The results released today in U.S. News and World Report make it clear – we have a problem at the very root of our education system.

“Through an exhaustive and unprecedented examination of how these schools operate, the Review finds they have become an industry of mediocrity, churning out first-year teachers with classroom management skills and content knowledge inadequate to thrive in classrooms with ever-increasing ethnic and socioeconomic student diversity.”

NCTQ generated a lot of controversy just for conducting the study, which MBAE endorsed, and deserves credit for persevering despite the obstacles it faced – including, as Director of the project Arthur McKee posted previously, from our own state’s institutions.  Although 35 Massachusetts institutions were included in the review, full information is only available for 14 with partial information for the remaining 21 programs.  Critics should look hard at how the review was conducted and at the standards applied.

Massachusetts is cited for “high expectations for what elementary teachers need to know across the board and uses top-notch tests for reading instruction and elementary mathematics”.   And, Fitchburg  State and Gordon College made the Honor Roll with three out of four stars.  But those of us who are used to hearing that Bay State education tops the nation will be disappointed to learn that this isn’t true for teacher preparation.  Among the sobering statistics are:

• SELECTIVITY IN ADMISSIONS - The Review found that only 24% of elementary and secondary programs in Massachusetts restrict admissions to the top half of the college-going population, compared to 28 % nationwide. Countries where students consistently outperform the U.S. typically set an even higher bar, with teacher prep programs recruiting candidates from the top third of the college-going population.83 programs across the country earn a Strong Design designation on this standard because they are both selective and diverse, although no such programs were found in Massachusetts.
• EARLY READING INSTRUCTION – Just 13% of evaluated elementary programs in Massachusetts are preparing teacher candidates in effective, scientifically based reading instruction, less than half the percentage of the small minority of programs (29%) providing such training nationally. The Commonwealth should find this especially alarming given that Massachusetts requires elementary teacher candidates to pass one of the most rigorous tests of scientifically based reading instruction in the country.
• OUTCOME DATA – Only 4% of Massachusetts’ evaluated programs earn four stars for collecting data on their graduates, compared to 26% of evaluated programs in the national sample. 46% of Massachusetts’ evaluated programs entirely fail this standard, compared to just 17% that do so across the country. The state does not connect student achievement data to teacher preparation programs, administer surveys of graduates and employers or require administration of teacher performance assessments (TPAs), and programs have not taken the initiative to collect any such data on their own.

Research from a variety of sources has confirmed that, “No school-based factor has more impact on our students’ success than the quality of our teachers. The preparation teachers receive has a crucial impact on their performance in the classroom.”  If we want to improve education, we have to focus on the teachers and school leaders who instruct our kids.  MBAE will be reviewing this report closely and we hope you will too.  Together, we must demand action from our teacher prep programs – and accountability for the performance of their graduates.

SPRINGFIELD – In October 2011, the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) released a study that found all but  0.6 of Springfield’s teachers were evaluated as satisfactory or above.  As in most districts, student achievement was not a factor in these evaluations and most teachers were granted tenure almost automatically.   This situation, however, was about to change as the district implemented a new evaluation system – known as SEEDS (Springfield Effective Educator Development System) – as part of its Race to the Top program.

Last fall, Superintendent Dan Warwick briefed Springfield Business Leaders for Education (SBLE) about the new system and these employers were impressed.  SBLE co-chairs John Davis and Nick Fyntrilakis commended the district in an op-ed in The Republican, saying “SEEDS departs from past approaches to educator evaluations that were compliance-oriented and often counterproductive. Instead, SEEDS encourages development and continuous improvement by aligning with and reinforcing an educator’s own goals.”

We’ll look forward to hearing more about how the system is working, but it seems to be a major improvement over past practice and having a significant impact already.

BOSTON – MBAE had also worked with NCTQ in 2010 on a study of human capital in the Boston Public Schools.   Concluding that the district’s evaluation system was “dysfunctional”, the report found that around half of the city’s approximately 5,000 teachers had not received an evaluation in the past two years, and a quarter of the city’s 135 schools had not conducted evaluations during that period.

Today’s newsletter from the Boston Public Schools, BPS This Week, acknowledged this situation, but reported that this has changed, with 95% of teachers having completed self-assessments for performance evaluations!  (Subscribe here)

From the Newsletter:  “We are wrapping up the first full year of our new performance evaluation process for educators. So far this year our educators and evaluators have collected more than 42,844 separate pieces of evidence toward the four standards and educators’ goals represented within the new system. More than 9,404 observations have taken place, which represents more than 8,028 total hours spent observing and providing feedback to educators.

This past fall, 95 percent of educators completed self-assessments in which they were able to communicate their strengths and desired areas for growth. From the data collected by the online system, we can report that a large number of educators want more support with developing well-structured lessons (such as implementation of Common Core), meeting the needs of diverse learners, adjustments to practice (using data to inform instruction) and parent and family engagement.”

The district is responding with a variety of professional development tools and opportunities for teachers to address these needs.  BPS is also looking at trends that may be emerging from the evaluation data to ensure the performance evaluation system is fair and being applied consistently across schools and classrooms.  Looks like the system is working!

And, MBAE appreciates the district’s reference to the 2010 report, as follows:

“It is also worth remembering why we created this new professional development system in the first place. Four years ago we commissioned a study to take an honest look at our development of human capital. The 2010 report, “Rethinking how to Attract, Develop and Retain Effective Teachers,” raised many issues that we have worked hard to resolve in the last three years (and, in some cases, continue to struggle to address). One of the most revealing conclusions was that “Boston principals do not appear to be evaluating teachers as required by state law. One in four schools has not turned in a single evaluation for any teacher in the past two years.”

“We are pleased to report that this year, for the first time since we can remember, every school has submitted evaluations — with most on track for full compliance by the end of this year. We continue to work closely with schools and evaluators to support this work.”

Hooray! Congratulations to both districts! We’ll look forward to hearing more – and learning how these new systems improve teacher effectiveness for children in Springfield and Boston!

According to the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association, “Compared to their district school peers, a higher percentage of Massachusetts charter public school students are scoring proficient or advanced in all subject tests at every grade level.”  Yet, more than half of the 29 districts that rank in the bottom 10% academically are either at the cap or have room for only one more charter school. These include large cities and towns like Boston, Holyoke, Lawrence, Lowell, Chelsea, and Randolph, and several smaller communities in Central and Western Massachusetts.

Speaking on behalf of MBAE, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, Linda testified in support of eliminating the cap altogether on charter public schools in at least the lowest 10% of districts, and stated that these schools should not be counted against the existing statewide cap of a total 72 charter public schools.

Citing socio-economic and racial achievement gaps that are among the highest in the nation, and a growing skills gap evidenced by employers struggling to fill positions with qualified workers and recent graduates without the knowledge and skills to secure those jobs, Linda spoke to the urgent need to increase educational opportunities for all children.

In addition to expanding charter school options to more parents, MBAE and our business partners support extending management flexibility to more struggling schools.  The Achievement Gap Act of 2010 gave principals of Level 4 Schools (those among the lowest-performing and least-improving 2% in the state) authority to hire staff based on performance rather than seniority; to expeditiously dismiss or replace poor performing teachers or administrators; to extend the school day; and to utilize an expedited process for amending collective bargaining agreement to accelerate improvements.  These authorities were instrumental in achieving the gains that have been realized by those schools in the past two years and, therefore, should be extended to all Level 3 schools and below until they reach Level 2.  As of last December there were 288 schools in Massachusetts classified as Level 3, falling in the lowest 20% statewide.

MBAE has consistently argued that to address our most intractable issues – achievement and skills gaps – we must expand on programs and initiatives that have been proven to work.  Charter public schools and the authorities given to “turnaround schools” fit that bill.

Future Ready Massachusetts will change this narrative. The Future Ready Massachusetts Campaign will bring together the college and career ready initiatives that already exist under one comprehensive “umbrella” and effectively provide communities with the tools to communicate the roadmap to becoming future ready.  With so many programs, educators are often not familiar with all of the options; and parents and legislators know even less about program offerings and how each relates to the others.  The goal is to raise awareness of what it takes to succeed in college and career and what programs are available to assist in that effort.

In Massachusetts, the demand for middle- and high-skilled workers (jobs that require some postsecondary education or training) is outpacing the state’s supply of workers educated and experienced at that level.

• 81% of Massachusetts jobs are middle- or high-skill.  Yet only 50% of Massachusetts adults have some postsecondary degree (associate’s or higher)
• By 2018, 68% of all jobs in Massachusetts will require a postsecondary education

Future Ready will help promote a college and career ready curriculum to provide all students with the core, foundational knowledge and skills they need to succeed in college, career and life.

Interested in learning more about Future Ready? Join us on May 20 for the Future Ready Summit at the DCU in Worcester. Click here to register!

_____

Future Ready Massachusetts is a collaborative project of the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education (MBAE), the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), the Massachusetts Department of Higher Education (DHE) in partnership with Achieve Inc., an independent, bipartisan, nonprofit education reform organization based in Washington D.C.

In 1988, under the leadership of the late Jack Rennie, CEO of Pacer Systems and an AIM director, MBAE brought together concerned employers to advocate for improvement of the state’s public schools (K-12). Their report, Every Child a Winner, provided the framework for the landmark Education Reform Act of 1993 which called for higher standards for student learning; accountability for performance and success; and adequate and equitable school funding.

“Over the years MBAE has worked to represent the employer community in supporting the implementation of the 1993 law and to advocate for further reforms driven by data and evidence of results,” said Richard Lord, AIM’s president and CEO. Recent examples, Lord said, included issuing a report on school finances that provided an impetus for the reform of municipal health insurance, advocating legislation that raised the charter school cap in targeted districts and expanded management authority for turning around lowest performing schools, and tracking progress of the state’s Race to the Top initiative.

In the context of “Legacy of Leadership,” MBAE is notable not only for its organizational role as the trusted source for the employer perspective on education issues, but also for its record of bringing forward business people into position of leadership. It nominates and recruits business members for advisory boards, commissions and task forces that advise state government, and also for national advisory boards. Several members of MBAE’s board have served on the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, including its current chair, Maura Banta of IBM; while cofounder Paul Reville served until recently as Secretary of Education.

“The quality of MBAE’s work over the years is one reason why the three leading statewide business organizations – AIM, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, pursue their education agenda through MBAE,”  Lord noted.

In conclusion, said Lord, “The work undertaken by MBAE during the past 25 years has contributed significantly to raising our student achievements scores to the highest in the nation, and MBAE will continue to speak for Massachusetts employers as we strive to close the achievement gaps the persist in some of our schools, and to match and surpass international competitors.

In a summary of feedback  received in January 2013 about the final draft, the NGSS acknowledged calls for increased emphasis on computer science but dismissed it as “a misunderstanding of the purpose of the NGSS”.   This was not unexpected as the NGSS had ignored previous calls to make computer science a more central component of the new standards.  Now, it is up to individual states to make decisions whether to adopt the new NGSS standards or go with their own.

MBAE will be urging the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, which has the authority and responsibility for approving state curriculum frameworks, not to miss this opportunity to address a serious need in our state’s science, technology and engineering education.   In fact, the NGSS in its dismissal of feedback on computer science stated that, “In contrast to many current state standards, the NGSS specify content and skills required of all students, and are not intended to replace high school course standards. The NGSS are meant to specify the knowledge and skills that will provide a thorough foundation for student success in any chosen field, and can be supplemented with further in-depth study in particular upper-level science courses.” (emphasis my own)

In Massachusetts, “computer systems design and related services” is the 5^th largest growing industry with 37% growth projected and a total of 17,600 new jobs being created in this field during from 2006 to 2016.  Network systems and communication is the fastest growing occupation, with 50% growth, and computer software engineer is the third fastest at 35%.  Massachusetts schools, however, are not preparing students to take advantage of these opportunities.  This denies our students the background they need for many high-wage jobs and leaves a growing skills gap between the jobs going unfilled and the competencies applicants possess.

Computer Science Education Now

Computer Science courses are electives in Massachusetts schools so most students are never exposed to this field.  Where these classes are offered, the curriculum generally does not cover computational thinking or teach students to build the technology in a way that exposes them to or prepares them for the opportunities available in this profession.  Similarly, career technical education trains students for company-specific certifications and does not provide the solid math and science foundation needed for high level computing jobs.  In addition, because computer science is an elective, it is not available to all students across the state and courses do not have to meet consistently high statewide standards.  Too few students are choosing to study computer science in college or pursue it as a profession as a result.

Only nine states currently incorporate computer science into their required math or science courses to earn a high school diploma.  Massachusetts is in the process of implementing the Massachusetts Core Standards in mathematics and will not be reviewing or revising these standards in the foreseeable future.  But the state does have the opportunity to incorporate computer science in to its science, technology and engineering (STE) standards as a core course.  Whether or not the BESE decides to adopt the NGSS for grades K-12, Massachusetts has a chance to address computer science in the next version of Massachusetts STE curriculum frameworks.

Opportunity to Make Computer Science a Core Course

The Massachusetts business community has considered this issue through groups such as TechHub, Broadening Advanced Technical Education Connections (BATEC), and the Governor’s STEM Advisory Council.  Curriculum and instructional materials have already been developed by respected local and national organizations.

MBAE believes this addresses a priority of many industries in the state that rely on this type of knowledge for their growth and success.  Establishing such a course to provide all children with exposure to computer science and a pathway to deeper knowledge for those interested in pursuing it as a career is also consistent with the college and career readiness goals of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education as well as the commitment of the Department of Higher Education to align its training and degree programs with Massachusetts economic development goals and needs.   Providing the opportunity for students to learn about and develop skills in this area where employment growth and demand exists makes sense for our citizens and communities.

Join us in calling for  Massachusetts to make computer science a core course as part of  any new STE standards!

Over the past week, MBAE has taken some flak for its refusal to support any increase in funding that is not highly targeted and based on strong evidence of what works.   We shared this position with Executive Office of Education staff when the Governor’s FY14 budget proposal was announced January 23^rd and discussed it with Education Secretary Matthew Malone at a meeting with MBAE Board members on March 7^th.

Our major concern is with the $226 million in unrestricted funds distributed to districts through what is known as Chapter 70.  This money is described in the Governor’s budget summary as including “an increase of $25 per pupil for every district” as part of a commendable effort to bring every district to the same level of foundation spending per pupil (the intention of the foundation budget formula developed by MBAE as part of the Education Reform Act of 1993.)  The Governor’s plan, however, includes no requirement that these funds be used to support initiatives that have demonstrated results, and there is no commitment to measure the effectiveness of these additional dollars.

Of the $553 million proposed increase for education, the $131 million for early childhood education comes closest to the type of investment that fits MBAE’s criteria.  The funding includes eliminating wait lists for income-eligible 4-year olds to attend pre-school.  There is ample data that connects pre-school education to reading proficiency by 3^rd grade (an indicator of future school success), reduced drop-out rates, and other benefits that make this a sound social and economic investment.   The new Quality Rating and Improvement System developed by the Department of Early Education and Care has the potential to guarantee funds are directed only to effective, high quality programs.

The same holds true for the $5 million earmarked for extended learning time in Gateway City middle schools.   This could be money well spent if it is used for effective programming that helps students complement their academic knowledge with valuable skills and experience that makes them future ready; not just to spend more seat time in the school building.

Similarly, the $152 million proposed to make higher education more accessible and affordable for middle and low-income families can have valuable benefits for students and for ensuring the state maintains the skilled workforce necessary to support economic growth.   It is good news that the funds would be tied to campus performance and outcomes that the Department of Higher Education is already measuring and reporting as part of its Vision Project.  More details on exactly what linking funds to performance means in practice must be forthcoming.  For example, if it includes improving educator education programs – a key lever for raising student achievement in pre-K-12 – this investment would be more compelling.

MBAE’s position on this issue, and any other, is the result of serious deliberation by our Board of Directors and consultation with others in the business community and knowledgeable education policy makers.  We don’t take a stand lightly and don’t expect everyone to agree with us (although we welcome the Boston Herald’s editorial support).  Yet, since the Secretary of Education is quoted in a State House News story running in several papers as saying MBAE is “wrong and they need to get their facts straight” and implying that our questions should be dismissed because we are “closely linked to the charter school movement”, we thought we’d state our position once again.

MBAE has a  25-year record of providing the perspective of business leaders on education issues; we have and can forge policy solutions to expand access to high quality education for all children.  Our recommendation is  that Massachusetts do nothing less than what President Barack Obama called for in his 2010 State of the Union Address:

“Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success. Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform–reform that raises student achievement.”

I founded LearnLaunch to encourage entrepreneurs and educators in New England to create and adopt a new generation of software tools which will supercharge teachers’ efforts to personalize learning for each child…. Tools that will bring the digital world into the classroom to solve persistent issues of K-12 outcomes, college persistence and college affordability.   Tools to engage students, save teachers and counselors time and improve their effectiveness.   And to do that as a community.

It has been 30 years since “A Nation at Risk” and the birth of the standards-based education reform movement.  Massachusetts, an early adopter with our Ed Reform Act of 1993, developed by MBAE, was a leader in adopting the tools of this movement, and reaped the benefits as our school leaders, teachers and students reached for the highest standards in the land.  The Commonwealth benefited, moving into first place in the land, as measured by scores on the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress).

There is certainly more work to be done to improve Massachusetts public education to close achievement gaps and to ensure that all students are college and career ready.  Charter schools pioneered the approach of urban schools with high expectations, more learning time, principal selected teams and parent engagement, and more district schools are adopting these approaches, especially with regard to school improvement in the bottom quartile of schools.  Based on research on the importance of individual teachers, there is a focus on “increasing teacher capacity” (professional development),   and changes to the recruitment and preparation of teachers.  System wide changes include parent choice among a district “portfolio” of schools and student weighted funding to ensure more resources go to the neediest students.

These efforts can be supercharged by software tools, many of them developed by companies right here in Massachusetts.  Is your goal to have all children read by third grade?  Have you looked at Lexia Learning of Concord, MA?   Care about hands-on science education?  Do you know about the Concord Consortium?   Ten Marks improves math instruction.  Elevation Education supports English Language learners.   Besides the growth companies mentioned above, there are over 150 Ed tech startups reaching out to parents, teachers and schools here in Massachusetts.

In Silicon Valley, philanthropists are funding the creation of “blended learning” schools, which seek to find the appropriate mix of teacher talent, support staff and software to deliver great personalized learning to students at an affordable cost.  Some are experimenting with competency- based models, in which students progress at their own pace, rather than as freshman, sophomores, juniors and seniors.

Our goal is to bring the educator, industry and entrepreneur community together to move this conversation, and change, forward.  Indeed, 450 joined us in the conversation at the LearnLaunch “Across Boundaries:  Innovation and the Future of Education” conference at MIT.    Check us out!   www.learnlaunch.org.  We provide monthly meetups, biweekly classes and bi-annual conferences to education innovators, and have launched an accelerator program, LearnLaunchX, for the most promising.

 Eileen Rudden, a member of the board of MBAE, is a 25-year software veteran and the cofounder of LearnLaunch and LearnLaunchX, an Ed tech accelerator.

“We at Strategies for Children and our Early Education for All Campaign thank former Commissioner Killins for her leadership on behalf of the commonwealth’s young children and families. She was instrumental in laying the foundation for a statewide system of high-quality early education upon which Governor Patrick’s proposed new investments in early education rest. She spearheaded Massachusetts’ successful application for a $50 million federal Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge grant. She launched a Quality Rating and Improvement System that defines levels of quality and offers programs pathways to improve. She helped further the professionalization of the early education workforce and aligned programs and services to ensure that children have the strong start they need to succeed in school. She and the Department of Early Education and Care achieved this with relatively little investment of state funds. She leaves the commonwealth poised to build on this foundation and substantially increase the number of children who have access to high-quality early education and care. We wish her well and remain grateful for her service. We look forward to working with Acting Commissioner Tom Weber, the Board of Early Education and Care, and early educators across the state on our shared vision for the commonwealth’s children.”

Our first school finance challenge is to determine whether the significant investment taxpayers already make in education is being used effectively and to ensure that spending decisions are based on strong evidence of what is working – not simply what we’ve been doing in the past.  That’s why MBAE supports the establishment of a Foundation Budget Review Commission (a provision of the Education Reform Act of 1993) as proposed by Joint Committee on Education Co-Chairs Rep. Alice Peisch and Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz and Rep. Jason Lewis.

The persistent challenges we face, however, cannot be solved by money alone.   Great teachers and school leaders are the key to improving student outcomes.  We must transform our teacher preparation programs, evaluation and compensation systems to ensure the best and brightest are in every classroom across the state.  In addition, the digital revolution which has transformed many other industries is now at the door of education.  How to use technology to support teachers, improve student outcomes, and leverage shrinking budgets is a key question for policy makers and educators today.

We are not convinced that money is the problem – or the solution – when it comes to closing achievement gaps and graduating every student ready for their future.  But, we are committed to finding out.  The business community has great expertise in these matters and we need your help to identify the most effective and efficient ways to utilize education resources to reach these goals.  We’re glad that the governor has issued the call to focus on this discussion and urge you to join MBAE in being part of the conversation.  Contact us to get involved!

————————————————————–

For analysis of the FY14 Budget from two of MBAE’s partner business organizations, read the statement from Associated Industries of Massachusetts and information from the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

You can also find information about the education section of the budget proposal in the Massachusetts Budget & Policy Center’s Budget Monitor.