| « Reckless Driving | It Takes A Potemkin Village to Educate A Child » |
Delaware: Small State, Big Mo'
08/27/08
04:38:00 am, Categories: Announcements [A] Our "Back-to-School" special features Delaware’s Associate Secretary of Education Robin Taylor.
We spoke with Dr. Taylor last Friday to learn more about Delaware’s success at narrowing achievement gaps (they are tops in the nation), their plans for the future, and what she hopes Joe Biden tells Barack Obama about education in the First State.
"I would hope that Biden would tell Obama that the reauthorization of ESEA is not only critical, but should be a high priority for the administration."
— Delaware Associate Superintendent Robin Taylor
——————————————–
Delaware is enjoying quite a ride.
The most recent NAEP results show that over the last ten years, Delaware outpaced every other state in the gains its students have made in reading in both fourth and eighth grades – not only overall, but for African-American students, for Latino students, and for students from low-income families.
In reading, Delaware is tops among states with significant minority populations. Its African-American 4th graders outperform those in every state except New Hampshire. Its 4th grade Latinos are 2nd in reading only to those in Montana. Its poor students are 2nd only to those in Montana and North Dakota. Its students outperform most other states in math as well.
And, right now, the state’s senior Senator, Joe Biden, is awaiting the Democratic Vice-Presidential nomination in Denver, after a lengthy selection process.
Education reform projects with flashy names that use the latest buzzwords and have high-visibility benefactors tend to get the most attention in the ed policy world. But Delaware has succeeded where it really counts - boosting student achievement and narrowing achievement gaps - over the long-term with hard work, consistency, and commitment.
——————————————
CB: Why has Delaware had such marked success in improving achievement, particularly for low-income and minority students, on both its own assessments and the NAEP?
RT: We began planning our assessment and accountability system back in 1997. And, our content standards were adopted by the State Board of Education in 1995. The standards and assessments, including cut scores, were revisited and alignment was checked again in 2005 to allow for adjustments. We believe and value continuous improvement so reviewing policy decisions such as these is part of that process.
Our state legislature mandated that we develop a comprehensive system that would allow us to compare Delaware students to those in the other 49 states. To that end, one-third of our state assessment in reading and math is a norm-referenced assessment.
We chose to develop an assessment that was NAEP-like and we adapted items that fit our state standards from a variety of other sources. Two-thirds of our items were developed by Delaware teachers to closely match both our state content standards and what they taught in the classroom.
As a consequence, we are seeing results in student achievement overall and in the achievement of poor and minority students. Statewide, gaps are closing. And school-by school, we really see gaps closing.
We have a lot of districts and schools that are beating the odds. Indian River School district, for example, located in the center of the state’s poultry industry, has a high number of poor and ELL students – 18% of the students are African-American and another 18% are Hispanic; 9% are ELL and almost half are low-income. In 2007-08, more than 90% of Indian River’s 4th graders met state proficiency in reading and 88% met proficiency in math; we also have 80-90% of Indian River students in 4th grade meeting our state standards in science and social studies.
CB: One criticism in many states is that the assessments drive instruction, rather than the other way around.
RT: That may be true. But when the assessments are aligned to the standards, it is a seamless system. In Delaware we have been very deliberate about not being vendor-driven. We invested a lot of time and money up-front to ensure that our testing system worked for us rather than vice versa. It was expensive in the beginning. But you get what you pay for.
CB: What’s your secret to success?
RT: Coordination starts with the big picture.
We started with a philosophy that all aspects of our education system had to be integrated. As a result, our policies are more consistent and coherent than in most other states. District curriculum is aligned with our state standards….we have policies in place where districts have to show alignment. Further we have a monitoring system where state teams go into schools to make sure that districts are doing what they say they are doing. The monitoring process is very comprehensive including both state and federal program requirements. Our decisions about where to target professional development is based on our assessment and needs results and guided, statewide, by what we want students to know and be able to do. We target school improvement state funds to districts and schools most in need of help.
One thing you have to remember about Delaware is that 70% of all education funding comes from the state. This enables us to coordinate our education policies across districts.
Moreover, we have built a process whereby districts apply for money in a common package that combines local, state and federal funds. We try to maximize the state-level latitude we have under NCLB’s Ed Flex. In this way, the state and our school districts together can leverage funds to better meet our students’ needs.
Our accountability system, which preceded NCLB, is stakeholder-driven. Educators, unions, parents, representatives from CBOs, all reach consensus in an effort to design the best system for Delaware that continues to value continuous improvement and individual longitudinal student growth.
CB: Delaware, because it had a solid accountability and assessment system, was one of the first states to be approved under NCLB to use a growth model for measuring student progress. But I noticed that Delaware did not apply for the “differentiated consequences” pilot that gives states more flexibility on how to label schools and what corrective actions must be taken when schools do not meet AYP.
RT: The current NCLB law actually gives us quite a bit of leeway already. We have seven levels of school ratings including multiple ones for school improvement. We have a solid algorithm which helps us identify schools under improvement where student achievement is regressing rather than improving. Thus, we are able to prioritize state technical assistance and leverage resources. While sanctions are still based on the number of years in school improvement, technical assistance can be based more on whether schools miss AYP by a little or a lot. Additional flexibility on labeling and intervening in schools has really not been necessary thus far, at least for us.
You also have to keep in mind that we in Delaware are big believers in state public school choice [a school improvement action required under NCLB]. We have had public school choice at the state level since 1995, and the program runs very smoothly. Students may transfer within or across district lines, as long as there is capacity, although we only provide transportation within districts (see table below).
CB: Delaware enjoyed a great deal of publicity last year for a computer-driven assessment system it was piloting. What’s next on this front?
RT: The pilot system was for online formative assessments, i.e., to guide instruction in a few districts. But we are moving to build on the pilot and develop a statewide system for both formative and summative (accountability) assessments if we can afford it. An RFP is in the works, being developed by a statewide assessment task force. One big advantage of such as system, in addition to all of the good and useful data, is that students can learn and be tested at their own pace, although they are still ultimately expected to meet certain annual benchmarks.
CB: Some ed policy analysts are advocating replacing state tests with local assessments. Do you think this is an advisable approach for statewide accountability systems?
RT: I think there has to be a balance. There is nothing wrong with having local assessments for formative purposes. But there has to be a consistent way of guaranteeing comparability across districts, because you ultimately have to ensure that things are equitable. There is a lot of mobility within and across our districts.
CB: Do you think there is any way to ensure equity and comparability with a patchwork system of local assessments?
RT: No.
CB: What do you think has to be done to improve state accountability and assessment systems in all 50 states?
RT: States need to leverage resources. For example, let’s share test items. We have to find a way to get away from off-the-shelf testing products or custom developed assessments that are cost prohibitive. Test vendors are driving us, and driving up costs as well. States need to take ownership of assessment systems and learn from each other.
CB: An open-source testing system?
RT: Exactly. We also need to do more to compare U.S. students internationally. Right now we are working very hard to have our students participate in PISA (Program for International Student Assessment). Andreas Schleicher presented here last year and we were quite impressed with the data. Delaware is interested in making sure that our students have the skills and knowledge that will allow them to be productive citizens in a global economy.
CB: Do you know if Senator Biden is familiar with your success? What would you hope for him to tell his boss, Barack Obama, about education policy, if they are elected in November?
RT: Yes he is, as are all of our Congressional delegation. We have excellent two-way communications with both Senators Biden and Carper, and Congressman Castle. We share what is happening in Delaware schools with them and they seek state and local advice on national education issues. We often have briefings and meetings with them and their staffers.
I would hope that Biden would tell Obama that the reauthorization of ESEA is not only critical, but should be a high priority for the administration. Further, the reauthorization should take into consideration some adjustments to NCLB.
For example, states should be allowed to truly differentiate the sanctions for schools that miss AYP for only one subgroup and schools that miss more. Another example would be to take into consideration that time should be a variable for ELL and some special education learners. In other words, research is showing us that ELL and some students with disabilities need more time to become proficient….the standards and proficiency levels should not be changed for these students, but if additional time is needed to reach proficiency for certain students, some provisions should be available for states.
Additional federal funding is essential if NCLB is to continue, especially as the 2013-2014 deadline approaches. I would also hope that there would be flexibility for states who are able to develop comprehensive systems which differentiate between students on track to proficiency and those not proficient.
——————————————————————————
Public School Choice in Delaware
Number of Schools with Choice Students:
191
Number of Local Choice Students:
(choice students from the same district)
9,235
Number of State Choice Students:
(choice students from another district)
5,470
Number of Federal Choice Students:
(NCLB School Under Improvement)
307
Number of Federal Choice Students:
(NCLB Unsafe School)
0
Number of Federal Choice Students:
(NCLB Victim of a Violent Felony)
2
——————————————————————————
Robin Taylor is the Associate Secretary of Education for the department’s Assessment and Accountability Branch. This branch provides leadership and oversight for statewide student assessment and accountability and professional accountability, including educator licensure and certification. The branch is also responsible for data collection and reporting including school and district report cards. Robin earned her Doctorate from Wilmington University. She has been an educator in the State of Delaware for 33 years as a teacher, coach, principal and district-level administrator. She has worked with the department from 1983-1992 in both student and staff assessment and returned to the Department of Education in 1997.
Trackback address for this post
Trackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location)
Feedback awaiting moderation
This post has 674 feedbacks awaiting moderation...
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
