Office for Education Policy: “Making Evidence Matter” Marc Holley Nate Jensen Brent Riffel Gary W. Ritter, Director.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Common Core: What should we like and dislike? And what don’t we need to worry about … Gary W. Ritter University of Arkansas Joint House and Senate Education.
Advertisements

The Need To Improve STEM Learning Successful K-12 STEM is essential for scientific discovery, economic growth and functioning democracy Too.
Principals Changing Schools Through Leadership and Advocacy 2009 NAESP-NASSP National Leaders’ Conference.
Closing the Race Gap in College Readiness Amy Ellen Schwartz Director, Institute for Education and Social Policy Professor of Public Policy, Education.
Center of Excellence in Leadership of Learning October 5, 2010.
Challenge to Lead Southern Regional Education Board Kentucky Challenge to Lead Goals for Education Kentucky is On the Move Progress Report 2008 Challenge.
Briefing: NYU Education Policy Breakfast on Teacher Quality November 4, 2011 Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor NYC Department of Education.
Hot Topics in AR Education Reform: The UA Office for Education Policy Joshua Barnett, Ginny Blankenship, & Laura Israel Research In Progress Seminar Fall.
How Have Arkansas Students Been Performing? Keith Nitta University of Arkansas, Clinton School of Public Service April 22, 2008.
Challenge to Lead Southern Regional Education Board Oklahoma Challenge to Lead Goals for Education Oklahoma is On the Move Progress Report 2008 Challenge.
Our Mission: Preparing Students for Postsecondary Success Mansoureh Tehrani R. L. Turner High School
CATE UPDATE Susan Flanagan, Director Office of Career and Technology Education March 12, 2013.
Computing Leadership Summit STEM Education Steve Robinson U.S. Department of Education White House Domestic Policy Council February 22, 2010.
STEM Education Reorganization April 3, STEM Reorganization: Background  The President has placed a very high priority on using government resources.
FY 2016 BUDGET INVESTING IN AMERICA’S FUTURE. “America thrived in the 20th century because we made high school free, sent a generation of GIs to college,
Dr. Gary Ritter, Director, Office for Education Policy House Committee on Higher Education October 28, 2011.
Catherine Cross Maple, Ph.D. Deputy Secretary Learning and Accountability
THE RESEARCH ON CLASS SIZE Christopher Martell, Ed.D.
Friday, February 7 th 8:30am. Conversation 8:30-9:30 1. Welcome 2. Where is Georgia in comparison to other states? 3. What is making the difference? 4.
Arkansas State Report Card Are We 5 th or 48 th ? February 21, 2013 Arkansas House Education Committee.
Florida’s Race to the Top R e d a c t e d. 2 Florida’s Courage to Reform School and district grades A – F Differentiated Accountability High School Grades.
SAVING AND CREATING JOBS AND REFORMING EDUCATION U.S. Department of Education June 12, 2009.
LOUISIANA 1 Goals for Education Challenge to Lead 2003 Louisiana.
Leveraging Race to the Top to Maximize the Use of Data To Ensure College & Career Readiness Aimee R. Guidera Achieve ADP September 10, 2009.
1 Executive Limitation 12: Curriculum and Instruction Darlene Westbrook Chief Academic Officer Denise Collier Executive Director for Curriculum Monitoring.
LOUISIANA STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION JOHN WHITE Tracking Readiness: Measuring High School Effectiveness in Louisiana National Conference on Student.
Washington Learns Overview for Shoreline Operations November Norma Goldstein.
Challenge to Lead Southern Regional Education Board Georgia Goals for Education Challenge to Lead: Georgia 2006 Challenge to Lead Southern Regional Education.
(High/Middle School) HSTW/MMGW Site Presentation ( Month Date, 2006) Promising Practices Next Steps Major Challenges Technical Review Visit (TRV)
Welcome to LIB5080 The School Library Media Program.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Standard 3: Candidate quality, recruitment and selectivity Jennifer Carinci,
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
Superintendent’s Panel on Excellence in Adult Education.
Mathematics and Science Education U.S. Department of Education.
Presentation Intro. The Single Salary Schedule: From Initial Intention to Current Conundrum James W. Guthrie Peabody Center for Education Policy Measuring.
The State of Public Education in North Carolina EDN 200.
Changes in Community Informational Meeting March 10, 2014.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
U.S. Department of Education Reform Agenda Overview April 2010.
Implementing Merit Pay, Overcoming the Obstacles: Lessons from the Field Gary W. Ritter Endowed Chair in Education Policy Brent Riffel Nate Jensen Office.
Analysis of Expenditure Changes post-Act 59 – Initial Findings Prepared for the Arkansas Senate Office for Education Policy University of Arkansas
The Improving Teacher Quality State Grants Program California Postsecondary Education Commission California Mathematics & Science Partnership 2011 Spring.
November 2006 Copyright © 2006 Mississippi Department of Education 1 Where are We? Where do we want to be?
ISLN Network Meeting KEDC SUPERINTENDENT UPDATE. Why we are here--Purpose of ISLN network New academic standards  Deconstruct and disseminate Content.
The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning Research conducted by SRI International California State University University of California, Office.
Eastern Technical High School “ All In: Creating an AP Culture That Expands Access and Raises Performance.” 1.
How Much Value is Added? An Evaluation Plan for the Achievement Challenge Pilot Project.
Integrating Success The Transition of All Students From High School to College November 2007 Iowa Educational Research & Evaluation Association Annual.
Can Merit Pay Work? Lessons from Little Rock Arkansas Political Science Association 2008 Conference February 22, 2008 Fayetteville, AR Gary W. Ritter Department.
THE CASE FOR THE NATIONAL WRITING PROJECT AN EVALUATOR’S PERSPECTIVE Inverness Research Associates April 2005.
Vision for Education in Tennessee Our Strategic Priorities ESEA Directors Institute Kathleen Airhart, Deputy Commissioner August 2014.
The elements of the proposed accountability model are subject to change.
College Preparatory Course Certification Pilot May 5th,
Arkansas P-16 Partnership. Arkansas P-16 Partnership Goals Improved Student Achievement P-16 Improved Quality of Teaching P-16 5-Yr P-16 Plan for Arkansas.
Office for Education Policy: How Funding Fuels Research Gary W. Ritter, Director, Office for Education Policy, Department of Education Reform.
High Schools That Work An evidence-based design for improving the nation’s schools and raising student achievement.
CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION State Policies: Orchestrating the Common Core Mathematics Classroom Ilene W. Straus, Vice President California State.
Governor’s Office of Education Innovation Rebecca Gau, Director Download the Plan
Our Vision Arkansas should build on the successes on the Lake View era to tackle the achievement gap with approaches shown by research to work.Arkansas.
Arkansas State Report Card Are We 5 th or 49 th ? July 8, 2013 Arkansas Rural Ed Association.
The Highly Effective Teacher’s Guide to Closing the Achievement Gap facilitated by: Maggie Austin & Doug Rowe.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) Title 1, Part A Recovery Funds for Grants to Local Education Agencies.
Understanding Student Learning Objectives (S.L.O.s)
Challenge to Lead Southern Regional Education Board Arkansas Goals for Education Challenge to Lead: Arkansas 2006 Challenge to Lead Southern Regional Education.
State Board of Education February 10, Update on EOC Reports: Assessment Survey Results Full-Day 4K, CDEP.
“Smart Money”: The Links between Education and Economic Development Gary W. Ritter Director, Office for Education Policy.
PLYMOUTH STEM STRATEGY DRAFT Vision To unify and monitor the positive momentum in STEM to ensure its leadership across Plymouth is aligned to.
OFFICE FOR EDUCATION POLICY UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION & HEALTH PROFESSIONS Introducing the Office for Education Policy at the University.
Aim: Does the US need to reform the educational system? Do Now: Make a list of the best aspects of the education you receive and make a list of the worst.
Defining 21st Century Skills: A Frameworks for Norfolk Public Schools NORFOLK BOARD OF EDUCATION Fall 2009.
Presentation transcript:

Office for Education Policy: “Making Evidence Matter” Marc Holley Nate Jensen Brent Riffel Gary W. Ritter, Director

The Office for Education Policy (OEP): one of many research and service units in COEHP Established in 2003, and housed in the Department of Education Reform Who Are We?

Our Mission The Office for Education Policy seeks to be a resource that aids state policymakers, educators, administrators, and other leaders in thoughtful decision-making concerning K-12 education in the state of Arkansas. In light of this mission, naturally, OEP has been following Arkansas education reform, and trying to track resulting changes in state education. The Office for Education Policy seeks to research key public policy issues relevant to K-12 education in Arkansas and disseminate the findings to policymakers in a timely and accessible manner.

Our Work The Office for Education Policy summarizes, synthesizes, and analyzes current issues and publishes this information in the forms of  Web-based resources  Policy briefs  Working research papers  Quarterly newsletters  Monthly e-news updates

Our Current Research  Tracing the outcome of the Lake View decision  Examining merit pay programs in Little Rock  Analyzing the effectiveness of technology in the classroom  Studying the effects of early childhood programs  Evaluating current science education standards  Reporting on the current school funding formula  Researching the effects of school consolidation

Tracking Progress In addition to evaluating existing programs, OEP continually tracks student performance throughout Arkansas. So…how does the state fare?

Recent Student Performance Arkansas has historically been viewed as both economically and educationally backward compared to most states. Yet in recent years the state has shown dramatic improvement in both economic development and student performance. In terms of the latter, the data confirm Arkansas’ educational progress.

Education Improvements Over the past decade, Arkansas has witnessed… Education reforms Rigorous curricula (Smart Core, EOC exams, one of only 3 states to mandate Algebra II) Accountability measures Incentive-based reform (e.g. performance pay) Approximately $1 billion invested into K-12 education Increases in funding (Lake View decision) Over $400 million for educational facilities Consolidation of schools Rising test scores & graduation rates Increases in AP participation

In terms of expenditures, Arkansas is annually spending almost $10,000 per student

Arkansas teachers earn more than ever before $45,488

Improvement in Early Grades Increases in NAEP Scale Scores Fourth-Grade Reading 1998 to 2005 Source: National Center for Education Statistics/Arkansas Department of Education Significant increases data not available DE MD

NAEP Grade 4 Math – Closing the Gap * Source: Arkansas Department of Education In 2007, average test scores remain near the national average, but largely unchanged from 2005.

Four-Year Graduation Rate From High School U.S. Graduation Rate: 68% Arkansas High School Graduation Rates

Challenges and Solutions Challenge 1: Recently, we have done the important work of increasing standards and increasing resources. This has likely influenced the gains we are witnessing. Now that the resources and standards are in place, the challenge to our policymakers is to develop and implement thoughtful strategies to employ these resources well to benefit students throughout the entire state. This is a big challenge, as innovation often creates contention.

Challenges and Solutions Challenge 2: We do well graduating students from high school, but are they prepared for college?

Potentially Effective Reforms Differentiated Pay for Teachers Critically important to draw talented teachers to difficult to staff areas (geographic and subject areas) Merit Pay, or Performance Bonuses Little Rock Achievement Challenge Pilot Project State legislation on merit pay Teacher Advancement Program Challenge = Inertia

The Effects of Incentive-Based Pay in Little Rock  Student performance in math increased 3.5 NCE points (roughly 6 to 7 percentile points).  Teachers support the ACPP merit pay program, and are significantly more satisfied with the ACPP than with the single salary system.  The program did not lead to counterproductive competition. The school environment is more positive with ACPP.

Challenges on the Horizon Avoiding complacency The settlement of Lake View is not the end of reform Must be willing to try new initiatives (e.g. merit pay, Teach for Arkansas) Must continue on with rigorous standards (exit exams) Keeping the Focus School and district decisions must be based on academics and students (LRSD) Policy and curricular decisions must be based on what has the best chance of working … Focus on the evidence as compared to “this is how we’ve always done it.”

Office for Education Policy For more information contact: The Office for Education Policy (479)