ideas Education

10 for

July 2010 | Featured Idea

North Carolina’s Segregated Schools
 10 Ideas for Education
July 2010

National Director
Hilary Doe

National Network Coordinator

Tarsi Dunlop

Lead Strategist for Education

Kirsten Hill

Managing Editor
Gracye Cheng

The Roosevelt Institute Campus Network

455 Massachusetts Ave NW
Suite 650
Washington, DC 20001
Copyright © 2010 by the Roosevelt Institute. All rights reserved.

The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors. They do not ex-
press the views or opinions of the Roosevelt Institute, its officers, or its directors.
 ideas
10 for

Education
 Congratulations to
Grayson Cooper,
author of
Brown v. Board of Education 55 Years Later:
North Carolina’s Charter Schools

Nominee for
Policy of the Year
 Inside the Issue

P
Requiring New Jersey High Schools to Report 8
Alternative Education Data
Casey Maliszewski

Holistic School Assessment through Comprehensive Evaluations 10

Danielle Collins

Creating Meaningful Teacher Evaluations in New York State 12

Maddy Joseph

Brown v. Board of Education 55 Years Later: 14

North Carolina’s Charter Schools
Grayson Cooper

A Path to Licensure for Special Education Assistants 16

Anna Peterson

Closing the Reading Gap: 18

Educating Teachers in Student Home Dialects
Joelle Gamble

Universal, State-Regulated Pre-Kindergarten Education 20

Elena Malkov

Funding Arts Programs in Low-Performing Schools 22

through USPS Fundraising Stamps
Erika K. Solanki and Shah-Rukh Paracha

Increasing Access to Information Networks 24

for Community College Students
Nathan Maton and Leslie Faylor

Expanding the Growth Model Testing Pilot Program 26

Aaron Goldstein

Roosevelt Review Preview: 29

Refugee Policy - Implications for the Admission of Iraqi Refugees
Adina Appelbaum
p Letter from Washington
W e are pleased and proud to present the second edition of the 10 Ideas Series.
Comprised of six journals, these articles represent the best of our student policy work
across the country. Throughout the past year, our national policy strategists have sup-
ported hundreds of students chapters stretching from New England and Michigan to
California and Georgia. As a peer-to-peer network, our student strategy team is unlike
any other - they are both friends and mentors, strategists and promoters. Instead of
waiting for their ideas to be approved in Washington, our Washington team looks to the
field for our most innovative policies - and it is the student network that votes on the
best proposals of the year.

Within this volume, you will find a variety of ideas in motion. Some are new proposals
being spread for the first time; others have already gained traction in their local com-
munity, as our campus chapters work to enact their policies today. Some will rise to
higher prominence in the months ahead, gathering momentum as the idea is adopted
throughout our national network of 8000 members. A few will be adopted by state
legislatures and city councils; some make it all the way to Capitol Hill.

A year ago, one Colorado student published an idea about improving remote access to
health care via unused television waves; the state of California is now working with him
to make that idea a reality. A pair of students in Chicago postulated that their school
could start a revolving loan fund for energy efficient building and development; they
now help administer such a fund at Northwestern.

Whether intensely localized or built for the nation at large, these ideas all have the po-
tential to become realities. We look forward to what comes next for these authors - and
if you can be a part of that change, we hope you’ll join us.

Sincerely,

Tarsi Dunlop
National Network Coordinator
 Strategist’s Note P
T he United States is struggling to educate the next generation. Budget cuts are forc-
ing massive layoffs, reduction of vital programs, enlarged class sizes, and tuition increas-
es. Current policies and practices are simultaneously limiting access to educational op-
portunities and creating environments that are not conducive to learning. As students,
we know this must change.

The Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network’s Education Policy Center provides students
with the tools and support they need to play an active role in education policy. Through
engagement with local and national education systems, students are offered a voice
in the reform process and are empowered not only to conduct research, but also to
reflect on and share their personal experiences with education.

Students are the true experts in the realm of education. As students, we have a unique
perspective: not only are we often directly impacted by the policies that are imple-
mented, but as active participants in these education systems, we are able to research,
collaborate, and rally with other students, both sharing our ideas and actively promot-
ing reform. Education policy issues resonate with us, because as students we’ve been
there, are there, or are soon going to be there. Our proximity to the issues and unified
identity as students generates a passion that has fostered the creation of an abundance
of progressive policy ideas and projects at Roosevelt chapters across the nation. From
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s work to start a local charter school
to Wesleyan University’s efforts to strengthen university-public school partnerships,
Roosevelters are engaging themselves with their local communities as they work hard
to improve educational experiences for current and future generations of students.

With the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act on the hori-
zon, now is a critical time for the Millennials to step up and impact education reforms.
In these ten policy proposals, students have tackled key areas outlined in the U.S. De-
partment of Education’s A Blueprint for Reform, suggesting innovative solutions for im-
proving assessments, enhancing teacher quality, closing achievement gaps, and better
preparing students for college and careers.

As Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said, “We may not be able to prepare the future for
our children, but we can at least prepare our children for the future.” These 10 Ideas for
Education are an exciting step in that direction.

Kirsten Hill
Lead Strategist, Education
Requiring New Jersey High Schools
to Report Alternative Education Data
Casey Maliszewski, Mount Holyoke College

In combating the dropout crisis, New Jersey should collect annual alternative educa-
tion program data from schools to help evaluate alternative programs.

There are no laws in New Jersey requiring schools to have alternative programs for
students who are at high risk for dropping out of high school, yet many schools use
alternative programs as a dropout prevention strategy.1 Apart from regularly collected
data and special education data, there is no state reporting required on alternative
education programs. Without systematic and separate data collection, there is no way
to tell if the alternative education programs are effective, which programs are working
best for which types of students, and which programs may need adjustments to better
serve students.

New Jersey’s Department of Edu- Key Facts

cation should collect annual data • The Alliance for Excellent Education estimates
on alternative education programs. that New Jersey had 15,573 high school drop-
outs in 2008.2
This information would be collect-
• If all high school dropouts graduated, they
ed from a staff representative of would have had a proejcted additional lifetime
the school’s alternative program income of $5,088,980,000.3
and would be categorized into • Many high schools in New Jersey use alterna-
four data areas: a) program specif- tive education programs as a high school drop-
ic information, including the type out prevention strategy.4
of students served by the program • New Jersey schools are not required to submit
and program characteristics, b) en- information about alternative education pro-
trance criteria, c) exit criteria, and grams to the state separately from regular and
special education data (except if the school is
d) outcomes, including including
classified as an alternative education school).5
how many students: 1) are served,
ii) have made academic progress,
iii) have graduated, and iv) have
been reintegrated a traditional program and/or classroom. To reduce development
costs, New Jersey can utilize existing models of alternative education data collection,
such as a survey done by the National Center for Educational Statistics in 2002 and
surveys implemented in Indiana, Oregon, and California.4

Analysis
Other states that have implemented such data collection systems have had great suc-
cess. Indiana collects data annually from schools, including individualized education
plan progress for each student, dropout rates, graduation rates, and information from
surveys administered to students and teachers about their opinions of the programs.
From this information, state officials are able to see the results of each school’s pro-
gram.5 Using a “risk index,” the state is also able to calculate how many students were
prevented from dropping out or being expelled from school because of alternative
education programs.6 They use all of this data to evaluate policy, propose state legisla-

8
tion, and set and assess state goals pertaining to alternative education.

Requiring schools to submit data on alternative education programs will benefit New
Jersey and serve a number of purposes. First, it will allow the New Jersey Department
of Education to ensure that alternative programs are following the New Jersey admin-
istrative code 6A:16-9.2, which establishes criteria schools must follow if they choose
to implement an alternative program.7 Secondly, requiring schools to report informa-
tion will better facilitate alternative program evaluations within each individual school
district. Third, if data is collected and shared on a regular basis, schools will be able to
share best practices, resulting in higher quality programs. When alternative education is
developed to its maximum potential, more
students will stay in school and graduate.
Talking Points
Next Steps • Without systematic and separate data
New Jersey should first create an explor- collection, there is no way to tell if the
alternative education programs are
atory committee or commission to make
working, which programs are work-
decisions on an alternative education pro- ing best for which types of students,
gram data collection process, including and which programs may need adjust-
both the framework of data required from ments.
schools and the technological process for • Collecting annual data will ensure ac-
schools to submit the information. After countability with alternative programs
the process is developed, the New Jersey and help schools learn about best
Board of Education should develop an ad- practices within the state.
ministrative code that calls for schools to
submit this information annually. Once the
code is established, schools will be able to submit information to the Department of
Education, providing a rich source of data for educators and policymakers alike.

Endnotes
1. Casey Maliszewski, “Alternative Education in New Jersey High Schools: Policy and Practice. Survey
from New Jersey High Schools.” 2010 Mount Holyoke College: South Hadley, MA.
2. Alliance for Excellent Education. 2009. The High Cost of Dropouts in America. http://www.all4ed.org/
files/HighCost.pdf. (accessed January 30, 2010).
3. Ibid.
4. Casey Maliszewski, “Alternative Education in New Jersey High Schools: Policy and Practice. Survey
from New Jersey High Schools.”
5. New Jersey Department of Education. 2009. DOE Data. http://www.state.nj.us/education/data/. (ac-
cessed March 25, 2010).
6. National Center for Educational Statistics. 2002. District Survey of Public Alternative Education Pro-
gram and Schools. Department of Education: Washington, DC.
7. Indiana Department of Education. 2009. Alternative Education 2007-2008 Summary Report. http://
www.doe.in.gov/alted/pdf/alted_0708-summary_report.pdf. (accessed January 15, 2010).
8. Sue Foxx. Interview. Dec. 4, 2009.
9. New Jersey Department of Education. 2009. New Jersey Administrative Code. http://www.state.nj.us/
education/code/current/. (Accessed January 20, 2010).

9
Holistic School Assessment Through
Comprehensive Evaluations
Danielle Collins, Tufts University

Public schools should be comprehensively evaluated by teams of educational ex-

perts, with funding available to meet specific goals defined by evaluators and school
stakeholders, in order to boost under-achieving schools and provide a system of fair
school assessment.

Data collected since the 2003 implementation Key Facts

of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) sug-
gests that the standardized testing model of
school assessment has done little to improve
national educational standards, and might be
detrimental to educational progress in some
respects. Schools should adopt more holistic
models to assess students, including examina-
tion of student work, interviews with students
and parents and incremental improvement of
the school environment. School assessment
centered in evaluation of classroom teaching
and student output allows educators to de-
velop improvement plans tailored to meet the
needs of each school, avoiding the pitfalls of
the standardized testing model.
• During the 2006-2007 school year,
30% of schools failed to make “ad-
equate yearly progress” and expe-
rienced punitive action.1
• In 2009, one-third of states were
found to have lowered their stan-
dards in order to avoid harsh penal-
ties stipulated under the policy.2
• Current legislation requires learn-
ing disabled students and non-
English speakers to meet the same
standards as other students being
assessed.3

The federal government and individual states should adopt a more holistic and com-
prehensive school assessment program as an alternative, or supplement, to using stan-
dardized test scores to determine school funding.4 This model of school evaluation
should be based on successful school assessment programs, including those enacted in
Rhode Island and the United Kingdom(UK).

In Rhode Island, schools are assessed using the School Accountability for Learning
and Teaching (SALT) program. A school improvement team analyzes the school’s status
based on standardized tests and surveys of parents, teachers and students. The team
of educational experts then drafts an improvement plan for the school with a set of
specific goals. Every five years, the SALT team visits the school to assess its progress.
Schools that have failed to make progress or meet stated goals are referred to a special
intervention program called Progressive Support and Intervention.

The inspectorate system currently in place in the UK provides another model. The
Office for Standards in Education contracts with private firms to provide inspectors.
These school inspectors are typically retired teachers and principals, and they assess
the school in a comprehensive way by interviewing students and teachers, observing
classroom teaching, and examining student work.5 This system of assessment paints a
more holistic picture of the school environment and enables schools to make individu-
alized progress tailored to the needs of the student population. It also bypasses some

10
of the pitfalls of the standardized testing
Talking Points
model, including narrowed curriculum and • Under current legislation school curric-
lowered standards. ulum is narrowed and teachers forced
to cut enriching material, such as arts
Analysis and sciences.
The government should adopt a model of • Teams of school inspectors will be able
school assessment that combines the SALT to look at the entire school environ-
program and the inspectorate system. ment and promote goal-oriented, indi-
These models offer numerous advantages, vidualized progress.
including greater community involvement
and input, and individualized progress
plans tailored to each school. A team of retired educators will conduct in-depth, ho-
listic assessments of schools every five years. In addition to evaluating test scores and
academic proficiency, the team will look at building conditions, school climate, and
students’ physical, social and emotional health. In conjunction with other stakeholders
such as parents and school officials, the team will draft a school improvement plan to be
enacted over a five-year period. The individualized nature of this program makes it less
likely that schools will be unable to meet goals, because school officials will shape those
goals to a large degree based on their current needs and resources available. Schools
that do fail to meet their goals will be subject to closer scrutiny and more frequent vis-
its to determine the cause of the problem, and to set more realistic goals.

Next Steps
The next step in enacting this policy is to design a pilot program to be implemented in
one school district, preferably a district with high ethnic and socio-economic diversity.
A good place to begin implementing more holistic methods of school assessment would
be in Rhode Island, where constituents and educators are familiar with the SALT pro-
gram. School districts currently using SALT begin collecting data on the effectiveness
of the program; from there, other school districts around the country can choose to
implement the model and tailor it to the needs of their district. Rather than dropping
NCLB immediately, the federal government should allocate additional funding for face-
to-face, team based assessments and slowly transition towards reducing or eliminating
standardized tests.

Endnotes
1. “NCLB.” US Department of Education, 06 11 2008. Web. 14 May 2010. <http://ed.gov/nclb/accountability/
results/progress/nation.html>.
2. Sam Dillon, “Federal Researchers Find Lower Standards in Schools.” The New York Times. http://www.
nytimes.com/2009/10/30/education/30educ.html?_r=1 (accessed November 15, 2009).
3. Mark Jewell, “No Child Left Behind: “Implications for Special Education Students and Students with
Limited English Proficiency.” New Horizons for Learning. Washington State Office of State Superin-
tendent of Public Instruction, n.d. Web. 15 November 2009. <http://www.newhorizons.org/spneeds/
improvement/jewell.htm>.
4. Jay Matthews, “Class Struggle - An Intriguing Alternative to No Child Left Behind.” Washington Post.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2009/05/an_intriguing_alternative_to_n.html (ac-
cessed November 15, 2009).
5. Jay Matthews, “Class Struggle - An Intriguing Alternative to No Child Left Behind.”

11
Creating Meaningful Teacher Evaluations
In New York State
Maddy Joseph, Columbia University

New York State should reform its guidelines for teacher evaluations to require dis-
tricts to make effectiveness as an instructor – as measured by observations and mea-
sures of student learning – the central criterion of evaluations.

Teacher quality is the most important con-

tributing factor to student achievement. A Key Facts
• A student who learns from a teacher in
student who learns from a teacher in the
the top 25% of the teaching pool will
top 25% of the teaching pool will learn, on learn on average three months more
average, one-third more material than a material than a student who learns
student who learns from a teacher in the from a teacher in the bottom 25%.
bottom 25%.1 To improve teacher quality, it That is one-third more material.2
is important that districts use meaningful • In 2008, only 15 states required an
teacher evaluations that identify and mea- objective measure of student learning
sure instructional effectiveness. to be an element of a teacher’s yearly
evaluation, and only four states man-
dated that student progress be the
Effectiveness as an instructor – the ability
main criterion for evaluation.3
to implement lessons that help students’ • 26% of teachers saw their last evalua-
progress – is at the heart of a teacher’s tion as “useful and effective.”4
responsibilities. New York State should
mandate that districts make instructional
effectiveness the main criterion in professional performance review plans. Three mea-
sures should constitute the determination of instructional effectiveness. First, teach-
ers should be observed annually. Second, observers should be required to consider
measures of student achievement that indicate student progress towards state learn-
ing standards. Finally, the state must allow and encourage evaluations to be tied to
personnel decisions.

According to a 2008 report by the National Council on Teacher Quality, which made
similar recommendations about teacher evaluation reform, only Florida mandated ob-
servation, use of student data, and an emphasis on instructional effectiveness.5 Many
individual districts, however, including New York City and Washington, DC, have pro-
grams or pilots that include comprehensive evaluations.

Evaluations increase the effectiveness of individual teachers by providing them with

feedback about the effectiveness of their teaching methods and about ways to im-
prove. Evaluations can improve the overall effectiveness of the teaching force when
tied to personnel decisions such as hiring, firing, and granting tenure.

New York State’s current teacher evaluation requirements create a barrier to raising
student achievement. Instructional effectiveness is not one of the criteria required
in yearly evaluations, nor is an annual observation mandated. Though teachers are
evaluated on their use of student data to shape instruction, districts are in fact forbid-

12
den from using student test data in tenure
determinations.6
Analysis
State expenditures should be restricted
to developing programs and monitoring
district programs’ effectiveness. Individual
districts must invest in professional devel-
opment to train observers and provide tar-
geted support for teachers. If the program
were implemented using expert evaluators
like those in DC’s IMPACT program, the
costs would be higher.
Talking Points
• Reform New York’s teacher evalua-
tion requirements as a step towards
increasing overall teacher quality in
the state.
• Create a meaningful measure of in-
structional effectiveness that can be
used in employment decisions and
allow officials and administrators
to identify excellence and address
struggling teachers.

Meaningful teacher evaluations would be a powerful tool for principals facing retention
and dismissal decisions, and could help districts correct the gross inequality in teacher
assignment between affluent and high-poverty schools that accounts for as much as
one-third of the achievement gap.

Next Steps
An appeal should be made to the legislature to pass these reforms. The current admin-
istration is moving to tie teacher evaluations and student achievement more closely
together. New York, which did not receive Race to theTop grants in round one, can
improve its chances of receiving future federal funding by requiring teachers to provide
evidence of student learning and improvement over the course of the school year.

Endnotes
1. Reagen Miller and Robin Chait, “Teacher Turnover, Tenure Policies, and the Distribution of Teacher
Quality: Can High-Poverty Schools Catch a Break?” Center for American Progress. http://www.ameri-
canprogress.org/issues/2008/12/pdf/teacher_attrition.pdf.
2. Miller and Chait, “Teacher Turnover, Tenure Policies, and the and the Distribution of Teacher Quality:
Can High-Poverty Schools Catch a Break?”
3. National Council on Teacher Quality, State Teacher Policy Yearbook, National Council on Teacher Qual-
ity, http://www.nctq.org/stpy08/reports/stpy_newyork.pdf.
4. Ann Duffett, Steve Farkas, Andrew J. Rotherham, Elena Silva, “Waiting to be Won Over: Teachers Speak
on the Profession, Unions, and Reform,” Education Sector, http://www.educationsector.org/usr_doc/
WaitingToBeWonOver.pdf
5. National Council on Teacher Quality, State Teacher Policy Yearbook, National Council on Teacher Qual-
ity, http://www.nctq.org/stpy08/reports/stpy_newyork.pdf.
6. New York State, “General School Requirements,” New York State Department of Education, http://
www.emsc.nysed.gov/part100/pages/1002.html.

13
Brown v. Board of Education 55 Years Later:
North Carolina’s Charter Schools
Grayson Cooper, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Reduce racial segregation and the black-white achievement gap in North Carolina
by creating a performance-based capital funding structure encouraging the estab-
lishment and expansion of successful charter schools.

The innovation associated with charter schools has the potential to be hugely beneficial
to education; however, this innovation also makes such schools inherently risky. To mini-
mize the negative impacts on schools systems that may arise from a charter school’s
innovation, the ability to fail and be reprimanded is crucial. Current legislation that
prevents charter schools from receiving capital funds minimizes the fiscal impact of
failure, but limits schools’ potential by restricting resources.

To limit risk, capital funding for charter Key Facts

schools should be contingent upon the
growth and diversity that they exhibit,
with subsequent years of success result-
ing in greater access to monies for capi-
tal projects. Schools underperforming
in measures of student growth or demo-
graphic representation are to be warned
by the charter-granting agency, and if
their performance fails to exceed that
of the traditional public schools, they
should be closed.
• The North Carolina Charter Schools
Program increases racial segregation
and the black-white achievement gap.1
• One of the six primary goals of the
Race to the Top Fund is to reduce the
Achievement Gap.2
• Two of the nineteen primary selection
criteria for the Race to the Top Fund ad-
dress charter school accountability and
increasing charter school supply.3 North
Carolina’s strategic plan for Race to the
Top fails to address these issues.4

Although Brown v. Board of Education

eliminated de jure racial segregation of public schools in 1954, de facto racial segrega-
tion is still present in North Carolina’s charter schools. A student enrolled in a charter
school in North Carolina is more than 2.5 times as likely to be enrolled in a racially seg-
regated school than a student in a traditional school.5 In this context, racially segregat-
ing schools are defined to deviate from the area demographics by more than 20% the
cutoff typically employed by court ordered desegregation. The resulting racial isolation
reduces black student achievement and contributes to a widening achievement gap.6
In these charter schools, students as a whole experience .16 standard deviations less
annual growth in math compared with their previous performance in a traditional public
school. This growth disparity is even greater for black students.7

Expansion of charter schools, which is highly emphasized by the Race to the Top Fund,8
is one of North Carolina’s greatest weaknesses in consideration for this grant. North
Carolina’s strategy for its Race to the Top application essentially ignores charter school
development.9 Currently, North Carolina’s charter schools do not have access to capi-
tal funds and are limited to a maximum of 100 schools, a ceiling that has already been
reached. To be eligible for future federal funds in the expanded Race to the Top Fund,

14
including $400 million for 2011, North Carolina will need to further examine the struc-
ture and funding model for charter schools and make significant changes.10 Moving for-
ward with charter school reform in North Carolina requires accountability in terms
of student improvement across all subgroups identified in the No Child Left Behind
Act. Additionally, successful reform is de-
pendent upon charter schools enrolling
student populations representative of the Talking Points
area in which the charter school is located. • A current lawsuit alleges that the
absence of governmental funding for
Analysis capital projects in North Carolina
Charter Schools is unconstitutional.11
The proposed guidelines reward high per-
• Academics are only one area in which
forming charter schools with capital funds, parents select a school for their
and close low performing charters. They children. Other major factors include
would also increase state support of char- school racial composition, school
ter schools that demonstrate exceptional location and assessment strategies.12
outcomes by giving them the same fund- As a result, some freedom of choice
ing as traditional public schools. Addition- models for school desegregation
ally, these guidelines will ensure that failing have been ruled unconstitutional (see
charter schools will have a minimal fiscal Green v. County School Board of
New Kent County).
impact on other public schools. Ultimately
this model encourages responsible growth
of charter schools, and will allow North
Carolina to eliminate the current cap. Consequently, this new legislation would make
North Carolina eligible for future Race to the Top funds, and greatly improve school
quality for students.

Next Steps
This proposal could be achieved by any of several avenues. It could be reached as
a settlement to the current lawsuit identifying the lack of capital funding for charter
schools as unconstitutional.13 Alternatively, the state legislature could propose a bill
that extends these powers to the State Board of Education in an effort to not only in-
crease charter school access, quality, and equity but also to enhance North Carolina’s
future competitiveness in Race to the Top.

Endnotes
1. Robert Bifulco and Helen Ladd, “School choice, racial segregation, and test score gaps: Evidence from North Carolina’s charter school
program.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 26(1), (2007), 31.
2. Arne Ducan, “Race to the Top Fund.” Washington, D.C.: (2009). http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/proprule/2009-3/072909d.
html. (Accessed 23 April 2010).
3. Ibid.
4. N.C. Department of Public Instruction, “NC Race to the Top Proposal.” Raleigh, NC. 2009. http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/princi-
palsarchive/resources/nov10webinar.ppt. (Accessed 23 April 2010).
5. Robert Bifulco and Helen Ladd, “School choice, racial segregation, and test score gaps: Evidence from North Carolina’s charter school
program.”
6. Shelley Brown-Jeffy, “The Race Gap in High School Reading Achievement: Why School Racial Composition Still Matters. Race, Gender,
& Class.” (2006). 13(3/4), 268.
7. Robert Bifulco and Helen Ladd, “School choice, racial segregation, and test score gaps: Evidence from North Carolina’s charter school
program.”
8. Arne Ducan, “Race to the Top Fund.”
9. N.C. Department of Public Instruction, “NC Race to the Top Proposal.”
10. Arne Duncan, “Race to the Top.” http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/funding.html. (Accessed 14 July 2010).
11. General Court of Justice, 24 Sess. (2009). http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/10/09/Charter%20schools.pdf. (Accessed 23 April
2010).
12. Robert Bifulco and Helen Ladd, “School choice, racial segregation, and test score gaps: Evidence from North Carolina’s charter school
program.”
13. General Court of Justice, 24 Sess.

15
A Path to Licensure
for Special Education Assistants
Anna Peterson, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

To increase the quality of special education and the pool of well-qualified special
education teachers, North Carolina should develop a scholarship program to encour-
age special education assistants to pursue a bachelor’s degree and become licensed
teachers.

Through a program similar to Teacher Education and Compensation Helps (TEACH)

Early Childhood, special education assistants employed in North Carolina public
schools will have the opportunity to apply for scholarships to cover the costs of at-
tending an accredited college. Scholarship recipients will continue working as special
education assistants as they make progress toward their degree, incorporating what
they learn into their educational practices. Unlike those in the TEACH program, these
scholarship recipients will have a clear goal: a bachelor’s degree in education and a
license to teach in North Carolina public schools. Once they complete the program,
these special educators will be promising new teachers with extensive experience and
dedication to their field, helping to fill North Carolina’s growing and unmet need for
special education teachers.

Since the Child Care Teacher Key Facts

Education and Compensation • TEACH Early Childhood has improved the educa-
Program began in 1990, thou- tion of more than 14,000 childcare workers and can
sands of childcare providers be replicated for special education assistants.1
have received scholarships to • Education requirements for special education
take classes in early childhood assistants vary by school district, but assistants
education and development. 4 working at Title I schools must have an associate’s
degree, two years of college, or pass a qualifying
Piloted in central North Caro-
exam, while fully licensed teachers must have at
lina by the Child Care Services least a bachelor’s degree.2
Association, the program be- • In 2007, North Carolina public schools employed
came known as TEACH Early more than 8,700 special education assistants. More
Childhood. The program pro- than 1,000 of these assistants did not meet IDEA
vides scholarships for childcare standards for qualification.3
workers to take classes at a
local community college or uni-
versity and subsidizes wage increases for the participants to reward increased educa-
tion even if scholars do not complete a degree. The TEACH program, implemented in
20 other states, has been successful in increasing the education of childcare workers,
and consequently, improving the educational quality of childcare programs.5

Analysis
The success of TEACH Early Childhood can be replicated and expanded through a
program that offers scholarships to special education assistants. Similar to TEACH Ear-
ly Childhood, scholarship recipients will improve their education, however this program
will go beyond simply taking classes. Scholarship recipients will be required to stay on

16
track to earn a bachelor’s degree and qualify for teacher licensure, eventually enabling
them to change jobs. This part of the program, which extends far beyond TEACH Early
Childhood, will help decrease the teacher shortage and encourage the hiring of in-state
teachers.

Unlike many teacher scholarship Talking Points

programs, this program will tar- • The Office of Postsecondary Education of the
get potential teachers who have Department of Education has labeled North
already demonstrated a com- Carolina a “Teacher Shortage Area” in the field
mitment to the field of special of special education.8
education. By building on that • Traditional teacher education programs have not
prior classroom experience, this produced enough special education teachers to
program will produce dedicated meet the nation’s growing need.9
• Retention rates for special educators are lowest
and qualified teachers and help
in the first two years of a teacher’s career. By
to improve the quality of special encouraging committed special education assis-
education programs.6 The school tants to become licensed teachers, North Caro-
districts in Wake, Durham, and lina can lower this rate of teacher attrition.10
Orange counties in North Caro-
lina serve a large number of spe-
cial education students and would benefit from more licensed teachers in this field
of education. Just as early childhood-focused non-profit organizations provided the
first funding for TEACH Early Childhood, non-profits serving disabled populations may
make contributions to begin a program of this sort. The North Carolina General As-
sembly provided funding to TEACH within a few years of its creation and could do the
same for this program. Additionally, the program would be eligible for federal education
grants through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.7

Endnotes
1. Child Care Services Association. The T.E.A.C.H. Early Childhood Project. 2006. http://www.childcare-
services.org/ps/teach.html
2. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Teacher Assistants.” Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010-11 Edition.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos153.htm
3. Office of Special Education Programs & U.S. Department of Education. “Part B Personnel,” Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Data, https://www.ideadata.org/PartBPersonnel.asp
4. Child Care Services Association. The T.E.A.C.H. Early Childhood Project.
5. Miller, Joyce Ann, and Tania Bogatova. 2009. “Quality improvements in the early care and education
workforce: Outcomes and impact of the T.E.A.C.H. Early Childhood Project.” Evaluation & Program
Planning 32, no. 3: 257-277.
6. Brownell, Mary T., et al. “Special Education Teacher Supply and Teacher Quality: The Problems, The
Solutions.” Focus on Exceptional Children 35, no. 2 (October 2002).
7. U.S. Department of Education. Building the Legacy: IDEA 2004. 2009. http://idea.ed.gov/explore/
home
8. U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education Policy & Budget Development Staff.
Teacher Shortage Areas nationwide listing for the years 1990-91 through 2009-10. March 2009.
9. McLeskey, James, Naomi C. Tyler, and Susan Saunders Flippin. “The Supply of and Demand for Special
Education Teachers: A Review of Research Regarding the Chronic Shortage of Special Education
Teachers.” Journal of Special Education 38, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 5-21.
10. Brownell, Mary T., et al. “Special Education Teacher Supply and Teacher Quality: The Problems, The
Solutions.”

17
Closing the Reading Gap:
Educating Teachers in Student Home Dialects
Joelle Gamble, University of California Los Angeles

The gap between the reading and writing scores of students from non-Standard
English linguistic backgrounds and Standard English students is widening. Due to
the complex language and dialect diversity among Los Angeles students, teach-
ers should be trained in the basic grammatical and phonetic structures of students’
home dialects.

Back in 1979, a US Circuit Judge ruled

in the case of Martin Luther King Jr. El-
ementary School Children v. Ann Arbor
School District that the school system
failed to take students’ home dialects
into account and that this led to a
lowering of students’ reading abilities.
Since then, several in-the-classroom
studies have proven that inclusion of
students’ home dialects in reading and
writing curriculums can increase ability
to learn Standard English, thus improv-
ing performance in reading and writ-
ing.4
Key Facts
• For the 2007-2008 school year, only 28 %
of African American students in the Los
Angeles area achieved an advanced profi-
ciency in reading and writing.1
• For the same year, 25 % of Latino students,
32 % Pacific Islander, and 58 % of non-La-
tino white students achieved % advanced
proficiency in reading and writing.2
• Under NCLB, schools that do not meet
their targets for student assessment
scores face harsher sanctions that can in-
clude staff dismissals and closings.3

English as a Second Language (ESL) students in metropolitan, under-served commu-

nities are performing significantly lower on standardized tests in reading and writing
than their white counterparts.5 In the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD),
African American, Hispanic/Latino and Pacific Islander students consistently represent
a lower portion of advanced reading and writing high school students.6 Basic training in
the grammatical and phonetic structures of students’ home dialects will enable LAUSD
teachers to apply this knowledge to Standard English reading and writing curricula,
improving performance of ESL students on reading and writing assessments.

Numerous plans have been proposed to heighten the academic performance of mi-
nority students, the most recent of which is the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of
2001. This act included measures to provide federal funding for schools promoting the
success of students on skill assessment exams, based on the standards set by each in-
dividual state. Reports suggest that NCLB has not been an effective method of closing
the education gap between ESL and white students.7 As a result, many school districts
with ESL students are not prioritized in the funding allocation process.

The Obama administration is proposing a new method for allocating funds and promot-
ing academic progress in America’s schools. In addition to eliminating the 2014 deadline
for academic progress standards set under NCLB, the administration plans to acknowl-
edge progressing schools and providing funding to failing schools.8 As many failing

18
schools have a disproportionate share of minority students, this funding can in part be
put towards the development and implementation of home dialect training programs,
which will improve ESL students’ performance in reading and writing.

Analysis
In Chicago, a professor tested a new meth-
od for Standard English writing among her
students. Students performed contrastive
analyses between AAVE (African American
Vernacular English) and Standard English.
Those who participated showed a 59 per-
cent reduction in the use of AAVE in Stan-
dard English settings. In contrast, those who
studied with traditional methods, which did
not incorporate their home dialect, showed
an 8.5 percent increase of improper use
of Standard English in formal writing as-
signments.9 Teachers who understand the
structure of students’ home dialects will
be able to incorporate these structures
into reading and writing curricula, thereby
increasing students’ ability to properly use
Standard English in the classroom and on
assessment tests.
Talking Points
• Studies have shown that many stu-
dents speak a dialect of English en-
titled AAVE, which has phonetic and
grammatical rules and structures dif-
ferent from Standard English.10
• Trials have proven that even moderate
training and incorporation of home
dialects into current curriculums will
help enable historically low-scoring
students to learn the Standard Eng-
lish necessary for college and the pro-
fessional world.11
• Training teachers in students’ home
dialects is a simple way to modify
reading and writing curricula to allow
more ESL students to learn profes-
sional Standard English.

Next Steps
Los Angeles School Districts can begin to educate teachers in student home dialects
through brief conferences or trainings before the start of the school year. Using exist-
ing infrastructure that provides leadership and training to teachers and administrators
would be the simplest way to jumpstart this process. For example, the Partnership
for Los Angeles Schools already has structures designed to provide resources for its
teachers, and similar structures exist throughout the system. Teacher training in stu-
dent home dialects can be incorporated into most major metropolitan areas with large
minority populations and historically widening reading and writing gaps.

Endnotes
1. Nation’s Report Card,“White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander fourth-graders scored higher in 2007 than in
1992.” National Assessment for Educational Progress. (http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2007/r0009.asp). (Ac-
cessed 14 July 2010).
2. Nation’s Report Card,
3. Sam Dillon, “Obama to seek sweeping change in ‘No Child Law’.” New York Times, January 31, 2010. http://www.ny-
times.com/2010/02/01/education/01child.html?ref=todayspaper. (accessed January 31, 2010)
4. Evelyn Freeman, “The Ann Arbor decision: The importance of teachers’ attitudes toward language.” The Elementary
School Journal 83, no. 1 (1982): 40-47
5. Nation’s Report Card. http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2007/r0009.asp
6. Nation’s Report Card. http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2007/r0009.asp
7. Sam Dillon, “Obama to seek sweeping change in ‘No Child Law’.”
8. Sam Dillon, “Obama to seek sweeping change in ‘No Child Law’.”
9. Taylor, Hanni. “Black English and Biadialectalism.” New York: Peter Lang, 1989
10. Public Broadcasting Netwrk. “African American Varities-African American Vernacular English.” Do You Speak Ameri-
can?. http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/AAVE/ebonics/ (accessed November 30, 2009)
11. Taylor, “Black English and Biadialectalism.”

19
Universal, State-Regulated
Pre-Kindergarten Education
Elena Malkov, Wheaton College

Providing federally funded and state regulated pre-kindergarten education to all

American children between the ages of three and five will generate a wide variety of
educational, economic, and social benefits.

Studies show that when children receive a quality pre-kindergarten education, it pro-
vides numerous benefits to American society. For instance, the crime rate among mem-
bers of pre-k programs is lower than that of non-members.1 In a study done on the
participants of the Chicago-Parent Center Prekindergarten Program, only 16.9% had
been arrested by the age of 18, as opposed to 25.1% of non-participants.2 Additionally,
participants in pre-k programs have an even lower rate of teen pregnancy.3 Aside from
these societal benefits, pre-k programs actively prepare children for the education sys-
tem. Therefore, they require fewer expenses at the K-12 level due to a reduced need for
special education courses, as well as resulting in fewer instances of grade failure.

Though the benefits of pre-k are vast, the

current set-up is disorganized and unco- Key Facts
• 39 states and DC currently offer
ordinated. While 39 states and the District
state-funded programs.4
of Columbia offer state-funded pre-k pro- • Only 6 states provide support for
grams, only Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma pre-k programs through their formu-
offer such programs universally. Only six las for school funding.5
states provide monetary support for pre-k • Florida, Georgia and Oklahoma are
programs through their formulas for school currently the only states that offer
funding, and only 18 states and DC require pre-k to all four year olds.6
pre-k teachers to hold BA degrees. Further- • Only 18 states and DC require BA
more, pre-k programs are generated by a degrees for pre-k teachers.7
variety of private and public agencies, which
means all programs are set up with differing
systems and standards. Lack of standardization has lead to inefficient use of funding,
as well as unsystematic management. Current programs lack standardized curricula
and education prerequisites for teachers, creating programs that provide only limited
benefits for the same costs.8

The first research and exploration of pre-k programs began in the 1960s. In 1965, Law-
rence J. Schweinhart and David Weikart initiated a study in Ypsilanti, Michigan called
the Perry Preschool Project. The study found that participants of the pre-k program
had a higher rate of graduation and employment, and a lower rate of teen pregnancy
than their peers. The study greatly contributed to the rise in popularity of Head Start,
a pre-k program also created in 1965.9 Though Head Start has produced some sat-
isfactory results, it is not an optimum pre-k program. Created mostly to help at-risk
children transition to the school environment, it alone does not necessarily provide
all the aforementioned benefits. A state-run program available to all different types of
children would be more all encompassing and beneficial.10

20
Analysis
While creating a pre-k program can be expensive at first – the investment per child
can range from four to fifteen thousand dollars – the returns are even greater.11 One
study shows that each child who goes through a pre-k program will save their school
district from $2,600 to $4,400 over their K-12 experience, as there is a dramatic de-
crease in grade repetition, need for special education courses, teacher turnover and
a variety of other costly factors.12 Additional financial benefits come from increased
work productivity among pre-k graduates, as well as higher income.13 States should cre-
ate pre-kindergarten educational programs with statewide curricula and an education
requirement for program teachers (such as a bachelor’s degree in education or another
subject). Funding for pre-kindergarten education should come from both the national
and state level. Regulations regarding programs, teaching requirements and curricu-
la should be addressed by state legislature. Members of federal and state Congress
should work with advocacy groups such as Pre-K Now, a sub-group of the Pew Center
on the States, to refine regulations and funding of pre-kindergarten programs.

Next Steps
Though the initiative to create
regulated and all-encompassing Talking Points
pre-k programs should come • Although funding exists for early childhood edu-
primarily at the state level, sev- cation programs, it is often used inefficiently due
eral federal funding opportuni- to lack of proficient program management.15
• Due to the large variety of pre-k programs such
ties are already in place for their
as Head Start and faith-based centers, no one set
commencement. The American of regulations and requirements is applied, which
Recovery and Reinvestment Act results in a lack of a standardized curriculum or an
(ARRA) has pledged $2.1 billion education prerequisite for teachers.
to Head Start and Early Head
Start programs, $53.6 billion to
stabilize early childhood, elementary and secondary education, as well as $27.2 billion
to other education programs. Pre-k programs must work in tandem with strong school
programs to take complete effect, therefore, federal funding may additionally be used
to reform the current public school system in a way that promotes and builds on the
foundation set by pre-k programs.

Endnotes
1. Albert Wat, “Dollars and Sense: A Review of Economic Analyses of Pre-K” (Washington DC: Pre-K Now, 2007), 17.
2. Robert B. Lynch, Enriching Children, Enriching the Nation (Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute, 2007), 32.
3. Wat, 16.
4. “School Readiness: A federal agenda in support of pre-kindergarten education” (Washington, DC: Pre-K Now), 3.
5. Ibid 4.
6. Ibid 6.
7. Ibid 4.
8. Ibid 2-6.
9. Constance Holden, “Head Start enters adulthood (Head Start program evaluated after 25 years of operation” (Science,
1990).
10. Ibid.
11. Wat 5, 15.
12. Wat 17.
13. Wat 20.
14. “Leadership Matters: Governors’ Pre-K Proposals Fiscal Year 2010” (Washington, DC: Pre-K Now, 2009), 12.
15. Ibid 5.
16. Ibid 5.

21
Funding Arts Programs in Low-Performing
Districts Through USPS Fundraising Stamps
Erika K. Solanki & Shah-Rukh Paracha, University of California Los Angeles

To close the achievement gap between high and low-income school districts, Con-
gress should authorize a new U.S. postal service semipostal, or fundraising stamp,
for the purpose of improving the access to, and quality of school arts programs. The
funds raised per semipostal sold will be distributed by the Department of Education
to thirty historically low-performing K-12 school districts in the nation.

The Los Angeles Unified School District

(LAUSD) is the nation’s second largest KEY FACTS
• Evidence from the YouthARTS Develop-
district, with a dropout rate near 40%. 1
ment project exhibited an inverse relation-
LAUSD is a prime example of a histori- ship between an increase in art programs
cally low-performing district that needs and decrease in criminal behavior, and im-
additional funding to prevent further proved attitudes towards education.2
cuts to its arts programs. In Decem- • During budget crises, arts programs are
ber 2008, LAUSD instituted a funding disproportionately affected negatively.3
freeze in an attempt to recover from a • Since 1998, the United States Postal Ser-
$375 million budget deficit. As a result, vice has sold more than 785.6 million
the district canceled all Arts Commu- Breast Cancer Research stamps, with
100% of profits contributing to breast can-
nity Partnership Network programs
cer research and treatment programs.4
and services, affecting over 80 artists
and arts organizations as hundreds of
scheduled arts activities were canceled
or put on hold indefinitely. Studies have demonstrated the positive effects of drama,
music, visual arts, and dance programs on student learning, including: improved reading
and language skills, sharper mathematic skills, better critical thinking skills, enhanced
social skills, a higher motivation to learn, and a more positive school environment. Fund-
ing art programs via postal service semipostal is an innovative and cost-effective means
to revitalize school art programs and work to close the achievement gap.

Analysis
Multiple studies concur that vibrant arts programs and student achievement are posi-
tively linked with improved reading and language skills, sharper mathematic skills, bet-
ter critical thinking skills, enhanced social skills, a higher motivation to learn, and a more
positive school environment.5 A study conducted by The College Board shows a strong
linear correlation between arts program participation and SAT scores—students with
less arts coursework in high school scored 58 points less on the verbal portion and 38
points less on the math portion of the SAT on average.6 Studies find that students en-
gaging in dramatic enactments have measurably better reading comprehension, story
understanding, and writing skills.7 Arts programs are a postive motivator for students at
risk of not graduating.8 Overall, integrated arts programs enhance school environments,
as demonstrated by the Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education and the A+ Schools
Program in North Carolina, both of which increased collaboration between teachers
and the community, resulting in higher standardized test scores.9

22
Semipostals will raise additional funds for specific districts and dwindling art programs.
Each semipostal stamp will sell for fifty-five cents, while First Class stamps cost forty-six
cents. The U.S. postal service has only ever issued three fundraising stamps; the Breast
Cancer Research stamp leads in popularity and is the only semipostal currently in circu-
lation. The Dept. of Education will distribute the difference of eleven cents per stamp
sold to art programs among thirty historically low-performing school districts across
America. The mechanisms to start semipostal production immediately are already in
place, and the cost of the semipostal production will be covered by the stamp price.

Next Steps
According to standardized test scores,
the Dept. of Education should first iden-
tify the thirty most underperforming dis-
tricts in the nation, and then implement
an annual competition for stamp designs
with submissions from K-12 students in
those districts. Funding for marketing
campaigns to effectively promote the
Arts for K-12 semipostal should come
from federal and municipal education
agencies, as well as local and national
private organizations including: the Na-
tional Assembly of State Arts Agencies,
the Arts Education Partnership, and Na-
tional Art Education Association, and lo-
cal groups like the Los Angeles County
Arts Commission and Arts for L.A.
TALKING POINTS
• Art programs have the greatest positive
benefits on the most economically dis-
advantaged districts, yet these are the
districts that have the greatest funding
discrepancies for art programs.
• The Dept. of Education will distribute the
eleven cent difference between a first-
class stamp and the semi-postal to art
programs in historically low-performing
districts.10
• Enhancing art programs in the most un-
derserved districts through the institu-
tion of a semipostal will avoid controver-
sial funding methods.

Endnotes
1. Dania Morris, “The Dropout Crisis.” http://cislawest.org/dropout-statistics.php (accessed November 28,
2009).
2. Heather J. Clawson and Kathleen Coolbaugh, YouthARTS Development Project, Office of Juvenile Jus-
tice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice, 2001.
3. OJJDP, U.S. Department of Justice
study. YouthARTS Development Project, pp. 7, 10, 12
4. Susan G. Komen for the Cure Celebrates the Reauthorization of the Breast Cancer Research Stamp
Komen Newsletter (2007), http://ww5.komen.org/KomenNewsArticle.aspx?id=7476. (accessed De-
cember 7, 2009).
5. Susy Watts, “Arts-Infused Summer School.” http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/arts/watts2.htm (ac-
cessed December 3, 2009).
6. 2005 College-Bound Seniors: Total Group Profile Report, The College Board, 2005, Table 3-3; SAT
Scores of Students Who Study the Arts: What We Can and Cannot Conclude about the Association,
Kathryn Vaughn and Ellen Winner (Fall 2000)
7. Jennifer Ross Goodman, “A Naturalistic Study of the Relationship between Literacy Development and
Dramatic Play in Five-Year-Old Children.” In R. Deasy (Ed.), Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and
Student Achievement and Social Development, Washington, DC: 2002. AEP.
8. Barry, N., J. Taylor, and K. Walls “The Role of the Fine and Performing Arts in High School Dropout
Prevention.” In R. Deasy (Ed.), Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student Achievement and Social
Development, Washington, DC: 2002. AEP.
9. Sandra Ruppert, Critical Evidence. 2006.
10. Stamps and Postcards, USPS. http://www.usps.com/postalhistory/stampsandpostcards.htm?from=Post
alHistory&page=Center_StampsandPostcards. (accessed Janurary 3, 2009).

23
Increasing Access to Information Networks
For Community College Students
Nathan Maton & Leslie Faylor, New York University

States should pilot programs that support information networks for committed com-
munity college students seeking access to better jobs.

Community college students seeking careers that offer economic advancement need
access to professional experience, which requires an understanding of how information
networks function. Information networks are programs like on-campus recruitment,
career fairs, and job shadowing that teach students about diverse industries and give
them access to industry leaders who can advise, mentor, hire or recommend them for
professional experiences.

Beginning community college stu- Key Facts

dents with access to information net-
works are 25% more likely to continue
on to their second year of schooling.4
Furthermore, approximately 70% of
jobs are found through personal con-
nections, making these networking
opportunities a requirement for finan-
cial security.5 Students have identified
these networks as a need; according
to one report, students without infor-
mation networks reported that they
felt as though college “was set up to promote failure and felt frustrated with their
institutional experiences.”6
• Over half of college students attend a com-
munity college. Their enrollment will rise
by as much as 20% in the next decade.1
• The lifetime earning potential of an individ-
ual holding an associate’s degree is approx-
imately 25% less than that of an individual
holding a bachelor’s degree.2
• 41% of incoming community college stu-
dents are from households with incomes
totaling less than $20,000 per year.3

According to Robert Putnam, access to informational networks empowers and pro-

vides more opportunities for low-income students.7 These networks used to be public,
but over the last fifty years professional associations providing these connections have
declined 60% on average.8 Mentorship programs attempt to address these concerns,
but are hard to successfully implement. One program currently using this method is
the Pathways Program at Holyoke Community College, which has an approximate $1
million grant to create informational networks to support its students in transferring to
4-year institutions and receiving a bachelor’s degree. This program has helped approxi-
mately 20% of its annual transfer students enroll in some of the nation’s best colleges,
like Amherst and Mount Holyoke.9 Holyoke Community College’s Pathways Program
suggests these programs could cost approximately $625 per student.10

Analysis
These programs should focus on engaging first year community college students, help-
ing them develop long-term goals. Students attend community college for various rea-
sons, including remedial or elective coursework and professional development. Com-
munity college students who have defined career goals are more likely to dedicate

24
themselves academically and pursue a four year degree. Information networks benefit
these students because they can accelerate an individual’s depth of knowledge in a
given field. With these experiences, these individuals develop a vision and a resume
that makes them more attractive to competitive colleges and jobs.

Next Steps Talking Points

The state government should apply
for grants that will allow them to pi-
lot programs akin to the Pathways
Program at local community col-
leges while simultaneously evaluat-
ing these programs. Measuring the
success of the students who partici-
pated in this program would allow
the state to assess if, and how, these
programs are benefiting community
college students, as well as the most
effective way to build information
networks.
• Research shows that “every dollar invested
in a community college yields an average of
$3 in benefits back to the taxpayers (ACCT,
2003).”11
• Students without information networks re-
ported that they felt as though college “was
set up to promote failure and felt frustrated
with their institutional experiences.”12
• 70% of jobs are found through social networks
so talented community college students with-
out information networks outside their low
income communities are severely disadvan-
taged in access to jobs.13

Endnotes
1. Phillippe, Kent A., and Leila G. Sullivan. National Profile of Community Colleges: Trends & Statistics. Ed.
Deanna D’Errico. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges: Community
College, 2005.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Karp, Melinda M., and Katherine L. Hughes. “Information networks and integration: Institutional influ-
ences on experiences and persistence of beginning students.” Wiley InterScience 144 (2008): 73-82.
Print.
5. Huhman, Heather. “Networking as a job search tool (part 5): Find a mentor.” Examiner. 10 Sept. 2009.
Web. 27 Jan. 2010. <http://www.examiner.com/x-828-Entry-Level-Careers-Examiner~y2008m9d10-
Networking-as-a-job-search-tool-part-5-Find-a-mentor>.
6. Karp, Melinda M., and Katherine L. Hughes. “Information networks and integration: Institutional influ-
ences on experiences and persistence of beginning students.” Wiley InterScience 144 (2008): 73-82.
7. Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon
& Schuster, 2001.
8. Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon
& Schuster, 2001. Print. Appendix III, 439.
9. Hoover, Eric. “Holyoke Community College Builds on Its Transfer Tradition.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education (2009). 13 Dec. 2009. Web. 27 Jan. 2010. <http://chronicle.com/article/Holyoke-Communi-
ty-College/49457/>.
10. Hoover, Eric. “Holyoke Community College Builds on Its Transfer Tradition.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education (2009). 13 Dec. 2009. Web. 27 Jan. 2010. <http://chronicle.com/article/Holyoke-Communi-
ty-College/49457/>.
11. Knapp, Kelly-Reid, & Whitmore, 2006 in Phillippe, Kent A., and Leila G. Sullivan. National Profile of
Community Colleges: Trends & Statistics. Ed. Deanna D’Errico. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American As-
sociation of Community Colleges: Community College, 2005. Accessed online January 27, 2010.
12. Karp, Melinda M., and Katherine L. Hughes. “Information networks and integration: Institutional influ-
ences on experiences and persistence of beginning students.” Wiley InterScience 144 (2008): 73-82.
13. Huhman, Heather. “Networking as a job search tool (part 5): Find a mentor.” Examiner. 10 Sept. 2009.
Web. 27 Jan. 2010. <http://www.examiner.com/x-828-Entry-Level-Careers-Examiner~y2008m9d10-
Networking-as-a-job-search-tool-part-5-Find-a-mentor>.

25
Expanding the Growth Model Testing
Pilot Program
Aaron Goldstein, American University

To increase individual academic growth, the United States Department of Education

should expand the growth model pilot program, permitting all fifty states to use this
innovative and proficient testing system.

Growth model testing is a unique form of computer testing that uses non-standardized
tests to produce individual results. These tests are given semi-annually or annually to
monitor the progress of students throughout their elementary education. To be permit-
ted to use growth model testing, states must go through numerous steps established
by the Department of Education to ensure that the growth model tests are an effective
tool for monitoring student performance. These additional measures help improve the
validity and efficiency of the test, and will help promote closing the achievement gap
for all students.3 U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated, “We want to close
the data gap that now handcuffs districts from tracking growth in student learning and
improving classroom instruction.”4 The U.S. Department of Education has been concen-
trating federal efforts to increase the amount of data available to school districts; this
will allow for growth models to monitor student’s growth and advance proficiency in all
areas of academics. This availability of data encourages the development and analysis
of individual student’s progress through their growth model assessments.

The pilot program was established in 2005 Key Facts

with the belief that states should be permit- • The American Reinvestment and Re-
ted to use growth models to determine the covery Act of 2009 allocated $300
school’s ability to achieve adequate yearly million for building data systems
progress instead of standardized testing. to increase the accountability of
There are currently fifteen states that use a growth model systems.1
growth model test for their statewide testing • Only 15 states currently use growth
model testing to administer stu-
as compliant with the testing standards of the
dent’s individual progress.2
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
The Department of Education established
seven principles that an effective growth model must have. These principles ensure
that the achievement gap is closed for all ethnicities. They include annual achievement
must be judged based upon grade levels; schools must be accountable for achievement
in reading and math; an increased ability to track student progress annually; and the
capability to monitor student participation and student achievement as guidelines to
an accountable system.5

Analysis
In March 2008, Colorado had its growth model pilot program approved by the U.S. De-
partment of Education and the Colorado State Board of Education. The primary goal
of Colorado’s system is that each individual student is compared to their peers in rela-
tion to the development of their academic proficiency. The Colorado Department of
Education recently released their data from the 2008-2009 growth model tests which
demonstrated that there was steady growth among grade levels in various areas includ-

26
ing “34% of students who scored below
Talking Points
proficiency last year in reading were grow- • School districts are able to supervise
ing fast enough to catch up to proficiency individual student’s growth annually un-
in the current academic year.”6 States that der a growth model system.
have been compiling data over several • Growth models encourage the in-
years through their growth model systems creased development of students and
have proven that growth models can be improve the levels of academic growth
effective in monitoring individual student’s among each student by providing class-
growth. A common concern with growth room teacher’s with the information
models is that there is a lack of definition they need to differentiate instruction.
in what sufficient growth entails. This issue
could be easily resolved through common
core state standards that have been developed by a consortium of 48 states including
governors and chief state school officers. Growth models promote academic progress
by providing individual and class scores instantaneously. The typical standardized test
meanwhile has a prolonged delay before results are known. Teachers and school admin-
istrators are therefore given the tools needed to immediately change the structure of
the class in order to address the specific academic areas that are in need of greatest
attention.

Next Steps
In order for the growth model testing pilot program to expand to more states, there
must be financial incentives to states to utilize the growth model system as an alterna-
tive to standardized testing. States should be held accountable under this system for
5-7 years as they analyze individual’s proficiency rates under the new system.

President Obama has proposed a dramatic need for our nation to increase the rate of
college graduates as a necessity to compete in the global economy. President Obama
said that “we will provide the support necessary for you to complete college and meet
a new goal: by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college
graduates in the world.”7 The I3 fund has great potential for funding a large variety
of innovative and unique projects. I3 should be extended and promoted through the
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in order to promote
innovation in education including the use of unique and personalized testing methods
like growth models.

Endnotes
1. Duncan, Arne. “The Race to the Top Begins.” U.S. Department of Education Home Page. U.S. Department of Education,
24 July 2009. Web. 23 Dec. 2009. <http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/07/07242009.html>.
2. Spelling, Margaret. “Secretary Spelling Approves Additional Growth Model Pilots for 2008-2009 School Year.” U.S. De-
partment of Education, 8 Jan. 2009. Web. 22 Dec. 2009. <http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/01/01082009a.
html>.
3. United States. U.S. Department of Education. Growth Model Proposal Peer Recommendations for the NCLB Growth
Model Pilot Applications. U.S. Department of Education, 23 Sept. 2008. Web. 23 Dec. 2009. <http://www.ed.gov/
policy/elsec/guid/cc2.doc>.
4. Duncan, Arne. “The Race to the Top Begins.”
5. Spelling, Margaret. “Secretary Spelling Approves Additional Growth Model Pilots for 2008-2009 School Year.”
6. Stevens, Mark. “New School Accountability Process Builds on Colorado Growth Model; 2008-2009 Results Reveal
How Many Students Are On Track For Proficiency.” Colorado Department of Education Press Release. Colorado
Department of Education, 7 Aug. 2009. Web. 28 Dec. 2009. <http://www.cde.state.co.us/communications/download/
PDF/20090807csapresultsfinal.pdf>.
7. Greene, Robert. “Obama Urges U.S. to Regain World Lead in College Graduates.” Bloomberg. February 26, 2009. Wed.
5 July 2010. <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ao_WPhFqAhzM&refer=us>.

27
Roosevelt Review Preview:
Refugee Policy - Implications for the Admission
of Refugees of the Iraq War Since 2003
Adina Appelbaum, Washington University in St. Louis

Abstract
In the past three decades, the U.S. has resettled more refugees from around the world
than all other developed nations combined. Yet following the U.S.-led war on Iraq in
2003, only minimal numbers of Iraqi refugees have been allowed into the U.S. despite
the displacement of over 4 million as a direct result of the war. The U.S. response to
the crisis has proved inadequate, especially when compared to previous refugee crises
in which the U.S. has been primarily responsible for events that led to displacements.
Why has the U.S. failed to react steadfastly and meaningfully to the Iraqi refugee cri-
sis?

In order to analyze the U.S. response, this white paper explores the following question:
How have U.S. foreign policy interests affected the U.S. response to the Iraqi refugee
crisis? The argument postulates that the U.S. has not responded fully to the crisis be-
cause it has not been in its foreign policy advantage to do so. The U.S. has had an
interest in legitimizing Iraq and its government and, therefore, has not addressed the
crisis through special resettlement programs and sufficient aid because doing so would
otherwise illuminate Iraq’s instability and thus de-legitimize the U.S. mission there. Be-
yond U.S. strategy, the fragmented nature of the international community’s approach
to refugee policy and the inadequacies of the USRAP have also been responsible for
the cumulative failed response to the Iraqi refugee crisis, particularly the USRAP’s in-
consistent and inflexible design which has resulted in dire rates of unemployment and
homelessness for resettled Iraqi refugees.

To read more, visit www.rooseveltinstitute.org for the full white paper,

part of the forthcoming Roosevelt Review.

29
www.rooseveltcampusnetwork.org