewed research suggests that results are affected by the experience and certification level of the TFA teachers as well as by the group of teachers with whom those TFA teachers are compared. The question’s specifics strongly determine the answer. The authors recommend a shift in focus for TFA from a program of mixed impact to one that makes measureable changes in the quality of education in America. Recommendations for policymakers and districts are provided