[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE ROLE OF NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN STATE AND LOCAL HIGH SCHOOL
REFORM EFFORTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM
of the
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
AND THE WORKFORCE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
June 9, 2005
__________
Serial No. 109-21
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
or
Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
21-648 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
JOHN A. BOEHNER, Ohio, Chairman
Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin, Vice George Miller, California
Chairman Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon, Major R. Owens, New York
California Donald M. Payne, New Jersey
Michael N. Castle, Delaware Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey
Sam Johnson, Texas Robert C. Scott, Virginia
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Lynn C. Woolsey, California
Charlie Norwood, Georgia Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan Carolyn McCarthy, New York
Judy Biggert, Illinois John F. Tierney, Massachusetts
Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Patrick J. Tiberi, Ohio Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio
Ric Keller, Florida David Wu, Oregon
Tom Osborne, Nebraska Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Joe Wilson, South Carolina Susan A. Davis, California
Jon C. Porter, Nevada Betty McCollum, Minnesota
John Kline, Minnesota Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
Bob Inglis, South Carolina Chris Van Hollen, Maryland
Cathy McMorris, Washington Tim Ryan, Ohio
Kenny Marchant, Texas Timothy H. Bishop, New York
Tom Price, Georgia John Barrow, Georgia
Luis G. Fortuno, Puerto Rico
Bobby Jindal, Louisiana
Charles W. Boustany, Jr., Louisiana
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Thelma D. Drake, Virginia
John R. ``Randy'' Kuhl, Jr., New
York
Paula Nowakowski, Staff Director
John Lawrence, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM
MICHAEL N. CASTLE, Delaware, Chairman
Tom Osborne, Nebraska, Vice Lynn C. Woolsey, California
Chairman Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey
Judy Biggert, Illinois Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania Virginia
Ric Keller, Florida Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
Joe Wilson, South Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio
Bobby Jindal, Louisiana Susan A. Davis, California
John R. ``Randy'' Kuhl, Jr., New George Miller, California, ex
York officio
John A. Boehner, Ohio, ex officio
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 9, 2005..................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Castle, Hon. Michael N., Chairman, Subcommittee on Education
Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce........... 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 3
Miller, Hon. George, Ranking Member, Committee on Education
and the Workforce.......................................... 4
Woolsey, Hon. Lynn C., Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce. 3
Statement of Witnesses:
Henriquez, Andres, Program Officer, Education Division,
Carnegie Corporation of New York, New York, NY............. 16
Prepared statement of.................................... 18
Howard, Deborah, Program Director, School Improvement,
KnowledgeWorks Foundation, Cincinnati, OH.................. 10
Prepared statement of.................................... 12
Vander Ark, Tom, Executive Director, Education, The Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA...................... 5
Prepared statement of.................................... 8
THE ROLE OF NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN STATE AND LOCAL HIGH SCHOOL
REFORM EFFORTS
----------
Thursday, June 9, 2005
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Education Reform
Committee on Education and the Workforce
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Michael N.
Castle, [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Castle, Ehlers, Osborne, Kuhl,
Woolsey, Scott, Hinojosa, and Davis of California.
Ex officio present: Representative Miller.
Also present: Representative Fattah.
Staff Present: Amanda Farris, Professional Staff Member;
Kevin Frank, Professional Staff Member; Lucy House, Legislative
Assistant; Alexa Marrero, Press Secretary; Krisann Pearce,
Deputy Director of Education and Human Resources Policy;
Deborah L. Samantar, Committee Clerk/Intern Coordinator; Alice
Cain, Minority Legislative Associate/Education; Lloyd Horwich,
Minority Legislative Associate; Ricardo Martinez, Minority
Legislative Associate; Joe Novotny, Minority Legislative
Assistant.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL N. CASTLE, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION REFORM, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
Chairman Castle. The forum for the Committee on Education
and the Workforce will come to order.
We're meeting today to hear testimony on The Role of Non-
Profit Organizations in State and Local High School Reform
Efforts.
I want to get to our witnesses today, so I am going to
limit statements to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority
Member of the Subcommittee. I would also like to welcome the
distinguished Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Miller
to the hearing and invite him to make a statement.
Therefore, if other members have statements they will be
included in the hearing record. With that I ask the unanimous
consent for the hearing record to remain open for fourteen days
to allow members' statements and other extraneous material
referenced during the hearing to be submitted in the official
hearing record.
Without objection, so ordered.
Today marks the second in a series of hearings our
Committee will hold to examine the status of secondary
education and what efforts are currently being made to
strengthen high schools across the country. This Committee
recently heard from Governors Romney and Vilsack about high
school reform efforts in their states. Today, we will hear from
three nonprofit organizations about the partnerships they have
across the country, and the innovative ways in which they are
driving change in our high schools.
High school reform is surfacing as a necessity. This is, in
large part, due to recent research that indicates:
One quarter of America's high school students read below
basic levels;
America's 15-year-olds performed below the international
average in mathematics, literacy and problem solving, placing
27th out of 39 countries;
30 percent of students do not graduate from high school;
And 50 percent of African-American and Hispanic students do
not graduate.
These are unacceptable statistics, and resemble what we saw
in our elementary schools leading to the enactment of No Child
Left Behind. High school is no longer about simply moving
students from ninth grade to graduation. We now must ensure all
students are leaving their secondary education with the skills
necessary to reach their next goal. Whether that goal is
college, the military, or to enter the workforce does not
matter. All students now need the basic skills to excel.
A recent study by the Education Commission on the States
suggest that most high school students expect to graduate from
college. The study also shows, however, that only about half of
the students take a rigorous academic program, and that few can
perform anything but relatively simple tasks in mathematics and
reading.
The importance of having a post-secondary degree is
resonating with our high school students. To me, this is good
news, but we have to make sure we are getting it right in high
school. For example, students need to realize that the senior
year is still an academic year, and the schools should seek to
eliminate student apathy once students have gain admittance
into their next endeavor.
I am sure that every person in this room has heard me say
more than once that I am an advocate on behalf of No Child Left
Behind. It is the right thing to do, and is making significant
headway in closing the achievement gap. I commend the
President, the National Governor's Association, local school
districts, and nonprofit organizations for recognizing we now
need to address our nation's high schools. I am not yet sure if
there is a Federal role, or what that role should be, but I
continue to be committed to learning more and doing whatever I
can to make this part of the education reform dialog.
I thank you all for being here and look forward to hearing
from our witnesses.
Chairman Castle. I now yield to the gentlelady from
California, the Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee,
Ms. Woolsey.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Castle follows:]
Statement of Hon. Michael N. Castle, Chairman, Subcommittee on
Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce
Today marks the second in a series of hearings our Committee will
hold to examine the status of secondary education and what efforts are
currently being made to strengthen high schools across the country.
This Committee recently heard from Governors Romney and Vilsack about
high school reform efforts in their states. Today, we will hear from
three non-profit organizations about the partnerships they have across
the country, and the innovative ways in which they are driving change
in our high schools.
High school reform is surfacing as a necessity. This is, in large
part, due to recent research that indicates:
One quarter of America's high school students read below basic
levels;
America's 15-year-olds performed below the international
average in mathematics literacy and problem-solving, placing
27th out of 39 countries;
30% of students do not graduate from high school; and
50% of African-American and Hispanic students do not graduate.
These are unacceptable statistics, and resemble what we saw in our
elementary schools leading to the enactment of No Child Left Behind.
High school is no longer about simply moving students from ninth grade
to graduation. We now must ensure all students are leaving their
secondary education with the skills necessary to reach their next goal.
Whether that goal is college, the military, or to enter the workforce
does not matter--all students now need the basic skills to excel.
A recent study by the Education Commission on the States suggests
that most high school students expect to graduate from college. The
study also shows, however, that only about half of these students take
a rigorous academic program, and that few can perform anything but
relatively simple tasks in mathematics and reading. The importance of
having a postsecondary degree is resonating with our high school
students. To me, this is good news, but we have to make sure we are
getting it right in high school. For example, students need to realize
that the senior year is still an academic year, and schools should seek
to eliminate student apathy once students have gained admittance into
their next endeavor.
I am sure that every person in this room has heard me say more than
once that I am an advocate on behalf of No Child Left Behind. It is the
right thing to do, and is making significant headway in closing the
achievement gap. I commend the President, the National Governors
Association, local school districts, and non-profit organizations for
recognizing we now need to address our nation's high schools. I am not
yet sure if there is a federal role, or what that role would be, but
continue to be committed to learning more and doing whatever I can to
make this part of the education reform dialogue.
I thank you all for being here, and look forward to hearing from
our witnesses.
______
STATEMENT OF HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE
ON EDUCATION REFORM, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for
today's hearing, and thank you witnesses for being here. I am
anxious to hear from you.
High school reform has not been a really hot topic in
Washington, but it's something that the Congress is looking at
becoming more involved in, because of the future of these young
people, and the future of our nation with this new economy--
knowledge economy that we have to be ready for.
So while we're thinking about whether and how, and when,
and why to get more involved, it's really important that we
hear from people like yourselves that have been seriously
considering these issues certainly before today.
Last month the Full Committee heard from both Democratic
and Republican Governors. Today we're going to hear from the
foundations that have been in the front lines of high school
reform. And as we move forward, I am hoping that we will have
the opportunity to hear from school administrators, teachers,
parents and certainly students about their experiences. There
isn't any doubt in my mind, and certainly this Committee's,
that this is a critical issue.
And we'll hear today, of course, that of every 100 students
who enter high school about 70 will graduate, and the numbers
are so much lower for minority students. Of those 70, about 40
will go on to college, and many of them will require remedial
help when they get to college. And only about 20 of the
original hundred will complete college in 6 years or fewer.
That may have been good enough during the industrial age
when most workers needed only basic skills and a basic
understanding of citizenship to get a good job and participate
in the political process. But today, that is not good enough,
because we have a knowledge economy, and we have to have our
children and our students ready to participate in it.
In a recent article, ``It's a Flat World After All'', a
book authored by New York Times' Thomas Friedman, he explained
that America's historical economic advantages have disappeared
now that the world is flat, and anyone with smarts, access to
Google, and a cheap wireless laptop can join the innovation
fray.
Mr. Friedman and others have remedies that they believe
will attract more young women and men to science and
engineering. But it will be impossible for our country to
continue to lead the world in innovation if our high school
system is not among the best in the world. That's why I'm
looking forward to hearing from all of you.
Oh, I should say that Mr. Hendricks--Henriquez. I'm really
sorry.
Mr. Henriquez. Henriquez.
Ms. Woolsey. Henriquez, thank you--is here from Sir Francis
Drake--what? Oh, he mentioned Sir Francis Drake High School in
his remarks, which I really appreciate. That's a school that we
all admire in my district. So thank you for being here.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. Thank you Ms.
Woolsey. I will now yield to the distinguished Ranking Minority
Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Miller, for the purpose of
making an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE MILLER, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and thank you
so much for this hearing, and Ms. Woolsey for this hearing. And
I share all of the concerns that you have both echoed about the
performance and the future purpose of high school.
But I'm really here because I am very excited about the
partnership between the Governors and the nonprofit sectors, in
terms of developing true laboratories for consideration on how
we might reshape the educational experience of our high school
students. How we might make it better connected to the
workplace, to their educational future, and the idea that we
have this kind of public and private partnership really
developing a roadmap for the Congress over the next couple of
years, I think, is very, very valuable.
I am working on and hope to be able, at some point, to
convince the Congress that we should put in some matching
money, that we should in fact encourage more of this effort. So
that when we do make a decision about it, and I believe there
will be a Federal role to play, that it will be an informed
role, it will be based upon the best evidence available. We can
shorten that timeframe in terms of our involvement in an
effective way and the outcomes that we all desire, given the
current status of high schools and achievements--the gaps that
remain.
So I look forward to the testimony. Thank you Mr. Chairman
so much, for this hearing.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Miller. We have a very
distinguished panel of witnesses before us today, and I thank
each of you for coming today. I'll go across and introduce each
of you and then we'll have your statements.
Tom Vander Ark is the Executive Director for the Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation's Education Initiatives. He is
responsible for the development and administration of the
foundation's education grant and scholarship programs. For 5
years prior to joining the Gates foundation, Mr. Vander Ark
served as a public school superintendent, Fedaway Public
Schools, one of Washington state's larger districts. He is one
of the first superintendents in the Nation to be recruited from
the private sector to lead a public school district.
Mrs. Deborah Howard serves as a Program Director of School
Improvement at the Knowledge Works Foundation. As program
director she is a designer and day-to-day manager of the
Foundation's $50 million-plus high school improvement efforts,
the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the Early
College High School Initiative. Prior to her current position,
Mrs. Howard established an education consulting firm called
Principal Results, Inc. in Independence, Ohio.
Mr. Andres Henriquez serves as Program Officer of the
Education Division of the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Mr.
Henriquez works on a wide variety of education issues with a
special emphasis on intermediate and adolescent literacy. He is
also a certified teacher who taught for 5 years in a public
elementary school in East Harlem.
We thank all of you very much for being here. You probably
know the sequence of events. You each have 5 minutes to make
your presentation. If lights, I think it's green for four, and
yellow for one, and thereafter red. And we will go through each
of you, and then we will take turns in 5-minute exchanges
coming from the various members up here.
Mr. Vander Ark, you're the lead-off hitter.
STATEMENT OF TOM VANDER ARK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, THE
BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION, SEATTLE, WA
Mr. Vander Ark. Chairman Castle and Ranking Member Woolsey,
members of the Subcommittee, it's a pleasure to be with you.
It's an honor to be here with my friends from the Carnegie
Foundation and the Knowledge Works Foundation.
I found the opening remarks quite remarkable. We wouldn't
have been having this conversation 5 years ago. It was 5 years
ago that I went to my high school--my daughter's high school
graduation. She went to high school where I was a school
superintendent.
So it was the first time that I sat in the audience for
graduation rather than sitting up front in one of those robes.
As I watched her and her colleagues walk in, I thought there's
not enough of them there. And I pulled out the program and I
counted and there were only 400 kids. But I knew that the two
junior highs in our district had 300 kids each in the ninth
grade class. And for the hour and a half of my daughter's
graduation I thought we are or the other 200 kids. What
happened to those kids? Kids on my watch as superintendent,
that dropped out.
So what should have been one of the best days in my life
was--was a painful reckoning with the fact that kids in my
district, an inner ring suburb of both Seattle and Tacoma, we
lose a third of our kids and almost half of the African-
American and Hispanic kids. If you let that sink in, and you
think about what that means for our future, for our economy,
for our civil society, it's a scary statistic.
What we didn't know until four or 5 years ago was that that
is true nationwide. Our friends at the Manhattan Institute and
the Urban Institute have both confirmed that the statistics
that the Chairman and the ranking member pointed out at the
beginning, it's an appalling problem that we simply haven't had
the data. That's a positive way of putting it. The other way of
putting it is that we've been lying to each other for decades
about how many kids really leave school and under what
conditions. So it's a difficult problem.
But we're working on it because we think it's the most
important problem in American education. This not to say that
is more important than early literacy. We understand that
there's nothing better than, nothing more important than early
start. K-8 improvement in this country is vitally important,
but it is not enough. We have to make sure that every student
has access to really high-quality high schools that prepare
them for college and work and citizenship.
So it's difficult problem, but like Representative Miller,
I'm really excited about several developments. I would like to
mention a couple. One is that when I visit a school like
Frederick Douglass Academy in Harlem, or the new College Board
school in the projects in the South Bronx, or when I go to
Wilson Prep, it's outside of Oakland, here's the statistic that
I think about when I'm in those schools.
Kids in those neighborhoods today have a five or 6 percent
chance of finishing a college degree. You're from a low income
family and you're a minority, there is a five or 6 percent
chance that you're going to finish a college degree.
When I walk into those schools and see the kids at each of
those schools, they have a 60 or 70 percent chance of finishing
a college degree. A powerful school can make a big difference
in the lives of low income kids. And as many noted authors have
pointed out, there are many challenges outside of school that
we also need to deal with. But a powerful school can have an
extremely--can make a big difference in a student's life.
So I'm excited about the progress that we're making in new
school development. We have helped to fund over 800 new schools
and 42 states around the country. I am also, as Representative
Miller put it, I am very excited about the progress that is
being made at the state level. I think at least in part because
of the National Governors Association Summit, and the parallel
work done by Achieve over the last few years, that over half of
the states will make significant progress in their policy and
data sets toward helping more students graduate from high
school, ready for college.
I'm encouraged, but also challenged, by our work with
existing high schools. The big lesson learned in 5 years and
hundreds of millions of dollars, is that it is very, very
difficult to turn around a large struggling urban high school.
I am encouraged, however, by the public-private partnerships
that are being created with the foundations represented here
and with cities all over the country. I know that you would
enjoy the testimony that you'll hear about those partnerships.
I would like to conclude with five very specific pieces of
advice about the Federal role toward helping more students in
America graduate ready for college, work and citizenship.
The first is to lend your support to the post-Summit
activities that the National Governors Association is leading.
NGA is pleased to receive over 30 grant applications this
month. That's an exciting response, and indicative of the
momentum and the opportunity that exists. I very much encourage
you to support that effort.
Second would be to provide continued support for the
development of state and local data systems. The state of data
systems in education today is still pathetic. It is very
difficult to know very basic information about students. I am
very encouraged by the Secretary and Assistant Secretary's
attention to this issue, and know that there are very promising
opportunities for public-private partnerships in this area.
The third and related area would be would just to help us
pick a graduation rate, a definition of a graduation rate. As
simple as that sounds, it's a complicated calculation and many
states use different rates that inhibit our ability to just
track student performance, school performance, and then to
compare state to state. And there is a Federal role in helping
us just define the common rate.
No. 4 is intervening in struggling schools. I think this
will be the biggest issue that states would deal with in the
next 5 years, as the growing number of identify struggling
schools continues to mount. It's going to take big public-
private partnerships to help turn around the struggling
schools.
And finally, I think there's a role for the Federal
Government to create public-private partnerships to fund the
development of exciting new school options. Math and science
schools. The College Board is developing its exciting Advanced
Placement Schools grades six through 12 where all students
leave with some college credit. Early College High Schools,
Debbie will mention, where students have the opportunity to
leave high school with an associate degree. So there is
exciting new school opportunities.
And finally, I just want to say thank you to the Committee
leadership. We appreciate the attention that Congress and the
Secretary and the White House are paying to this important
issue. We appreciate the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Vander Ark follows:]
Statement of Tom Vander Ark, Executive Director, Education, The Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA
I. Introduction
Chairman Castle, Ranking Member Woolsey, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on this
vital issue of redesigning the American high school. I am pleased to be
here to brief you on the work of the Gates Foundation and other non-
profit organizations, and to provide some thoughts on what further
actions are needed at all levels of government.
II. The Problem: The High Schools of Today are Obsolete
As Bill Gates recently said to our nation's governors and business
leaders, America's high schools are obsolete. They were designed for
the 20th century's industrial-age economy, when relatively few students
needed the kind of higher-order knowledge and skills necessary to
succeed in college. Of 100 ninth graders entering high school today,
fewer than 70 will graduate, approximately 40 will go directly to
college, with only just over 30 prepared for college, and fewer than 20
will graduate from college within six years. These numbers are even
lower for poor and minority students. And this underperformance is
reflected in international comparisons. One recent study, for example,
places the United States 24th out of 29 of the most developed (OECD)
nations in terms of math literacy among (15-year old) high school
students.
III. The Vision--Redesigning the American High School with a Range of
Options and College-Ready Expectations
If the United States is going to continue to lead the world
economically, and if every child is going to have the opportunity to
rise to his or her potential, then we must fundamentally redesign our
high schools to prepare all students for the 21st century. The high
school of tomorrow must be build around the new three Rs of rigor,
relevance, and relationships to focus on the needs of each individual
student--using data and providing a range of options to ensure that
every student graduates with the knowledge and skills necessary for
college, work, and citizenship.
IV. The Role of the Gates Foundation
The Gates Foundation was conceived out of a desire to advance
equity around the world--to help make sure that, no matter where a
person is born, he or she has the chance to live a healthy, productive
life. With the belief that our support should spur innovation to find
solutions that will continue working long after our grant making has
ended, we look for places where every dollar invested and each hour
expended can make the biggest impact. This approach has led us to work
in two main areas: Around the world, we invest in health, because
millions of people in developing countries die every year from diseases
that have been virtually eliminated in the rich world. And here in the
United States, we believe we can do the most to promote equity through
education.
The Gates Foundation believes in the importance of improving
education at all levels--from early childhood education to college and
beyond. But our focus is on strengthening the American high schools
because evidence shows that performance in early grades is often not
sustained in later grades, because high schools represent a vital link
between primary education and the demands and opportunities of the 21st
century, and because high schools are often the weakest link in our
education pipeline rather than a seamless link between K-12 and higher
education.
To date, the Gates Foundation has invested approximately $1 billion
over the last five years to help spur innovation and focus our nation
on the goal of ensuring that all students graduate from high school
ready for college, work, and citizenship. The foundation has supported
over 1500 schools in 41 states. Most of our school-level grantmaking
has focused on new school creation and improvement of existing schools.
New school creation can provide quality options for underserved
communities, replace failing schools, or build on community assets.
While many foundation-sponsored new schools are still young, the
results are promising. Students have demonstrated high levels of
engagement (high attendance and retention rates), teachers and leaders
have built a school-based culture that supports high expectations
(emphasis on college preparatory curriculum for all students), and
schools have achieved good results (relatively strong test scores and
graduation rates). A handful of these schools have also been able to
scale effectively--that is, grow a single high performing school into a
network of consistently high performing schools. From them we have
learned that any new school strategy designed to increase the supply of
quality options must include a clearly articulated school model and
strong support systems. Schools that have posted the largest gains in
both attainment and achievement have benefited from a well-structured
reform model paired with strong technical assistance.
IV. Key National Activities and Elements of High School and System
Redesign
I am pleased to say that, over the last year in particular, a
strong national consensus has emerged regarding the need to transform
America's high schools. For example, the National Governors Association
has made high school reform a top priority, and at the federal level
President Bush has made high school reform the centerpiece of his
second term education agenda.
The Gates Foundation was proud to sponsor the NGA-Achieve 2005
National Education Summit on High School earlier this year, at which
many of our nation's governors along with national leaders from
business, education, philanthropy, and more came together to discuss
and commit to the vital issue of high school redesign. Among other
things, the Summit included publication of an Action Agenda that
outlines many of the broad policy areas that should be the focus of
high school redesign efforts, including:
Aligning high school standards, curriculum, and
assessments with college and work expectations;
Providing a range of high school options and
interventions that can support the needs of individual students;
Preparing teachers and professionals to achieve college-
ready expectations;
Promoting meaningful use of data along with valid and
reliable models for high school accountability; and
Streamlining education governance to create a more
seamless education pipeline.
Following the Summit, NGA has announced a new grant program for
states, funded by the Gates Foundation and others, that is designed to
help states move strategically through the long-term process of high
school redesign. Over the last two months, a vast majority of states
have brought together multidisciplinary teams of leaders, committed to
the goal of all students graduating from high school ready for college
and work, worked through a comprehensive blueprint for developing their
high school redesign plans, and applied for the NGA grants. And we
expect that NGA will announce ten or more states as grant recipients
next month.
V. Lessons Learned from High School Redesign
Though much work remains to be done, there is a lot we have learned
from our research, evaluation, and experiences regarding what it takes
to transform the American high school and ensure that all students
graduate ready for college, work, and citizenship. And we have
promising examples of real world results in high schools that have
undergone fundamental change.
Among the core lessons we have learned are the following related
points:
Successful high school redesign requires systemic changes
at both the policy level and in practice. This requires a careful
balance between a consistent, across-the-board commitment to college-
ready standards, curriculum, and expectations (for example) along with
a flexible range of options to focus on what is most effective for each
student and in different contexts.
Successful high school redesign promotes a focus on
individual students, based on the new three Rs of rigor, relevance, and
relationships. And this kind of effort is often most efficient and
effective in the context of new high schools that are built from the
start with a focus on this purpose and structure.
Successful high school redesign depends on a coordinated,
long-term approach to fundamentally restructure the high school; add-on
programs are not likely to be enough. The NGA post-Summit grants, for
example, ask states to take immediate action as part of a ten-year
plan.
V. The Federal Role in Promoting Effective High School Redesign
The moral, economic, and democratic imperative that has called us
to action in support of high schools and high school students is driven
by a groundswell of support among both governmental and non-
governmental organizations across the country. And the federal
government has become an important partner in education reform,
promoting accountability, providing resources, offering technical
assistance, and more.
I applaud Congress and this Subcommittee for taking the time to
examine this issue that is vital to the individual futures of so many
children and to the future security and prosperity of our nation. And I
urge you to consider how the federal government can support the efforts
that are hopefully approaching a tipping point across the country. In
that regard, let me make three suggestions:
First, the federal government should support promising state and
local efforts with regard to high school redesign, such as those being
undertaken by states as part of the NGA post-Summit grants and the
American Diploma Project.
Second, there are some immediate efforts that Congress should
consider in light of its pending reauthorizations and as part of
implementation of current federal law. These include:
providing continued support for the development of state
and local data systems that can mark student progress P-16 and foster
data-driven decision-making;
promoting more valid and reliable accountability for high
schools, including more accurate definitions of graduation rates;
providing assistance to states to build the capacity
necessary to improve struggling districts and schools; and
providing increased support for the creation of high
school choices that will ensure all students have access to high
quality options, including schools of choice, charter schools, and new
schools, with a particular focus on math and science high schools.
Third, Congress should give ample consideration to the President's
proposed high school reform initiatives as part of its examination of
this issue, such as the proposed support for individual student
learning plans and for the establishment of a teacher incentive fund.
VI. Conclusion
In conclusion, the Gates Foundation believes there is a unique
window of opportunity to redesign the American high school for the 21st
century, and it is imperative--for both individual students and our
nation--that we seize this opportunity and spur change at the local,
state, and federal levels. We--national non-profit organizations,
concerned community members, policy makers at all levels, parents,
educators, and others--cannot afford to let this window of opportunity
close without drawing upon our common visions, best experiences, and
lessons learned to ensure that all students have access to high quality
high schools.
______
Chairman Castle. Thank you Mr. Vander Ark. Ms. Howard.
STATEMENT OF DEBORAH HOWARD, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT, KNOWLEDGEWORKS FOUNDATION, CINCINNATI, OH
Ms. Howard. Chairman Castle and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you very much for the opportunity. I'm here
today on behalf of our president, Chad P. Wick, who wanted to
be with you, but at this moment is receiving an honorary
doctorate and needed to be there.
Knowledge Works Foundation is Ohio's largest education
philanthropy. And I wanted to talk to you today about the scope
of our work and then how we achieve that work. We act as a
convener, a funder, a facilitator and a technical assistance
provider. Our focus often offers cover for innovators and
reformers on the ground to give them time to really achieve
their goals. Acting in these roles, Knowledge Works strengthens
the independent, credible voice for education in Ohio.
Knowledge Works, as Tom mentioned, has one of the largest
and most aggressive high school reform efforts in the country.
We have partnership with the Knowledge Works Foundations, the
Gates Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, the Ohio
Department of Education, the Kellogg Foundation and the Ford
Foundation. Together all of these partners are investing more
than 50 million dollars in Ohio's high schools over 5 years.
Our work touches 25,000 students in some of the state's most
economically challenged urban and rural districts.
We have two major initiatives.
The Ohio High School Transformation Initiative, in which we
help local communities take existing high school facilities and
use them in new and more effective ways. In fall of 2004, 58
new, separate small high schools opened their doors on what
used to be 17 large low performing urban campuses. Eleven more
new small schools will open this August.
The second initiative is Ohio Early College High School
Initiative. We are actually forming 10 new Early College High
Schools, which as Tom pointed out help students earn up to 2
years of college credit or an associate's degree while they are
earning their high school diploma. Together we believe these 79
new small schools will really help create a tipping point for
high school reform in Ohio.
Because our schools are in their first or second year of
development we don't yet have a long track record of student
achievement data. However, the early results are promising. The
Dayton Early College Academy is located in the state's lowest
performing urban district. Right before I got on the plane to
come here yesterday, I learned that 90 percent of the first of
its classes to take the Ohio graduation test this spring passed
that test on the first try. That's the lowest performing urban
district in the state.
Seventy percent of the students at that school, and 100
percent of the students at the Lorain Early College High School
and the Youngstown Early College High School are taking and
passing college courses in their ninth and 10th grade years.
These are not cream of the crop, these are students that are
believed not to be college-going in the traditional setting.
Initial data covered from the first few months of operation
in our conversion schools in the Ohio High School
Transformation Initiative shows some promising evidence. There
is some improvements in attendance and discipline, and there's
growing evidence that teachers are making real changes in
teaching and learning. All of the schools are focused on
rigorous standards-based curriculum that really connects what's
learned in the classroom to what happens in the community.
Here's how we work to achieve results. We just don't give
grants and walk away. We began by building a coalition of
state-level leaders that can move policy and resources to
achieve the goal. We include the Governor's office, the Ohio
Department of Education, and the heads of the largest education
associations in the state, for the teacher's unions, the
administrators and the school boards. Together this group
allows us to align and integrate multiple funding streams and
waive administrative policies that get the way of real change.
We have leadership development for principals. We fund for
workshops and embedded coaches on the school sites. We have
separate grants to community organizations and train them and
grassroots advocacy to sustain the schools. We provide
leadership development for students so that their voices are
heard not only in their local schools, but in the statehouse.
Finally we have a strong system of evaluation and knowledge
management that points to what is working on the ground, shows
us the gaps in the design and resources, and then shows the
value added impact of our work.
Finally, we also have tough non-negotiable attributes and
detailed contract that hold the systems with which we work
accountable for achieving a tough set of benchmarks. Either
they achieve the benchmarks or they risk losing funding.
At Knowledge Works Foundation we take very seriously our
role as the state's largest education philanthropy. As such we
seek to be a trusted resource and a partner. We help move the
work further faster. We provide honest, tough, feedback to
schools and we work with them in literacy, with their ninth
graders and throughout their high school career. We expect
results and we are committed to delivering the same.
Thank you for your attention. I will be happy to provide
stories and examples from the ground, or to answer any
questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Howard follows:]
Statement of Deborah Howard, Program Director, School Improvement,
KnowledgeWorks Foundation, Cincinnati, OH
Thank you, Chairman Castle and members of the Subcommittee, for
this opportunity to share KnowledgeWorks Foundation's experiences in
support of local and statewide high school improvement efforts in Ohio.
Overview of the Foundation
KnowledgeWorks Foundation is Ohio's largest education philanthropy.
Created in 1998, KnowledgeWorks is classified as an ``operating
foundation.'' That means we both award grants and receive funding that
furthers our work. Our Board and staff believe that education is the
key to the success of individuals and society. We are dedicated to
removing barriers to education for all individuals. To achieve that
goal, we work to create partnerships that will produce measurably
better educational results throughout the state. The Foundation
carefully focuses its limited human and financial resources on systemic
initiatives in where there is a convergence of statewide attention to
the problem and the will to effect real, lasting change. We believe
that educational barriers can be eliminated by collaborating with those
public and private entities across the state and the nation who share
that goal.
KnowledgeWorks Foundation acts as a convenor, a facilitator, a
funder, and a technical assistance provider. Often, our focus on
accountability offers ``cover'' for the innovators and reformers to
give them time and space to achieve their goals. Acting in these roles,
the Foundation strengthens the independent, credible voice for
education in Ohio; convenes education leaders around their priorities;
facilitates stakeholder discussions with interests similar to ours; and
defines and communicates the problem in a way that also advances
reasonable solutions.
Scope of Our High School Improvement Work
KnowledgeWorks Foundation's statewide high school initiatives are
grounded in the belief that learning is ultimately about
relationships--about making connections between people, places,
resources and ideas. Through two primary initiatives, the Ohio High
School Transformation Initiative and the Ohio Early College Network,
KnowledgeWorks is focused on creating a tipping point for high school
reform statewide.
Over a five-year period, KnowledgeWorks Foundation and its
partners, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the U.S. Department of
Education, the Ohio Department of Education, and the Ford Foundation,
will invest more than $50 million in Ohio's high schools with a three-
pronged goal: 1. To change forever the way in which our high schools
are designed and operated, moving them from the assembly line, factory
model to the information age; 2. Dramatically improve student
achievement at the high school level, preparing them to enter college
without remediation; and 3. Ignite a firestorm of community involvement
in the daily lives of the schools that both supports them and holds
them accountable for achieving results.
In total, the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the
Ohio Early College Network impact more than 25,000 students in some of
the state's most economically challenged urban and rural areas.
Schools and districts involved in the Ohio High School
Transformation Initiative are using existing high school facilities in
new and more effective ways. In fall 2004, 58 separate, small high
schools opened their doors on what used to be 17 large, low-performing
urban high school campuses. Eleven more new small schools will open in
August of this year, adding an 18th urban high school community to the
Ohio High School Transformation Initiative.
The Ohio Early College Network is helping to break the artificial
barriers between high school and higher education by developing 10 new
early college high schools in urban and rural sites across the state
Our work involves nearly 3,000 educators annually in more than 20
professional development forums. Skills and information learned at
these statewide events is then followed by intensive, research-based
support from 40 seasoned educational and leadership coaches embedded at
the school sites.
We've created and support a statewide Small School Leaders Network
that is helping train some 100 administrators and teachers to be
effective leaders of these newly-designed schools.
We award separate grants to support 15 local community
organizations and train them in strategies for community engagement and
grassroots advocacy.
KnowledgeWorks provides leadership training for some 150 students
statewide to ensure their voices are heard in the design and delivery
of their education, both at home and in the halls of the statehouse.
Finally, KnowledgeWorks Foundation invests significant resources in
evaluation and knowledge management systems that continuously provide
information on what's working in the field, points to gaps in design or
support, and assesses the value-added impact of our work.
Early Indicators of Success
Because our schools are in their first or second year of
development, we do not yet have trends in student achievement data,
however, early results are promising.
The first Early College High School, the Dayton Early College
Academy, is located in the state's lowest-performing urban district. We
just learned that 90% of its first class of students to take the Ohio
Graduation Test this spring passed that test on the first try. Nearly
70% of the students in the Dayton Early College Academy and up to 100%
of the students in the Youngstown and Lorain Early College High Schools
are taking and passing college courses at their partner universities in
the 9th and 10th grades. These are not the ``cream of the Ohio crop''
of students. These are students who traditionally don't view themselves
as college-bound.
Initial data from the first few months of operation for the new
small schools formed through the conversion of existing facilities in
the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative shows improvements in
attendance and discipline. Students tell us they believe these changes
are happening because the small school settings allow teachers to know
them well, to expect more from them, and to build an individualized
learning instructional plan that meets their targeted needs. In new
small schools across the state, students tell us stories of how
teachers have called their mothers, their fathers, their friends and
others to track them down when they don't attend school. Teachers and
principals, they say, expect you to attend school and they do what it
takes to make that happen.
There is growing evidence that teaching and learning are improving
in these high schools. Through a multitude of partnerships and
community-based service learning experiences, students and teachers are
beginning to make connections between what happens in the classroom and
life after high school. Just talk to the Cleveland students whose
social studies investigation of the neighborhood around their school
caught the attention of the History Channel and will soon show up as a
documentary with connections to archaeology, genealogy, science and
mathematics. Or the students in East Cleveland whose civics class gets
a firsthand knowledge of our justice system by working with local
attorneys and judges. Or the students in Dayton and Lorain who, with
the blessing of their principals, are jointly researching effective
instructional strategies with a goal of totally redesigning their high
school curriculum.
We believe these types of relationships set the stage for high
levels of student achievement in systems that are focused on a
rigorous, standards-based curriculum that connects what is learned in
the classroom with relevant experiences in the community.
The Role of the Foundation
I spoke earlier of the Foundation as a convenor, a facilitator, a
funder, and a technical assistance provider. Because we are an agile
organization, we are able to respond quickly to needs and challenges.
Our track record engenders trust and respect among our partners. The
following examples demonstrate how we use those partnerships and
resources to move innovations further, faster.
We begin by building a coalition of state-level leaders that can
move policy and resources to achieve the goal--the Governor's office,
the Ohio Department of Education, the heads of the major statewide
education associations of teachers, administrators and boards.
Together, this group allows us to align and integrate multiple funding
streams and waive administrative policies that get in the way of
progress.
For example, many of the barriers to change identified in our
statewide initiatives formed the basis for state high school task force
recommendations to improve achievement. In a matter of months--not
years--these changes were reflected in the state budget appropriations
approved just last week.
In another area, working with the Ohio Department of Education, we
were able to leverage Comprehensive School Reform dollars for eligible
participants in the OHSTI, using common grant application, portfolio
development and reporting processes. Potential grantees were not
required to go through two different and competing sets of ``red tape''
to achieve a single set of goals.
For both the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the
Ohio Early College Network, schools and districts respond to a request
for proposals. They choose to work with us to fundamentally redesign
the high school experience in their communities. When they choose to be
involved with KnowledgeWorks Foundation, they also agree to meet our
Non-Negotiable terms and high performance standards, or risk losing
support. And it's not just a single person choosing to be involved.
Detailed contracts, with benchmarks and deliverables are established
for each initiative. These contracts must be signed, not only by the
school superintendent, but also by the Board President, the university
president, if applicable, and the President of the teachers union at
the district and/or union level. And union presidents generally call
for a literal vote of support of the membership before signing on to
these initiatives. So from the beginning labor and management must both
agree to remain at the table, stay committed to the change process and
work out the details to achieve targeted goals. On many occasions,
state association presidents sat down side-by-side with KnowledgeWorks
staff , local union presidents and superintendents to work through
problems that would have caused a halt to other improvement efforts.
Our direct grants to community-based organizations ensure they have
a place at the table when key decisions are made. In addition, these
grants allow the organization to focus on recruiting community members
to stay involved in the daily life of the schools, serving on school-
based governance teams, connecting students with internships and
mentorships, working with teachers to connect the curriculum to real
world applications, and taking part in performance-based assessment of
students.
When data showed that the majority of students in the schools we're
targeting are entering the 9th grade with reading abilities at least 3-
4 years below grade level, we were able to leverage Foundation funding
to contract with Kent State University and the Ohio High School
Alliance to conduct baseline diagnostic testing of more than 3,000
incoming 9th graders. This data was used to develop statewide training
for teachers targeted at increasing literacy support in the content
areas. KnowledgeWorks kicked off the training and assisted ODE in the
development and piloting of a statewide high school literacy
development initiative.
Conclusion
At KnowledgeWorks Foundation we take seriously our role as the
state's largest education philanthropy. As such, we seek to be a
trusted source and partner. We help move the reform work further
faster. We provide honest, tough feedback. We expect results. And we
are committed to delivering the same.
Thank you for your attention. I will be happy to answer any
questions or provide additional information.
Foundation Overview
Founded in 1998, KnowledgeWorks Foundation is Ohio's largest public
education philanthropy. Dedicated to removing barriers to higher
education for all individuals, the Foundation provides funding,
technical assistance, and other resources to initiatives that improve
the effectiveness and efficiency of Ohio's public and higher education
systems.
To support this goal, we've committed 85 million dollars in grants
to research-based, education reform initiatives since our inception. We
strongly believe the reforms we fund show great promise for supporting
Ohio's education, and ultimately supporting the children and adults who
are the economic future of Ohio.
Topic Overview
Our work is grounded in four main areas: High Schools and School
Improvement; Adult Learning; College Access & Success; and Communities
& Schools. These areas currently support the following initiatives:
High Schools and School Improvement
Initiatives within the High Schools and School Improvement area
address the challenges and shortcomings of Ohio's public schools, where
only 7 in 10 students graduate every year. Most of our financial and
human resources are invested in high schools, although our work also
supports pre-kindergarten through post-secondary education. Initiatives
include: The Ohio High School Transformation Initiative (OHSTI);
Project GRAD Ohio; and Early College.
Adult Learning
Initiatives within the Adult Learning area support Ohio's low-wage
workers, estimated at over 1 million, who have limited opportunities
for increasing their skills and incomes. These initiatives support
accessible postsecondary education for all low-wage workers, so they
can escape poverty through higher-paying jobs. Initiatives include: The
Ohio Bridges to Opportunity Initiative and Career Pathways.
College Access & Success
Initiatives within the College Access & Success area work to ensure
that every Ohioan has the option of postsecondary education at all
levels-apprenticeship, certificate, associate's degree, and bachelor's
degree. Our goal is to grant every Ohioan access to learning beyond
high school and throughout their lives. Initiatives in this area
include: Early College; The Ohio Bridges to Opportunity Initiative;
Ohio College Access Network (OCAN); Achieving the Dream; and Project
GRAD Ohio.
Communities & Schools
The Communities & Schools area is encouraging school districts and
communities to utilize state and national funding for school
construction to make school facilities more conducive to learning, and
more accessible to the entire community. We facilitate partnerships
between communities and schools, so they can redesign school facilities
that reflect the community's needs and values. Initiatives in this area
include: School as Centers of Community and School Facilities.
Our Approach
Community Engagement--The Key to Healthier Schools
All of our Foundation program areas support powerful community
engagement that encourages community members to influence official
decisions, and share ownership of their public schools. Community
Engagement
Public Policy--The Key to Long-term Change
Our Foundation only supports education reform initiatives that will
lead to long-term change in the education system. An important part of
ensuring that change lasts is for the state, federal, and local
governments to enact legislation that supports and nurtures the change.
To that end, we identify and advance policy changes that support the
initiatives we fund. Learn more about our role in public policy within
High Schools, Adult Learning, College Access & Success, and Communities
& Schools.
The KnowledgeWorks Way
We are unique in our approach to education philanthropy. We
describe our method in three simple words: ``Fund, Facilitate, and
Do.''
By funding initiatives, we are strategically investing
resources, including time, money, and people, into priority areas.
By facilitating initiatives, we are bringing together
people who might not traditionally work collaboratively to discuss
issues and uncover new solutions.
By doing some of the work ourselves, we are able to fill
temporary gaps where there may not be an individual, team or community
to take on a particular challenge.
Mission
KnowledgeWorks Foundation will increase the number and diversity of
people who value and access education, by creating and improving
educational opportunity at pre-kindergarten through high school and
post-high school institutions, and through community organizations.
History
KnowledgeWorks Foundation was created in 1998 as a charitable
foundation through the reorganization of the Student Loan Funding
Corporation.
Statistics
Number of employees: 65
Endowment: $200 million
Total grant commitments since inception: $85 million
______
Chairman Castle. Thank you very much, Ms. Howard. We
appreciate your testimony. We will be back to you shortly. Mr.
Henriquez.
STATEMENT OF ANDRES HENRIQUEZ, PROGRAM OFFICER, EDUCATION
DIVISION, CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, NY
Mr. Henriquez. Thank you, Mr. Castle. It's good to be here
in the People's Court, People's House, excuse me.
I'm going to discuss a little bit about the Carnegie
Corporation's work in high schools, and some of the work that
we noticed that we found as we started this high school reform
work.
In 2001, Carnegie Corporation of New York in partnership
with the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation launched Schools for
a New Society, a 5-year $60 million urban high school reform
effort, matched with local funds, aimed at promoting systemic
and district-wide reform in seven cities. The reform efforts
encourage partnerships and collaborations with community
including school officials and teachers, parents and students,
and community stakeholders such as teacher organizations,
business leaders, elected officials, and higher education
leaders.
Initially the corporation invited 20 schools to submit high
school reform plans, and after an in-depth review by leading
educators and scholars, the school districts chosen to
participate in the Schools for a New Society were Boston,
Chattanooga, Houston, Providence, Sacramento, San Diego, and
Worcester.
The key objective is to reform policies and practices that
help shape teaching and learning in the high schools. And
through its grant making the Corporation provides resources to
community organizations with a substantial history of working
to improve student achievement and workforce preparedness, and
enabling these organizations to lead and to manage a school and
district renewal process.
Critical components to the reform included first holding
all schools accountable to help every student to meet high
standards and to prepare for higher education, as well as the
workforce, and to confront the challenges and opportunities for
21st-century society.
Second was to raise graduation requirements to ensure that
all students take and succeed in rigorous courses.
The third was to transform these large, impersonal high
schools into small schools, or really these small learning
communities and personalize the student learning experience.
And fourth was to improve teaching through intensive
professional development, while enabling teachers time to work
in teams. And again this is to help all students succeed.
One of the most valuable findings in the very first year of
Schools for a New Society was the fact that almost half of the
students entering the ninth grade were reading several years
below grade level. It became clear to us that no matter what
kinds outcomes we wanted to achieve from this initiative,
whether it was higher graduation rates, more students going on
to college, more students taking advanced placement courses,
success would be difficult because of these students' low
literacy skills.
When we looked at data from the National Assessment of
Educational Progress, our NAEP data, otherwise known as the
nation's report card, it became clear to us that adolescent
literacy was indeed a national problem. It turns out that 70
percent of our entering ninth graders in the United States can
be considered as reading below grade level. And these young
people can neither understand nor engage with text, and they
represent a substantial proportion of students who are dropping
out of high schools.
According to the Alliance for Excellent Education, 3000
youngsters disappear from our high schools and classrooms every
day. At the end of this month, at the end of this school year,
over 540,000 students will have dropped out of our high
schools, many because of poor literacy skills.
Of those who do manage to get a diploma, half will be
unprepared for the demands of higher education in the
workforce. And according to national data, 53 percent of the
freshmen in college are receiving remediation to improve their
reading and writing.
In a related finding, employers were recently asked whether
high schools were giving young people appropriate job related
skills, 41 percent responded somewhat to very dissatisfied,
with how young people ``read and understood complicated
material.'' In view of this dire data, the Carnegie Corporation
of New York established a program called the Advancing Literacy
Program. This is an initiative that focuses intensively on
improving the literacy of students in grades 4 through 12.
Over the last 2 years, we've come to realize that educators
have pretty well figured out how young people learn to read,
which has resulted in a very strong K through 3 early reading
policy in our country. On the other end of the spectrum, there
has been a focus on adult literacy programs. And in between
these two extremes of learning to read as children or
developing reading skills as adults, is what we call the
forgotten middle. And that's the chasm that includes an
estimated 8 million students in grades four through 12 who have
learned to read, but cannot yet read to learn.
Now it's important to note that these problems are
exacerbated by poverty, and they are particularly prevalent in
our poorer urban districts. However the comprehension problem
is also common in middle-class suburbs, ex-burbs and rural
areas throughout our country.
For example, the fourth grade and eighth grades proficiency
rates on the 2003 NAEP data, only range from 10 to 43 percent
across states, and the overall proficiency rate for eighth
graders was only 32 percent. And clearly there are struggling
readers at every level of our socioeconomic strata.
The course of work that the Carnegie Corporation has been
able to draw on a number of recommendations from experts on
literacy for older children. And although everyone recognizes
that we have much more to learn, we are convinced that we know
enough to make a real difference for students in elementary
grades, middle schools and our high schools.
For instance, a report that was written to the Carnegie
Corporation of New York, ``Reading Next--A Vision For Action
Research in Middle and High School Literacy'' lays out 15
elements of effective adolescent literacy programs that
practitioners can and indeed are using to improve student
achievement in schools across the nation.
And there has been some Federal response to this crisis.
The $25 million appropriated by Congress for the Striving
Readers Initiative for this fiscal year was an important first
step in helping to make effective literacy and prevention
programs available to the children who are most in need of
them. Teachers and parents and reading researchers are eagerly
awaiting the results of these demonstrations. Given the
Corporation's long history of advancing educational
opportunities, we are committed to revitalizing America's high
schools by focusing on district reform.
And we believe that in order to prepare all of today's high
school students to succeed in our complex knowledge-based
economy, we can't provide them with one or two good high
schools but must have in place an entire system of excellent
high schools.
I would like to conclude with a quote from Dr. Gregorian,
our President at Carnegie Corporation, who says: ``We will do
what it takes to ensure that the spectacle of American students
shutting down and dropping out of high schools at the appalling
rate of 3000 a day, quickly becomes one of those shameful
memories in American history that we are all eager to forget.''
I thank you for your attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Henriquez follows:]
Statement of Andres Henriquez, Program Officer, Education Division,
Carnegie Corporation of New York, New York, NY
``Creating high schools for the 21st century is a challenge for
education reformers as momentous as building the Panama
Canal.''
Vartan Gregorian, President
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Overview
Carnegie Corporation was one of the first foundations concerned
with early childhood development, care and education from prenatal
development and care systems through preschool health and education and
has continued concentrating funding in these areas for over 30 years.
That history resonates throughout our current work in education, though
we have tried to sharpen our focus in light of two fundamental
questions that always bear asking: What are we doing? Why are we doing
it? Today, the Corporation is making fewer grants and larger
commitments than in earlier years, and ambitious professional
evaluation efforts are built into our larger initiatives from the
start. Therefore, this overview seeks to provide a context for
understanding how we have arrived at the program strategies we will be
focusing on in the next few years and which we would like to share with
the subcommittee.
It was Carnegie Corporation of New York that helped to create some
of the nation's most innovative preschool care, education and parenting
support programs, efforts that included funding for the development and
initial production of the PBS television series, Sesame Street. The
foundation also supported projects aimed at demonstrating the
effectiveness of early education and care and that assisted in the
training of professionals for the early childhood work force. The
Corporation encouraged a broader look at social policies that affect
families with young children, created and sustained the Carnegie
Council on Children and provided initial support for the Children's
Defense Fund. The Corporation's work in early childhood education and
care has been summarized in What Kids Need: Today's Best Ideas for
Nurturing, Teaching, and Protecting Young Children A Carnegie
Corporation Initiative: A Decade of Progress in Early Education (Rima
Shore, Beacon Press: 2002), which describes best the successful early
childhood programs and implemented practice.
The Corporation's work in middle school reform was also influential
in setting an agenda for restructuring schools with greater attention
to students' developmental needs. The focus of the Carnegie Council on
Adolescent Development was adolescent health issues and their social-
emotional development, but the Council also concluded that ``the years
from ten through fourteen are a crucial turning point'' for adolescents
and that ``this period represents an optimal time for interventions to
foster education . . .'' The Corporation began its work in middle
school reform with the Middle Grades Schools State Policy Initiative,
and, in 1989, published the widely influential report, Turning Points:
Preparing American Youth for the 21st Century. Since our first foray
into this work, tens of millions of dollars have been invested by a
number of other foundations including the Lilly Endowment, Inc. and the
Edna McConnell Clark and W.K. Kellogg Foundations. In summing up
Carnegie Corporation's work, middle-school reformer M. Hayes Mizell
reported, ``We helped to create a consciousness and understanding of
the need for greater attention to the academic dimension of the middle
grades.'' Assisted by the collaborative efforts of other foundations
and by evolving state and local public policy, the Corporation's focus
on the middle grades moved them front and center into the reform
agenda, and the number of middle schools soared. Middle school
reformers are now beginning to focus heavily on issues of literacy.
Throughout the history of Carnegie Corporation, its presidents have
been engaged with literacy. Andrew Carnegie's legacy includes over 2000
free public libraries that he saw as a link ``bridging ignorance and
education.'' Access to books and the explicit teaching of reading are
two ways in which literacy is fostered. From the 1930's to the 1960's
reading was increasingly taught through methods that concentrated on
``whole words'' (or whole language), using sentences and stories that
were closely geared to children's interests. Surprisingly, the teaching
of reading became an intensely debated national issue in 1955, when
Rudolf Flesch's Why Johnny Can't Read And What You Can Do about It
(Harper) moved onto a national best-seller list. Flesch charged that
the neglect of phonics instruction had caused a national crisis in
literacy and that ``whole language'' was based on a flawed theory that
required children to memorize words and guess how to pronounce a word
they did not know, instead of sounding out the word. The ``look-say''
or whole-word method had swept the textbook market, despite the fact,
Flesch alleged, that it had no support in research.
Carnegie Corporation President John Gardner (1955-1967) saw the
debate about reading as central to the foundation's interests, writing
in a 1959 Annual Report, ``The question of whether Johnny can or cannot
read if so why, if not why not has probably given rise to more hue and
cry throughout the land than any other single educational issue. There
are those who claim that today's youngsters cannot read as well as
their parents did at their age; others state that the situation is
actually reversed. Proponents of one or another method of reading argue
vociferously for their method and heap scorn upon other methods.
Wherever the truth lies, it's not yet obvious, and any research which
may shed light on this complicated problem will be to the good.''
Following this logic, the Corporation soon funded a key grantee, Jeanne
Chall of the City College of New York, to help ``settle'' the reading
debate.
Chall spent three years visiting classrooms, analyzing research
studies, examining textbooks and interviewing authors, reading
specialists and teachers. She found substantial and consistent
advantages for programs that included systematic phonics, finding that
this approach was particularly advantageous for children from lower
socioeconomic backgrounds. In 1967, Chall collected her Corporation-
supported research and published Learning to Read: the Great Debate
(McGraw Hill), which became a classic. Later, after moving to Harvard
University, Chall developed a conceptual framework for developmental
reading stages that extended from the pre-reading stage of very young
children to the highly sophisticated interpretations of educated
adults. Chall's reading stages clearly distinguished ``learning to
read'' from ``reading to learn;'' she also identified and named the
``fourth grade slump.''
Advancing Literacy: Reading to Learn.
The Corporation's distinguished history in support of literacy--
some of which is described above--has recently extended from pivotal
initial support for the Emmy award-winning PBS series Between the
Lions, to the work of the International Development Division in
strengthening libraries in sub-Saharan countries in Africa. As always,
our work in this area includes a concern with access to books, the
search for better methods of teaching reading, and building a body of
knowledge about the developmental issues associated with early
childhood and adolescence. Taking all these factors into account,
Carnegie Corporation comes to its current focus on literacy with
enormous comparative advantage. Indeed, to many people, the name
Carnegie Corporation is associated with the very foundations of
literacy going all the way back to the philanthropy of Andrew Carnegie
himself and of the Corporation in its early years; both were
instrumental in helping to create the nation's network of free public
libraries.
Building on this work our current program focus, Advancing
Literacy: Reading to Learn, was developed after an extensive two-year
review that included consultations with the nation's leading
practitioners and researchers. We learned that the teaching of reading
in K-3 is well supported with research, practice and policy, but that
these are lacking for grades beyond this point. Therefore, we have
chosen to focus our efforts on intermediate and adolescent literacy, to
build research, practice and policy for literacy in students in grades
4 through 12, with a particular interest in grades 4 through 8. Our
decision is informed by our grantmaking, which as helped us and the
nation learn a great deal about children in their early, middle and
adolescent years of development, as well as about teaching and learning
and the complexity of school reform. What has become evident is that
good school reform and knowledge of adolescent development are not
mutually exclusive: they go together.
Urban School Reform.
During its tenure, the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development
issued three major reports, each of which informed the development of
the Corporation's urban school reform efforts. In 1989, Turning Points
proposed making middle schools both more developmentally appropriate
and intellectually challenging and recommended creation of
``communities of learning'' (now echoed in small learning communities),
providing opportunities for all students to succeed. In 1992, the
Council's report, A Matter of Time: Risk and Opportunity in the
NonSchool Hours, introduced the concept of positive youth development,
highlighted the need for opportunities for young people to have
challenging and rewarding experiences in their nonschool hours and
emphasized the importance of partnerships between schools and community
organizations. Building on the Turning Points work, in 1995, Great
Transitions, the final report of the Council, set forth recommendations
of what an appropriate middle grades education should include; those
recommendations form the premise that shaped the Schools for a New
Society vision of an excellent high school education.
Recognizing the comparative advantage provided by the Corporation's
history of study and analysis, Vartan Gregorian, the Corporation's
current president, challenged the foundation to address the nation's
lack of success in achieving widespread and sustainable educational
reform. In response, we worked closely with leading researchers and
practitioners and conducted a meticulous review of relevant literature.
This led to the concept of a program in Urban School Reform,
emphasizing the troubled urban high school.
We repeatedly encountered three intersecting discussions that
shaped what became the Corporation's major high school reform
initiatives, Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for
New York City. The first concern centers on deeply entrenched political
interests and bureaucratic procedures of school districts and how these
two factors impede and undermine effective educational reforms. The
second concern is the extent to which the lack of broad-based community
engagement in education leaves schools vulnerable to both entrenched
political interests and the frequent changes in leadership that
commonly occur in urban school districts. The third concern, already
growing as part of the national debate around standards and
accountability, is the need to challenge the underlying assumption that
not all students could or even should ``succeed'' in high school. We
were especially influenced by It Takes A City: Getting Serious about
Urban School Reform (Paul T. Hill, et al., Brookings Institution Press:
2000), an important book that addressed all three of our concerns.
Our focus on high schools was strengthened by an analysis of where
the most strategic opportunity for change exists and a recognition that
the inequities of the current system are most pronounced in high
schools. School districts often make gains at the elementary and middle
school level that are eroded at the high school level. Given the press
of state accountability mechanisms and the growth of high school exit
exams, we concluded that there would be a positive response to an
initiative that calls upon cities to take on the challenge of creating
a system of good high schools--schools in which all students could be
successfully prepared for postsecondary education, employment and
democratic citizenship. Thus, building on the knowledge base created by
Carnegie Corporation grants, especially during the past two decades, we
began our reform work by inviting twenty urban school districts to
submit plans for reform. After an in-depth review that involved some
the nation's most respected scholars and leaders in high school reform,
we selected seven school districts to participate in Schools for A New
Society: Boston, Chattanooga, Houston, Providence, Sacramento, San
Diego, and Worcester. The school systems were not awarded the grants
directly. Nonprofit, community-based institutions working with the
school systems received the grants.
Advancing Literacy: Reading to Learn
Effective reading and writing skills are essential to gaining and
making use of education. At present, large numbers of young adults are
deficient in these skills, as seen through enrollment in remedial
writing courses in postsecondary education and massive deficits in
performance in reading comprehension among high school students. Poor
reading skills in high school have roots in a system that provides
little systemic support for readers beyond the age of eight. In
general, the nation successfully teaches literacy to children in
kindergarten through third grade. There is no consensus, however, on
how to develop reading strategies in the fourth grade and beyond. The
Corporation is addressing this problem by helping to build the nation's
capacity to teach and strengthen reading comprehension skills, with a
special focus on grades 4 through 12, i.e., ages 9 through 17.
Therefore, we refer to this effort as intermediate and adolescent
literacy. The Corporation begins from a position of comparative
advantage, having established a knowledge base of theory and effective
practice in early learning and education systems reform.
As we begin the 21st century the educational community faces a
difficult challenge. What is expected in academic achievement for
middle and high school students has substantially increased, yet the
way in which students are taught to read, comprehend and write about
subject matter has not kept pace with the demands of schooling.
According to a recent international study by the Organisation for
Economic Co-Operation and Development (Programme for International
Student Assessment), American 15-year-olds barely attain the standards
of international literacy for youngsters their age. During the past
decade the average reading score of fourth graders has changed little.
Readers who struggle during the intermediate elementary years face
increasing difficulty throughout middle school and beyond. Poor or
limited achievement in literacy negatively affects every aspect of a
student's education. Conversely, effective reading to learn is a
prerequisite for successful participation in most areas of adult life.
In order to become lifelong learners, students must learn to engage
competently the variety of textual information they will encounter
throughout their lives.
The marketplace for employment is governed by a new knowledge-based
economy, requiring better educated, highly literate and technologically
fluent high school graduates. The causes of the weakness in
intermediate and adolescent literacy are poorly understood, but current
research and practice suggest several promising avenues for
interventions that include:
A shortage of qualified literacy experts who can coach
and teach literacy for students and teachers in the middle grades.
A lack of capacity, time and will for middle and high
school teachers to teach literacy within their content areas.
A lack of reinforcement of comprehension of
``informational text'' in early reading.
A lack of strategies at the end of the third grade for
pupils to deal with a rapid shift from narrative text to expository
text.
A lack of systemic thinking in schools about literacy
beyond age eight.
Decrease in student motivation to read as children
progress from fourth grade through twelfth grade.
Little awareness by parents and community groups that
literacy instruction needs to continue after children have learned the
basic skills of decoding words and following a simple narrative.
We believe there is strong evidence that schools with a focus on
literacy (reading and writing) are associated with improved academic
performance and successful academic outcomes for students. At the
Corporation, we are making grants aimed at having a profound influence
on adolescent literacy by directing national attention to the issue,
bringing together the best talent in the field to address the issue,
and supporting needed research and innovative practices.
Urban School Reform
After the investment of millions of dollars and the talents of the
best and brightest reformers over decades of educational reform, it is
now clear that urban schools cannot be successfully reformed without
substantially changing the way school districts operate. The
Corporation considers the redesigning of urban high schools to be a
daunting challenge but also a promising target of opportunity for
accelerating the pace of school district reform. This requires treating
urban schools as a complex system rather than an aggregation of
individual schools. School districts are embedded within communities
that strongly influence their mode of operation. Therefore, school
districts cannot succeed in addressing the problems of educating all
students to high standards in isolation and must also employ community
and organizational resources external to the district.
In the 21st century economy all students can and should be educated
to high standards. Wages paid to workers with only a high school
education have declined steeply, and there has been a correspondingly
dramatic increase in the added value of a college education. Therefore,
our nation can no longer view a high school diploma as a satisfactory
terminal degree for a substantial number of citizens. Every high school
graduate needs to leave high school ready for college or the kind of
productive gainful employment providing security, benefits and
advancement opportunity. Even well paid employment not requiring
postsecondary degrees now depends on advanced levels of literacy that
are not common among urban high school graduates. Furthermore, given
the escalating costs of public higher education and the lack of a
proportional increase in financial aid, many urban students will need
to work and continue their education at the same time.
In addition to high literacy, quantitative skills, an understanding
of science and comfortable mastery of technology, an excellent high
school education must reflect our modern multicultural democracy.
Students need help in making sense of a world in which modern media
engulf the citizen with competing sources of information and complex
global issues influence domestic policy and vice versa. High school
graduates should be well prepared to assume roles as engaged and
informed citizens in a diverse and vibrant democracy.
Urban high schools face formidable challenges in educating all
students to high standards. The students in these schools are more
likely than their suburban and rural counterparts to come from low-
income families and from homes where English is not the first language
and also to move from school to school as their parents' economic
circumstances change. These urban students are more frequently educated
by teachers who do not stay very long in any one teaching situation and
in schools burdened by overcrowding, inadequate fiscal and human
resources, bureaucratic rigidity and political interference.
Many urban school systems have succeeded in improving student
achievement in the elementary and middle school setting, but these
gains are not sustained and, sometimes, are even offset by losses at
the high school level. In most urban high schools, as many as half the
students drop out before completing their studies. Even many graduates
do not show adequate levels of academic achievement, with up to one-
third of high school graduates requiring remedial coursework at the
post-secondary level. These problems are compounded by the fact that
groups of students with varying family incomes and different ethnic
backgrounds are separated by wide gaps in academic achievement.
Fortunately, the knowledge base exists in both theory and practice
to permit the creation of successful high schools, and almost every
urban system of education has at least one or two successful high
schools. Through the creativity of exemplary practitioners, these high
schools have been established in urban districts, raising standards and
expectations and challenging students to levels appropriate to today's
economy and democracy. These schools are the existence proofs that
urban high schools can work. Yet, throughout the country, these high
schools stand as exceptions to the dominant, large, comprehensive high
school, and no urban district has created an entire system of
successful high schools.
Most urban high schools suffer from the twin problems of inequality
of expectation and a misplaced emphasis on economies of scale. The
American high school, as we now know it, was created when it was
acceptable to expect that, at most, about one-third of the students
would go on to postsecondary education. Accordingly, the high schools
reserved the smallest classes and most experienced teachers for the
brightest students. Less experienced teachers taught less able
students, usually in larger classes, and both schools and society then
blamed the students for their inferior performance.
The large size of most urban high schools can be a barrier to
student achievement, making it difficult for teachers to know their
students well enough to understand their individual learning capacities
and needs. Large urban high schools also increase the isolation of
teachers and undermine the development of a collective sense of
internal accountability for student success.
The typical operation of school districts exacerbates the problems
facing high schools, since the procedures of school districts are built
around assumptions of unequal outcomes and large size. School resources
are distributed in ways that provide the best teachers and more
congenial learning settings to the students who are the most able.
Effective political pressure from affluent parents tends to reinforce
these dysfunctional practices.
The shortcomings of urban high schools are a current problem and at
the same time a likely generator of future inequality. The Corporation
is addressing this challenge by stimulating improvement in the
administration of school districts to rearrange the allocation of
resources on behalf of instruction and by treating the problems of
urban schools in their complexity as a system, inclusive of community
and organizational resources external to the district. The particular
focus of the Corporation in effecting these changes is the urban high
school, which are a target of opportunity because they are far more
difficult to reform on an individual basis than elementary and middle
schools and thus provide an entry point into the reform of urban
education as a whole.
To prepare students for their adult lives in the 21st century,
urban high schools need to become learning communities with cultures
that support high expectations, inquiry, effort, persistence and
achievement by all--teachers, students and staff. In short, these
schools must become communities of teaching, learning, purpose and
contribution, a process that involves far more than incremental change
in the high school as we know it. The current model for the American
high school, which is obsolete, was not designed to educate all
students to high levels of achievement, but rather to manage students
by sifting and sorting them, with only a minority of students prepared
for higher education.
Urban high schools also need new leadership. Federal and state
accountability requirements and greater autonomy and flexibility in
personnel, budgetary and curricular decision making have made the job
of school leadership far more demanding than in the past. Most current
preparation for principals is weak and does not reflect recent research
findings about effective educational leadership. Candidates who aspire
to become principals follow an individual course of study, selecting a
mix of required and elective courses to qualify for state
certification. The focus of the curriculum is on management rather than
instruction. Internships are rarely required and poorly supervised.
High school principals and elementary school principals are prepared in
basically the same way, even though the differences in their school
environments are dramatic. There is a need to rethink seriously how we
prepare principals if we expect to have them succeed, and we should
encourage the district to play a constructive role in shaping that
preparation.
Building communities of effective high schools from schools that
are islands of innovation and excellence requires reforming urban
districts. Our vision for a system of high schools in which there is
room for every student to thrive will be difficult to achieve without
strategically aligning all the diverse resources of the district and
community into a coherent plan for action. This involves changing the
cultures of districts, challenging political interests and financial
inequities and finding solutions to professional and technical problems
of curriculum, teaching and learning, recruitment and supervision,
school design and management and assessment and accountability
practices.
Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for New York
City both incorporate the strategic assumptions of redesigning urban
high schools, reforming urban districts and building effective
leadership for districts and schools. Both initiatives seek to build
existence proofs about the viability of wide-scale urban high school
reform and knowledge about strategies, tools, challenges and resources
that can be applied in other settings. The Corporation is joined in its
pursuit of reinventing the urban high school by the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation, and, in New York City, by the Open Society Institute.
Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for New York
City are not models, but broad strategies for reform. The overarching
goal of the program in Urban School Reform is to increase significantly
student achievement in targeted urban centers while reducing gaps in
achievement among groups of students.
Conclusion
Staying focused while reaching new heights is long tradition for
Carnegie Corporation of New York. It has its roots in Andrew Carnegie's
belief that, ``Only in popular education can man erect the structure of
an enduring civilization.'' This belief has guided the Corporation as
it has moved from helping to establish public libraries, to laying the
groundwork for what we know as Head Start, to its groundbreaking
efforts to improve middle schools. And, now, the challenge is improving
high schools and the districts that serve them through Schools for a
New Society and New Century High Schools for New York City. This is
perhaps the hardest challenge of all along the lines of ``building the
Panama Canal,'' in the words of Vartan Gregorian. The Corporation is
realistic that there may be setbacks along the way that may ultimately
lead to greater understanding of the obstacles. But the results to date
higher test scores, increasing attendance rates, and a stronger sense
that students are engaging in true, meaningful learning--show that,
just as the Canal broke new ground at the beginning of the 20th
century, Schools for A New Society and New Century High Schools for New
York City can do the same in this new era.
[An attachment to Mr. Henriquez's statement ``2001 Carnegie
Challenge Paper: Creating a New Vision of the Urban High
School'' is available at http://www.carnegie.org/pdf/
urbschl.pdf.]
------
Chairman Castle. Well, thank you, Mr. Henriquez. And let me
thank each of you. I will yield to myself to start the
discussion process.
We rarely have these hearings where I agree with everything
that everybody is saying. I agree with what you're saying. That
doesn't solve our problem necessarily, but you've helped
identify the problem, you've helped identify the start to
solutions to some of the problems. I think that we all
understand we have to do a lot more. The things we are not
going to get into today, I worry about the cultural side of
this, the whole societal issues of how people value education
out there and various issues like that, but we're more focused
right on the high schools.
And let me just say right up front, Mr. Vander Ark, I
couldn't agree with you more with your statement about the
graduation rates. That is something that I have wrestled with
for years. And I am told that we're dealing with that a little
bit in our regulations on No Child Left Behind, but at some
point there should be an absolute measurable device so that
everybody can use it. And I think it is absurd that it does not
exist today.
My question, though, goes along a different line. You
represent three magnificent, nonprofit entities that are doing
some very positive things. I don't know--I have no criticisms
of anything you're doing. But when we have--in spite of your
substantial assets in some cases, there is no way you can reach
out to every single high school in the country, it just can't
be done. I mean, you're dealing in Ohio in one case, and a
variety of schools around the country in other cases. And with
all due respect to Mr. Gates and the Gates Foundation, even
they can't go touch every school.
And I worry about how all of this translates into our other
schools. In other words, I think that it is great that the
National Governor's Association had their summit. I think that
helps because that gets them engaged and they truly are or
should be at least, engaged with their schools and their high
schools. I think it's great that you're looking at various
devices to try to help in these various schools.
But my problem is that getting that to every single high
school in America. I worry about the Federal role in this. I
worry about the state role in that, even with the Governors
engaged, I still worry about it. And how we actually make that
connection. Because frankly just holding out exemplary programs
doesn't necessarily mean that somebody who's been doing it the
same way for 20 years or 30 years and not a particularly
successful way, is not going to necessarily buy in to that.
So I would be interested, and I know this is a very general
statement, but I would be interested, briefly, because I like
to have all three of you comment on this, any of your thoughts
concerning how we can engage high schools holistically in
America. And what I think we all, at least up here probably and
there, agree are reform efforts which are needed.
In any particular order. Does anybody want to start?
Mr. Vander Ark. I'll make two comments. It's an insightful
question that we struggle with frequently.
We will soon have spent $1 billion just on this problem,
and we will soon touch about 10 percent of the high schools in
America. So it does look to me like just the high school
problem is probably a $20 billion issue. So we're--the family's
contributions though substantial, are the small portion of what
it will actually take to create the high schools that we need
in this country.
So my first comment is that our efforts and at least how I
think about our efforts with these foundations are to create
proof points, school and city-wide proof points of what's
possible, what to do, how to do it, how much money it takes,
what kind of outside assistance you need, what order to do
things in. So we're trying to focus as much of our work as we
can and work deeply in a set of cities where we are trying to
lift achievement levels and graduation rates citywide. And
frankly, we have a lot more to learn about how to do that well.
So strategy No. 1 is to try and create proof points.
No. 2, as Debbie alluded to at the end when she talked
about knowledge management, it's culling out of that work while
it's ongoing, lessons learned and trying to share those. An
example of that, Debbie can talk about some of their
publications, they do a great job. But an example would be that
the National Association of Secondary School Principals, they
wrote ``Breaking Ranks'' 10 years ago and they just updated it,
and we helped ship that to every high school principal in
America. So it's a pretty good guide to improving your high
school.
So there are some efforts underway and we have more to
learn. But there's no question that every state needs to play a
stronger role in creating a vision. First of all for its
graduates, and second of all for its secondary schools, and
then third for creating the intervention capacity to improve
struggling schools.
Chairman Castle. Thank you. Ms. Howard.
Ms. Howard. As Tom talked about, part of our strategy is
really to have a very deep knowledge management system that
collects the information, and then helps us move that
information out, and to share it with our counterparts across
the country. And I think as we talk to each other, just in this
room this morning, there are several organizations in here who
talk to each other all the time, who work together across the
country, we share ideas, we share information and we're using
similar strategies nationwide.
Chairman Castle. Before you go on, how about sharing with
the schools, the ones who are not your counterparts.
Ms. Howard. Right.
Chairman Castle. I assume your counterparts are other
organizations like yours.
Ms. Howard. Yes.
Chairman Castle. But my concern is, of course, is getting
it to the other schools that are not involved with those
counterparts.
Ms. Howard. That's the whole strategy behind our design for
Ohio. We chose specifically districts that are throughout the
state, that are the most troubled districts, knowing that if we
can move them far enough fast enough, we can impact other
districts. And that is already showing to be true. We're
already having other districts in suburban and rural areas ask
us for the information.
I said we have coaches embedded on the ground. Those
coaches come from across the country. They have actually helped
design work now in schools across Ohio and several other
states.
Chairman Castle. Yes. Mr. Henriquez.
Mr. Henriquez. Yes, I would just like to add and dovetail
to many of the comments that have already been made. I think
that foundations can best be incubators of ideas, and we see
the Schools for a New Society and the work that we're doing in
the urban schools as truly proof of concept.
And we hope that these could become sort of effective
models that provide a roadmap for replication, much like the
work that Carnegie has done in early childhood education, where
we worked for 30 years, and provided at least a lot of valuable
tools. And through dissemination of knowledge and information
that we hope that those schools that are not getting those
resources are at least getting the kinds of information that
will help them at the ground level at various levels.
Chairman Castle. Let me thank you for all of your answers
and I think you do wonderful work. But I have this horrible
vision in my mind, and it is this: That I see Carnegie doing
this wonderful glossy brochure that lays it out, lays out the
facts, the data and everything else. I'm just using that as an
example, whatever, and it is distributed. But there are those
who simply don't want necessarily the change. They have sort of
been doing it their own way, they are 3 years from retirement,
and they aren't really ready for new challenges or whatever it
may be. And that could be administrators, it can be teachers,
it can even be parents. It's a lot of people.
I just worry that they don't have the same enthusiasm for
the change and the improvements that we need that you all have.
So I would just encourage all of you to always be thinking
that way. How can we reach beyond what we are doing to make
sure that we're touching on everybody else. Because frankly,
it's the ones that you're not touching on who probably need the
most help.
Probably when you go forward and try to find schools, you
know, it's the ones who raise their hands. So it's like kids in
class, the ones who raise their hand to say we want to be
involved with you, you're most likely, you know to choose. And
it's those others who just don't want to be called on, who sort
of stay away. So I just think it's a continuous problem in
education. Not to be overly harsh about education, but I think
it's something with which we have to deal.
But let me turn to Ms. Woolsey for comment.
Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
welcome Representative Chaka Fattah from Philadelphia, who is
just up here listening and learning with us. Thank you, thank
you for being here.
OK, that is the answer. You know--you asked the question
and then the answer is why isn't the government, our
government, Federal and state, ensuring that all of our
children have the education they need for the future of our
country. Not just their future but our nation's future.
I'm so thankful that you exist. Thank you, thank you, thank
you. But I am so embarrassed that in a country when public
education is supposed to be the very core and center of who we
are and why we are such a good, productive nation, is going
down, while the demands are coming up. So I see you as models,
as examples.
The school, Sir Francis Drake, that Mr. Henriquez talked
about is in one of the best school districts in the country,
and one of the most affluent districts in the country, one of
the most progressive districts in the country. They know how to
get help, they know how to look forward. We need to talk about
schools--not that I don't want my schools to get what they're
after, but I want all schools to have these same privileges. If
it means we have to do more to help them get interested then
that's our job, to help them do that. It's not totally private
foundations. But what you're doing, I admire so much.
OK, I'm going to go. Just a couple of things. Ms. Howard,
both of the gentlemen on each side of you talked about school
size and teacher quality. Would you talk about that too, about
how important it is, both of those issues are, to providing a
good education for our high school kids.
Ms. Howard. Yes. Thank you very much. Definitely. All of
our schools are formed with 400 students or less. We believe
that that's the size in which teachers and students can really
form relationships, and in which teachers can take students
deep into the work, not just touch the surface of the work.
Ms. Woolsey. How about class size?
Ms. Howard. Class sizes range anywhere from 15 to 25. We're
still working on finding new ways to impact class size by
changing the schedules of the day, using teachers differently,
using time differently to try to get down to smaller class
sizes.
Ms. Woolsey. Teacher quality?
Ms. Howard. We've worked a great deal in teacher
professional development. We think that's critical. The
districts in which we work sometimes have some of the least
experienced teachers, and so we provide a lot of training at
the state level. We then follow that up with deep embedded
coaches in the schools and in the classroom to help.
We also have had strong experiences working with the
teachers' unions. And the teachers' unions in the districts in
which we work have become real champions for change, and
they're the ones who are encouraging all of their teachers, not
just their first year teachers and second-year teachers, but
their seasoned teachers to change and to take advantage of the
opportunities that are offered. The unions are a main force
behind the change in our schools.
Ms. Woolsey. Which is very important. Mr. Vander Ark, of
course, with the Gates Foundation and Microsoft, you know being
hooked together, there is, I am sure, the express need for
high-quality, high-tech kids coming out of school and their
education. How are you supporting the idea in your programs for
girls becoming more proficient in science, math and technology
with the idea that they are over 50 percent of our workforce.
Mr. Vander Ark. Let me give you two answers to that
interesting question. First of all, in math and science we have
helped to sponsor three exciting networks of schools in
California. High-Tech High, and New Tech High, and Envision in
the Bay Area, three really high-quality examples of math
science and technology schools.
We believe there are similar opportunities in other states.
We're in conversation in Texas right now about an opportunity
to expand the number of math science and technology schools.
And in New York City we have funded a number of math science
and technology schools. So that's one opportunity.
Ms. Woolsey. Are you finding some women interested in them.
Mr. Vander Ark. Absolutely. In all of those schools are
about 50-50.
Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Vander Ark. Let me give you the flip side of the issue
though. We have a boy problem in America, especially a minority
boy problem.
Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Vander Ark. The families also funded a scholarship
program called the Gates Millennium Scholars, which provides
1000 scholarships a year to high achieving, low-income students
of color. It is now over 60 percent girls. And if you go to
institutions of higher education, you will find that many of
them are now 55 to 65 percent female.
So we need to pay a lot of attention to this emerging
problem. It's one that I don't admit to fully understand. It is
a cultural as well as an educational issue that we need to pay
attention to.
Ms. Woolsey. But before high school.
Mr. Vander Ark. Absolutely.
Mr. Woolsey. Thank you. My time is up.
Chairman Castle. Let me just personally thank you, Mr.
Vander Ark. Ms. Woolsey is always telling me about girl power
here, so I'm glad to hear someone defend the boys for a change.
Mr. Osborne, the Vice Chairman of the Committee is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Osborne. Thank you and I would like to thank those of
you on the panel for being here this morning.
Just a couple of thoughts. We talked about some of the
problems with young men just now, and in my previous profession
I think I sometimes I ran into--maybe a part of the problem is
that with some young men in certain areas it's not the thing to
do to be a good student, and matter of fact that's sort of
social taboo, particularly early on.
I wondered if any of you have done anything to address some
of the social issues, because certainly poverty is a difficult
thing. But if you're from an area where there is a lot of
violence, drugs and alcohol enters into the thing. And I
wondered if, you know it's very easy to maybe have a school
that's fairly select, people want to come there, but you're
also maybe dealing with a little bit of a select population.
So I wondered if in your endeavors, you have in any way
attempted to address some of the social problems and cultural
problems that we see affecting kids today that maybe weren't
quite as prevalent 30, 40 years ago. And that's a question for
any of you, if you'd like to.
And then let me just throw one other question at you, if
you don't want to answer that one, and that is it seems that
most of your efforts are focused at the urban level. But you
know we have a lot of poverty in rural areas, and we have a lot
of kids who are struggling because of a lack of IT, you know
their course offerings are pretty limited, and I wondered if
you have done anything at the rural level. So those two
questions, anybody answer any way you want. Thank you.
Mr. Henriquez. I just wanted to say, thank you for raising
the question, Mr. Osborne. I think that the--as Tom pointed
out, the boy issue is a very severe issue, and we are beginning
to look at that. In fact, this summer we just had a conference
recently at the foundations around lost boys. And if we think
that 70 percent of incoming ninth graders are bad, if we just
disaggregated that data and we disaggregated the data on drop
outs, what we see is mostly black and Latino males.
One of the first schools that was taken over in New York
City to be a small school was Julia Richman High School, the
school that I graduated from in 1978. And I don't see many of
my friends on the Delta shuttle. I don't see many of my friends
here at the Rayburn House that I graduated with. I was one of
the fortunate ones.
But with that said, I think that one of the issues that
we're trying to get at, certainly through literacy, is both the
issue of how do we address the number of boys that are
continually failing. And if you see that population also in
incarceration figures, sir, you will see that not only are
there high numbers of those students who are dropping out and
going sometimes directly into jail, but the literacy rates for
those students are also a very sad figure.
The rural area as I mentioned in my testimony are also
areas that are not without their problems. And even though
these problems are exacerbated in the urban areas, they are
just as likely to exist in rural areas as they are in suburban
areas. And so it is something that we are trying to focus on,
sir.
Ms. Howard. Mr. Osborne, I would like to talk very briefly
to build on what Andres has said about the literacy and the
reading issues. What we have found as we have worked in high
school is that predominantly with--even with males in the ninth
grade, there is an acceptable academic structure. It is OK for
them to not pass science and it's OK for them not to pass
mathematics. It is not OK, even among their peer group, for
them to not pass the state reading test, so even among
themselves they know that that's the gatekeeper. That's one of
the reasons why we work so hard in the area of literacy,
because literacy opens the doors.
The work that we've done on the ground in literacy,
actually if you can get young men excited about reading, they
will carry paperbacks in their back pocket, they will talk to
each other at lunchtime, they'll choose authors that they like
to read. We've even had some inner-city young men get so
excited about mysteries that they'll read a Nancy Drew if there
is no other mystery available on the shelf. That really does
seem to be the gatekeeper. And it is the same in rural areas.
I grew up in rural Nebraska and so I understand very much
what you're talking about. What we're trying to do now with our
early college initiative is to try to find a way for those
rural schools to come together to be able to share services and
offer those things that are more readily available in the
suburban and the urban areas.
Mr. Vander Ark. I'll add a couple of quick thoughts. We
have grants to 2000 schools, and 15 or 16 percent of them are
rural. One exciting story about a little town in eastern
Washington called Mapton, had a terrible high school. And after
the last 4 years of work just had a hundred percent graduation
rate and a hundred percent college attendance rate. So it is
possible, when a community rallies around its high school and
dramatically changes its expectations, that great things can
happen. Now that's a school of almost a hundred percent kids in
or near poverty, and over 70 percent Latino.
But you point to a cultural problem that's a big and
complicated issue. We've made, we've stumbled forward on a
couple of different fronts. We recently created a partnership
with MTV to try to use the media to, as Debbie said, to make it
cool to be smart. We see, as Debbie pointed out, especially in
new schools that you can quickly change the culture where it's
cool to be smart in a new school. It's a more difficult
challenge to get it--to uproot and change the culture in a
large struggling school.
We've just begun some work in Los Angeles enlisting student
voice, student leaders in their school to be on campus
encouraging other kids to participate in college preparatory
curriculum. So I think there's a lot of opportunity there to
engage kids in helping to turn this around.
I was encouraged by Hugh Price's leadership at The National
Urban League. This was really an area of focus for him when he
launched the Achievement Counts campaign. So I think that
there's work that we all need to do to turn this culture
around.
Here's the bottom line. We need American kids to work
harder. That's really what it comes down to, we need most of
them to work harder. There's 10 percent that are working pretty
hard today, but most of them are just flat. They need to work
harder. So part of that is schools that are more challenging,
interesting and supportive. But it's also the adult
expectations for them and for their future.
Mr. Osborne. Thank you. And I yield back.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Osborne. Mr. Miller is
recognized for 5 minutes.
He yields to Mr. Scott, who is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Vander Ark, you
mentioned proof points, and I assume that means you've just
shown that it can be done. You mentioned a terrible school
going to a hundred percent. We have at least one school in my
district that they focused on that has eliminated the
traditional racial gap.
How long have you been working at the Gates Foundation?
Ms. Howard. Actually I am working with Knowledge Works
Foundation. We've had our partnership with Gates since the fall
of 2002. And we've actually spent 3 years working to prepare
the teachers for the change, and letting teachers help design
their schools. Now there have been really 1 year of operation
in our conversion high schools, and 1 year for most of our
early college high schools.
Mr. Scott. OK. Mr. Vander Ark mentioned a powerful school
where everybody is graduating, and other schools where few
students are graduating. And I like the calculation where you
look at how many people are in middle school and compare it to
the high school, because whatever happens in the summer and all
of that you just lose them. But that is a calculation that I
think you ought to be using.
But there is a difference. You can see the difference
between one school and another. Now, we've talked about class
size, is that an element of a powerful school, the lower class
sizes?
Ms. Howard. Class size is definitely an element. But so is
instructional strategies, the way in which teachers help bring
students to the information and the way in which students will
learn. We're finding that the traditional stand and deliver way
in which curriculum was delivered back when I went to high
school is not the most effective way for today's kids.
Mr. Scott. Well, how do we make sure that they use the up-
to-date methods? Is up-to-date methods common, is that an
element in the better schools?
Ms. Howard. It is definitely an element in the better
schools.
Mr. Scott. OK. We're talking about teachers. We have a Head
Start bill that we're considering, and there's an amendment
that we're going to consider that will allow discrimination
based on religion and hiring. Would that help?
I mean some of us think that's an outrage, just to say that
we don't hire people of different religions. Would that be
helpful to education, to teach kids that you can be selected
based on religion. Would that be a good head start or a bad
head start to subject people, kids to that kind of--their
parents being discriminated against can't participate in the
Head Start Program. Is that something, in terms of improving
schools, is it something that you're proposing that we allow
discrimination?
Ms. Howard. No sir, we're not. That is not an area in which
we've worked. We've really worked on instructional strategies
and because we do not--we don't actually hire the teachers. We
work with----
Mr. Scott. But do you think that you're going to improve
the schools without the schools starting to discriminate for
the first time in decades?
Ms. Howard. We're hoping that we can.
Mr. Scott. OK. If kids fall behind a little bit, remedial
education, is that an element making sure you catch them when
they fall behind a little bit before they fall behind a lot?
Ms. Howard. Remedial work is definitely a piece of it. What
we like to do though, and an area where we've been focusing
resources is on actually using diagnostic tests for students
when they come in, so that every teacher knows where those
students' strengths and weaknesses are the minute that they get
in their classroom. Then they design an individual
instructional plan for that student.
Mr. Scott. For each student?
Ms. Howard. Yes sir. We believe that's critical.
Mr. Scott. I guess, what about parental involvement?
Ms. Howard. Parental involvement is important. In our early
college high schools, parents must sign a contract that they
will allow their student to stay late for remediation, to come
on Saturdays, to really be involved, and the parents and
students together are involved in teacher-parent contracts and
in conferences.
Mr. Scott. Now funding all of this, sometimes it costs more
to educate the lower income students, because they come with
deficits, and we have the expert on school funding here, who
has joined us. Is the funding mechanism based on real estate
counterproductive, because the lower income areas end up with
less resources?
Ms. Howard. Sir, I'm not a school funding expert. I will
turn it over to one of my colleagues who might know more. I'm a
curriculum and instruction person.
Mr. Scott. Well, you have to pay for it.
Ms. Howard. Yes.
Mr. Scott. Is that counterproductive? Is funding things
based on a local real estate taxes, where the lowest income
areas get the lowest resources, is that a good idea or a bad
idea? I mean, you've got two other people.
Well, some of us think that it is a bad idea. Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Howard. I would say sir, that part of the research that
we are doing in our publications like Dollars and Cents that
we're partnering with the Gates Foundation, is we're trying to
look at schools to say how can you use the resources that you
have differently and more effectively. We know that our money
is only like a vitamin B shot, it can only jumpstart the
change. The schools are going to have to sustain that over
time, and so we want to help them figure out the best way to
make the best use of what they do have.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Mr. Miller is
recognized.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to just
sort of follow on with what Chairman Castle talked about. And
that is, you know, we are always looking for the manner--I
guess today the term is tipping point, but at what point do we
get to where replication is really feasible.
And we know that you're working with institutions that are
highly personal. I've been involved in schools that look like
they were soaring and the principal had a heart attack and the
programs fell apart. I looked at other schools where in another
case the principal was mugged and decided that they were
leaving just as we were starting to see turnaround in very
difficult schools and very difficult environments.
I just want to, what is the interplay here between some of
the, you know exciting environments that you're creating and
successful environments that you're creating, and we get to the
idea that this is fundamental change.
In your paper, Mr. Henriquez, you point out that many of
these schools need new leadership. You know, too often what
we've seen is that--the idea of change has been adopting a
different reading program and then just sort of laying that
down on top of all the teachers and saying, OK now this is the
way we're going to teach literacy or this is the way that we're
going to teach reading, and that somehow is equated with--, and
it appears that it doesn't work because 4 years later they're
buying another program because that one didn't work.
How do we build the capacity so that we can then extend
beyond those successful environments that you've created in
these partnerships, and we can really seriously think at the
Federal--you know, if we are going to invest what may be $20,
$30 or $40 billion, if Mr. Vander Ark's numbers are right, and
we really want to do this in a first-class fashion, how do you
know that you have a business plan out there for that kind of
success? Because I think you have created some very exciting
environments, that again are also successful environments. I
think excitement and success kind of go together with young
people and change the manner in which they are asked to learn
and engaged to learn.
Let me stop there and just ask you this question of
replication and building that internal capacity for expansion.
Mr. Henriquez. I'll just say a couple of words about the
issue of--we understand that the very fragile infrastructure of
school leadership is indeed exactly that, fragile. And one of
the things that we've seen especially around literacy is that
we want to build distributive leadership so that the
responsibility and onus of leadership is not built on one
individual, but a team of people within a school building, that
if for some reason if something happens to that principal, that
there is an infrastructure that he or she can depend on that
will then know the knowledge and the necessary information and
strategies that are going to be useful to implementing the work
in terms of the vision that individual and team have laid out.
One of the things that we're working with is the National
Association for Secondary School Principals, along with the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to really figure out exactly
how do you build this distributive leadership, particularly
when it comes to issues around literacy. So that you're not
doing this issue of changing formats and reading programs every
four or 5 years, but that you have a vision, a long-term
vision, for how this is going to be implemented over the long
term.
I'm sure Tom has other words of advice.
Mr. Vander Ark. You've addressed two big, related issues.
I'm going to try to make comments on each one. One is on the
tipping point issue and the other is the capacity to create and
sustain the change.
My great hope is that a generation from now that more than
80 percent of American kids graduate, and that a generation
from now African-American and Hispanic kids graduate at rates
that are comparable to their white counterparts.
The change that I think about that needs to take place in
the next 10 years to make that possible is at three levels. One
is, I think we need several thousand great schools spread all
over the United States that show what's possible, newly created
schools and dramatically improved schools, but thousands of
proof points of what's possible and what good secondary schools
look like.
Second, I think we need several dozen, probably three dozen
districts that have made dramatic improvement in the percentage
of students that graduate from high school ready for college.
And third, we need at least half a dozen states, preferably
big ones, that have really moved the needle, that have both
created a good policy set and an intervention capacity and have
seen significant increase in the number of kids graduating and
the percentage of those children ready for college work and
citizenship.
So that's my theory of action. Those are three things that
I hope to help this country accomplish 10 years from now. As I
think about the capacity necessary to reach that, we've begun
to understand that school developers and school model providers
need to have--need to be very prescriptive about what the
school model looks like and they need to provide a high level
of support. My early grants didn't reflect that. They were
pretty loosey-goosey and we now make grants that are quite
prescriptive in terms of school design and support.
Second, the states are going to have to build much more
capacity. We are going to need much stronger state education
associations than we have today, or education administrations
that have clear standards and really strong data systems, and
intervention capacity to help improve struggling schools and
districts.
Ms. Howard. I would like to build on that for just a
minute. One of the things that we have begun doing this past
year to really build the statewide capacity is to start
training the school improvement coaches that employ by the Ohio
Department of Education right alongside our coaches. So they're
learning all of our strategies, they're learning the design of
these schools, and then those school improvement coaches go out
to districts far beyond the ones that we're working with and
they help design that work.
The other thing that we've really focused on since day one
is building the knowledge of what education has to look like in
the communities in which we work. And we're now focusing pretty
heavily on building--on helping communities learn how to
advocate for what they want and what should be in their
schools. And parents talk to parents. I don't care if you're in
an inner-city, or a suburb, or a rural area, parents are our
greatest advocates for what should happen. And if we can get
them to understand the new design of schools and if we can get
them to stand up and fight for that, then schools will change
rapidly.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Miller. Mr. Ehlers is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all for
being here. I apologize for being late, but I was in another
Committee meeting trying to improve the security of this place.
It's terrible that we have to spend so much time worrying about
terrorism, but it has to be done.
Mr. Vander Ark, it is good to see you again. I enjoyed
visiting you some years ago at your foundation. It's good to
see you're still there doing good work.
As some of you know, and as my colleagues know because I've
bombarded them ad infinitum on this, I'm very strongly in favor
of improving our math and science education throughout our
nation. And high schools are not doing well, I am sure you're
aware of the Thames study, the more recent pieces of study and
so forth. We're not even doing well in the K-8 system. But at
least we're near the average of the developed countries. But it
seems to drop steadily after the fourth grade, and by eighth
grade, we're well below average. High schools, we're very near
the bottom.
I have really been pressing this issue for some time and
we've done some things. As you know the Federal Government
can't solve all of the problems, but we have developed math
science partnerships which will train teachers, and I think
that is one of the keys.
It becomes increasingly important--30 years ago when I was
teaching at Berkeley, they did a survey and discovered that if
you did not take advanced math in high school, it is impossible
for you to complete, in 4 years, 95 percent of the majors at
Berkeley. Now, Berkeley is Berkeley. But I think that's
probably true of most higher education institutions at this
point. And so kids, by their decisions whether or not to take
math and science in high school are directly affecting their
academic careers in college and their professional careers
after that.
I would like your ideas on what we can do. Part of the
problem, much of the problem may be schools where students are
underperforming, maybe the school is underperforming. But even
in high-quality schools that would meet the standards that Mr.
Vander Ark outlined for these exceptional schools you need, we
have some of those in this country, most of them in the
suburbs. Rural schools have problems, urban schools have
problems.
But I'm interested in your suggestions, and in particular a
reaction to something that has been floating around here, and I
see it in the literature too, that we should do the same thing
we did after Sputnik, that is have another national defense
education act or something like that. Do you think that is a
good approach? What other ideas do you have of things that the
Congress can do which will really spur this? I would appreciate
any comments from anyone of you.
Mr. Vander Ark. We have lots of school choice in America.
There's lots of choices in high school, it is just all the
wrong kinds of choices. We let 15 year-old kids with no adult
guidance stitch together a curriculum of their own creation.
And we give them a phone book-sized catalog of courses that
vary by degree of difficulty, and we actually provide the
subtle encouragement to low-income and minority kids to take
easier courses. And then we wonder why two thirds of our
American kids don't get what they need or deserve from the
school system. It's time for us to lead. We have to stand up,
and the adults in educational systems need to prescribe a
curriculum that will prepare students for college and work in
citizenship.
That's what good schools do they make choices about the
curriculum. They don't let kids who don't know any better
decide what courses to take.
So as the American Diploma Project of Achieve, Incorporated
is encouraging, and as the State Scholars Program, the Federal
Government has helped to support, both of those programs are
advocating, kids ought to be in a course of study that prepares
them for college work and citizenship. And it clearly should
include 4 years of math and science.
So there's an opportunity here for the Federal Government
to continue to lead. States need to do more. There are only two
states in the country now that require Algebra II, which is
required to pass a community college placement exam in just
about every state in the country. There are only two states
that require that for graduation. So there is clearly an
opportunity to lead on this front.
What I mentioned earlier, what I'm quite excited about is
the development of networks of math and science high schools.
An opportunity for us to work together would be to make a
commitment that every city in America have at least one great
math science technology secondary school. We can do that
together and we could get it done in 5 years, and make sure
that every city in this country had a great secondary school
six through 12, or 6 through 14, where kids left with at least
a year of college credit. There is no reason we couldn't do
that in very short order, and then use that as a lever to help
inform the improvement in all high schools in America.
Mr. Ehlers. Let me just react to that a moment, because I
don't disagree with you. But the point is, that solves a
shortage of engineers, scientists and so forth. But the jobs of
the future at every level are going to demand good skills in
math and science. And I am not talking about going into science
or engineering. Perhaps technical jobs, but almost every job in
the future is going to require a fairly substantial skill set
in math and science. So how do we reach the masses?
Mr. Vander Ark. We reach the masses by lifting our
expectations. My home state requires 2 years of math, and they
don't tell you what it is, so most kids take consumer math
instead of Algebra II. So, this is one of the important things
that is coming out of the National Governor's Association
summit. I think half the states in this country are going to
take serious steps toward lifting their standards, setting a
default curriculum, lifting their graduation requirements, so
that at least over the next 5 years we move toward higher
expectations in math and science. I think that's the way that
you reach all high schools in this country, and then we create
examples of what is possible and how that can be done well, in
an exciting and applied learning environment.
Ms. Howard. I think, in addition to narrowing the
curriculum--and I think that that's a really good start--one of
the high schools with whom we are working, started out with 193
courses in their course catalog. And that just doesn't work. So
I think narrowing the curriculum is a good start.
But the other thing that is really important is making that
link between what they are learning in the classroom and what
they are going to need it for later in life. And we need to
find a really effective way to connect what students learn in
the classroom. I go in to schools every day, and there are kids
who say, ``why do I have to learn math, or why do I have to
learn science? How am I ever going to use that in the future''.
We have to show them how they're going to use that in the
future, and that's going to require a strong partnership among
not just the schools, but government and corporations as well
to bring that relevance to the classroom learning.
It also means that we have to think differently about how
we award credit in high schools. You know right now, it is--you
have to get a waiver for a student to earn credit for having an
internship in a hospital where they are actually helping the
medical professionals in that hospital. And it's learning math
and science skills at the same time. So it's narrowing the
curriculum, it is making relevant what they're learning and it
is also looking at the ways in which we use time and award
credit.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you.
Mr. Henriquez. I agree with my colleagues. I think one of
the things that we've seen through our research is as soon as
our youngsters enter science and mathematics classrooms, that
it's not that they don't think the content is fun; students
love math and students love science. It's particular--
particularly when it's innovative and it's hands-on. But we see
them disengage because they don't really understand the content
of the text. The ways in which the text or the ways in which
the content is instructed, and the ways in which teachers
design that curriculum is absolutely important in the children
really understanding and engaging with that content.
We're seeing that students, particularly with science and
even history textbooks, just can't engage at that level. One of
the ways in which we engage students, and more importantly how
do we balance both the need to help the students improve their
literacy rates and also balance the fact that they also need
science and mathematics daily. How do we do that? Because I
don't think it's an either/or.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you very much.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Ehlers. Mrs. Davis is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to all
of you. As a former school board member from San Diego, I've
been sitting here listening to you and high-tech high obviously
is a very good example there. But what I'm struggling with in
many ways is what our role is. You know, what can we do here on
the Committee, in Congress nationally, that makes a difference
in how teachers teach, how young people come to school, how
communities respond to students. And you said a number of
things, and I think there are some wonderful examples that have
been cited.
Part of the difficulty that I see is often, you know, it's
that conundrum in a way from having something that comes top-
down versus bottom-up. You talked about being more prescriptive
with the support that's there in communities and I appreciate
that, that's important. And yet I sometimes see a lot of
resistance as a result of that.
And again, I am struggling between having on a school board
hat, which is more, you know--it's all local versus our role
here and what we can do. I've wondered as well, you know do we
need a major initiative, No Child Left Behind obviously has its
pluses, but it's got some negatives as well, because it makes
people shift gears, you know, even if they're doing something
that's positive. I'm struggling with it a little bit.
You've obviously seen some of the resistance, I'm sure in
the schools. What would you consider to be the key elements
that, from our point of view, from where we sit here today, we
can promote that makes a difference in terms of that
interaction between a teacher and a student, because I think
that's where it's at. When you look at European programs, there
is a lot more going on in the classroom.
I'm going to lose my time here, but just anecdotally, I
know as a school board member I used to go around to classes,
and I don't think this has changed that much, and I used to sit
with the teacher throughout the course of the day and observe
that same teacher teaching gifted students and non-gifted
students, which we would call non-gifted classrooms, and there
is a difference. There's a difference in body language, a lot
of things that are happening, because discipline becomes a
bigger issue than what kids are getting in the classroom
sometimes. I suspect that's still probably a little bit true.
So can you help me, what from our point of view, really
promotes that special interaction between a student and the
teacher. I'm very familiar with the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards. I don't think we do much with
that. I think we could and we should. I think businesses could
support teachers as they go through that process. Is there
anything else that you can add to that?
I apologize Mr. Chairman, I have a question, but I'm really
more interested in what is it that we can do?
Mr. Henriquez. Well, certainly I think the building of
public will is absolutely critical to this effort. And what
we're seeing in terms of the work that we are doing in schools
for a new society is that teachers are spending a lot more time
collaborating with students and getting to know individual
students. This is probably something that couldn't have
happened before this initiative started. And we're seeing that
growth.
We're also looking at the ways in which professionals--how
do we train teachers as well as leaders who are coming into the
system to ensure that they know how to work within these small
school environments?
Mrs. Davis. I think----
Mr. Henriquez. So it is not just the teachers who were
there.
Mrs. Davis. I think you would probably include
instructional leaders, principals as well as--that really
have----
Mr. Henriquez. Absolutely. How do we include that pipeline
of people who are coming into the workforce and turns of
education to insure that they know how to engage with the
students within this context of small schools?
Mrs. Davis. Mm-hmm.
Ms. Howard. Having clearly anything that you can do to
encourage the type of instruction that is prevalent and those
who are National Board Certified Teachers, anything that you
can do to encourage that would be very very helpful.
If you look at the way in which most of our teachers learn
to teach in today's higher education, they don't learn to teach
in a way that National Board Certified Teachers do. They are
more taught to deliver information and to have students come
and tell them back what they have already given them. And
that's not the way. So anything that you can do to promote
that.
Also I think that it's very important for us to look at
ways to break the barriers between high school and higher
education. There are some artificial walls that have been built
between those systems. And as was alluded to earlier sometimes
in the last couple of years of high school, students really
could be doing more and pushing further. But there are some
barriers to that built into the system, so it would be helpful.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you.
Mr. Vander Ark. I'll reiterate, four recommendations--to
help sponsor new schools, and help provide aid to failing
schools, and support the National Governors Association policy
efforts, and support data systems. I think it's critical that
we provide teachers with good data about their kids, and that
that data be able to follow the kids.
Mrs. Davis. Yes.
Mr. Vander Ark. So that the next group of teachers knows
about the needs and gifts of each student.
Mrs. Davis. I appreciate that. And also your comments
earlier about knowing what it really takes to educate a student
today. It's very important, and often we don't take all the
considerations that we have to. We may not be able to do all of
that, but we should know what it takes. Thank you.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mrs. Davis. Mr. Hinojosa is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hinojosa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the
participants on this important hearing that we are having. I
think it's been very interesting and surely educational for me.
I, too, have served on the local school board and on the
Texas State Board of Education, and now here on this Education
Committee for 8 years. So I agree with you that it's no secret
that we are losing our competitive edge in producing experts in
math, science and engineering.
If we do not engage and provide both quality and
challenging educational opportunities for African American and
for Hispanic American children I think are just going to
permanently cede the leadership in this area.
So listening to some of the ideas that each of the
foundations you represent have used to create what has in some
cases resulted in some of the 100 best high schools in our
nation--I know I've seen the list in 2004, and I saw the latest
one in 2005--I am pleased to tell you that I come from South
Texas, a very small area compared to San Antonio, Houston,
Dallas and Fort Worth, but it is very rural. And we have one of
those top 100 high schools. It was eighth best in the country
last year, and is in the top 40 now.
Forty percent of the children in this math and science
Academy in South Texas Independent School District are on the
free lunch program. There is a lot of difference in that school
versus the one in Highland Park in Dallas where there are no
children on a free lunch program. And if you take a look at
differences, the makeup of the children--of those schools, ours
has 80 percent Hispanic children, Highlands may have one or 2
percent Hispanics, mostly non-Hispanics.
So there are big differences, but there's definitely some
similarity, and that is they have a lot of teachers with
Master's degrees who are able to really get involved with the
children, with the students, and turn them around from the idea
that you can only take the very minimal courses. Instead
they're going one and a half hours longer than the normal
programs that we have. And these are public schools that I am
referring to in Mercedes, Texas, South Texas ISD, Math and
Science Academy.
They are bused from as far as Brownsville to Mercedes, and
as far as San Isidro and Edinburg to Mercedes. It seems to me
that those programs have some other components that each of the
three of you have mentioned. Very good teachers, challenging
programs, longer hours than the normal, and higher
expectations.
So look at the model I know in Mercedes, and look at who
was feeding into that program, into the math and science
colleges, and it's the students in the Gear-Up program. Gear-Up
is working for both the African American and for the Hispanic
children. It's funded at about, a little--slightly over $300
million and has a lots of success stories.
Why couldn't each of your foundations and others match the
government and give us more of the programs that take a whole
cohort of students, a whole classroom, rich, middle income and
poor, and do what that program is doing.
Look at creating these regional schools. I call them
regional because the one in South Texas ISD is considered to be
regional because there are 28 school districts feeding into it,
and do a six state--or as many states as you want to. But you
see, it's not just for the urban, it's also for the rural like
we have. And it puts to bed the myth that children of United
Farm workers and migrants cannot learn. It's that they're given
the tools, the computers, the teachers, the challenging, and
they learn about team learning that we use.
It seems to me that there is hope, and we need to look at
what's making those top 100 high schools work, and put it to
use here in Washington.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Castle. Representative Hinojosa, I was just at
South Texans a couple of weeks ago, not two, a quick story
about it. A school in Donna, called Idea, it's a K-12
international baccalaureate school. And like school that you
mentioned, it is proving that with a rigorous curriculum that
is well taught, and a supportive environment, that low income
kids can and should be doing serious intellectual work when
they're 17 and 18.
We hope to help create a dozen more of schools like Idea,
and its sister school, Uplift, in Dallas. We've committed over
$50 million creating great high schools in Texas and plan to
make additional investments. We look forward to working with
you, this Committee and others in that work.
Mr. Hinojosa. Thank you.
Mr. Vander Ark. Let me make a comment about Gear-Up. Gear-
Up provides great services to kids, but it is a set of services
that ought to be central, not ancillary to high schools. It's
an add-on, when in fact those college preparatory, guidance and
academic services ought to be the core, the mission core of
high schools that we design around, not add-on for some kids.
So we would be happy to match an effort to try to take
those services and to help schools implement them. I mean,
that's really the essence of our Texas State Project with the
community foundation of Texas, to help schools take that
college ready goal and rigorous curriculum, and a set of
guidance services that provide individualized support for kids,
and to make those services and activities central to the high
school mission and not an add-on.
Mr. Hinojosa. But Tom, what's important though in the Gear-
Up programs is that it's not for the middle and upper income
children.
Mr. Vander Ark. We only work with low income kids and low
income schools. So I share----
Mr. Hinojosa. Well, I just feel that Gear Up has a way of
including a lot of African Americans and Hispanic children, and
that's what I like about that.
And second, I like the fact that they have been
successfully putting them on to the path of math, science and
engineering. And the schools that have Gear-Up in Texas that I
am familiar with. So that answers the problem that we are all
concerned about, that we don't have the students feeding into
that pipeline to go to the community college or to the
university and study engineering, math and science and
information technology.
I wish we could talk more.
Chairman Castle. You can certainly talk more, perhaps after
this hearing is over. Maybe you want to offer to take them to
lunch or something of that nature.
At this time, we would like to welcome Mr. Fattah back to
the Committee. He was previously on the Committee, he just
can't seem to stay away. And I offer him the opportunity to
have a discussion with the witnesses for 5 minutes.
Mr. Fattah. Thank you. This is actually a pleasure for me,
because my fondest days here in the Congress were as a Member
of this Committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the ranking
member.
And to follow onto this whole dialog about Gear-Up, which
is what I guess--as the architect for the Gear-Up program, and
I remember the day we passed it in this Committee--there was
support on both sides of the aisle. I am happy to report this
morning that my new Committee, the Appropriations Committee,
has just marked up the education bill, and notwithstanding
other recommendations, they have decided to fully fund Gear-Up.
And this Committee has moved out legislation to re-authorize
it.
And I want to use that as the basis for my comment, which
is that one of the things that I'm suggesting in re-
authorization of Gear-Up is that we allow for early college
opportunities, which is you know something is happening now
with many of the Gear-Up programs, but I think that we can do
even more.
I know, Tom, that you have been interested in this whole
issue for a while, and there's important research on it. We've
done a lot in Philadelphia in this regard. I think it is
critically important that we in the Gear-Up reauthorization
look at early college in a way in which it is built on to some
of the other things that we're doing.
I do want to ask a question, because I know that you've
looked at a lot of this around the country, and as I look at
it, I just want to make sure that I am not missing something.
Have you found states where in low-achieving schools versus
high-achieving schools, that children are given the same
quality teachers, the same access to computers, or similar
class sizes? Or is it true that in every instance that we see a
very significant difference between the resource allocations
between high-achievement and low-achievement schools?
And if that is so, I guess my point Tom is, is it as
important as creating--moving through your kind of work
schedule that you have laid out, which is ambitious, but to
also point out to the country that part of the difficulty is
that states seem to have some selective amnesia when it comes
to how to make schools work.
They seem to figure out how to make them work in wealthy
suburban areas, and somehow can't seem to provide the same
level of resources in rural and urban areas in terms of the
quality of teachers, the access to educational material, and
this has been a matter that has been litigated across the
country, and some 49 states. I know that the foundations are
doing great work, but I mean if you want to get the systematic
change across the board, at some level we have to deal with the
structure of how public education deals low income children in
rural and urban areas comment by some behind the eight-ball.
Mr. Vander Ark. It's a difficult issue. It's a great
question. Our sense is that there are four big policy levers,
and that we advocate for college-ready standards, for strong
accountability, for equitable school choice, and for adequate
and flexible funding.
That means funding that represents or recognizes the need
of the children that attend a particular school. And you're
right, there are big differences within states of the
distribution of human resources. There are even bigger
differences within districts.
Mr. Fattah. Right.
Mr. Vander Ark. Paul Hill and Marguerite Rosa's recent work
illustrated that while there are big differences between
districts within states, it is even more significant within
districts when you look at high poverty and low poverty
schools, and the total staff budget that is allocated to those
places.
Mr. Fattah. Either in district or in states, shouldn't we
be talking about a more fair level?
Mr. Vander Ark. Absolutely.
Mr. Fattah. This is my point, one the things that may be
useful for either Carnegie or Gates or someone who's got some
national scope and some credibility, is maybe do a costing out
study to say what it would cost----
Mr. Vander Ark. Right.
Mr. Fattah [continuing]. To provide an adequate education
for a child in Philadelphia, Mississippi, or Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, or New York City. I mean to kind of get past the
rhetorical discussion, and to really think about how to lay out
so that state policymakers or Federal policymakers, or even as
these matters are being litigated----
Mr. Vander Ark. Right.
Mr. Fattah [continuing]. There will be some bases to think
about what the actual costs might be, because in Texas you can
go from districts where they spend $4000 per pupil to where
they are spending $24,000 per pupil. I don't know how you're
going to end up with a comparable result with that wide a
disparity.
Mr. Vander Ark. We launched what I think is the largest
school finance project ever assembled. It is called the School
Finance Redesign Project. It's centered at the University of
Washington. It's a series of 10 linked studies that we hope
will develop our understanding of how education finance can
work more efficiently and effectively, and I hope it will begin
to address this issue of adequate and effective distribution.
Mr. Fattah. Well, I think it is critically important.
You've been doing great work and this teacher quality is at the
top of the list. That's the very essence of it. If you are a
poor kid in this country, and Carnegie, you financed the
research that showed that if you get effective teachers, then
all other things to the contrary--I mean, nothing else matters.
I mean, the kid will do well. The least likely kid to see a
qualified teacher in our country is an African American or
Latino youngster. They can go to high school in any of our
states, and go through their whole high school year and never
have a math or science teacher who majored or minored in the
subject that they're teaching.
Mr. Vander Ark. Let me go back to your issue of
distribution of human resources, which is closely tied to
quality.
Mr. Fattah. It is also tied to money.
Mr. Vander Ark. It is.
Mr. Fattah. Yes.
Mr. Vander Ark. So this weekend I will be with the Aspen
urban superintendents and that group of 10 of the leading
superintendents will have at the top of their list the
distribution of all of the human resources. So what you pointed
out is at the top of the list for urban superintendents.
I just want to point out that it's a difficult, complicated
problem that is a function of state budgets, of local budgets,
of state policy and of local employment agreements. It's going
to take tough work, state-by-state, to help untangle this so
that we can actually get, for the least advantaged kids in our
society, access to the highest quality teachers in great
schools.
Mr. Fattah. Well, I'm a guest here of the Committee. So I
won't belabor the point. I do thank you for your work that
you're doing, and I encourage you as you as you go forward.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Fattah, you're a welcomed
guest. We're not going to have a formal second round of
questions, but Ms. Woolsey did have a couple of things that she
wanted to state, maybe a question or two, and I want to provide
her that time.
Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you Chaka
for coming, and if you loved us here so much, why did you leave
us?
[Laughter.]
Ms. Woolsey. But thank you for what you're doing on the
Appropriations Committee. I mean we authorize and if the
appropriators don't deliver, we're in trouble. And you deliver.
Thank you very much.
You know, I have to tell you, when we talk about adult
expectations and parental involvement--I raised four kids. My
baby's 38 and she has three older brothers, so you know I'm
through raising them in that way. But I have one son that I am
always using as an example, and someday he's going to realize
that and tell me to cool it because I talk about him up here a
lot.
First of all, when he was in high school, he was an All-
American--well no, he was a really good football player. When
he was in college, he was an All-American in his junior and
senior year. So he's a big, good kid. He was always the captain
of the team. He's a leader. All right.
He graduated in 1985. A couple of years before that, I
think he was a junior and we were downtown trying to find
clothes for him. He's a big man, so it's hard to find clothes
for them. And I found a shirt and I said, ``Honey''--because I
always call my kids those things--``Honey, look at this, look
at this.'' ``Oh. mother, are you kidding? That looks like a
smart kid's shirt.'' But I said, ``But you're smart.'' ``I
don't want it--no, no, I'm sorry.'' So now he's a college
graduate, and he's a very successful young man, a father and he
provides very well for his children. That was my kid, when it
wasn't cool to be smart.
We have such a job ahead of us to make being smart what it
is supposed to be. Believe me, I get it. But it's parents that
have to get it. And when we talk about Gear-Up, and we talk
about--when I talk about girls in science and math, I've got
legislation called Go-Girl, and what it is about is getting
parents involved at the very early ages, instead of thinking
that isn't where their kid should go, and being part of the
program. That's what Gear-Up does.
So how do you--because you're doing it right. Are your
programs set up so that these parents are already engaged so
that the child can't be part of it? Or are you bringing the
parents along with the student? Could you help us with that?
How about you?
Mr. Henriquez. Yes. I think, as you know from your
experience with your children that as soon as they are old
enough to outgrow sitting on your lap, there is a huge
disconnect between how engaged you can be.
Ms. Woolsey. And you can imagine how quickly that big guy--
--
Mr. Henriquez. Especially if you have big kids.
Ms. Woolsey. But he still sits on my lap, right----
Mr. Henriquez. This is a problem that we have been looking
at. I mean, one of the core principles was in the schools and
society to really try and engage parents into, and to engage
communities at large but to ensure that their parents are a
critical piece of the reform effort.
Ms. Woolsey. Then, how do you do it with parents who aren't
already educated, I mean?
Mr. Henriquez. That's exactly right.
Ms. Woolsey. I was wondering that.
Mr. Henriquez. One of the things they were working with is
groups like the National Urban League, who have a number of
affiliates around the country, and who have tentacles out to
parent communities to help them understand the work they need
to do with their older students, that it's not just enough to
ensure that you're being a good early childhood parent, but
that you need to be a parent over and over and over again,
right through 12th grade, and right through college. And even
when you go out shopping for shirts.
Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Henriquez. And even when you go out shopping for
shirts. But it's something that we're trying to figure out in
terms of what are the key critical ways in which you can have
conversations with your students around academic work.
One of the ways in which--and I have a 15-year-old
daughter, and I barely see her work. It is not because I'm not
interested, it's because it's just that age in which students
really want to be very independent and independent learners.
And so one of the strategies that we can use as parents and how
can we use them with students, we're looking at the work at
Johns Hopkins that Joyce Epstein has done for a number of years
in terms of looking at how parents and students work together
and ways that we can support that, not just in early grades,
but how do we build on that and how do we build on this
continuum?
So we hope to have some critical strategies very soon.
Ms. Woolsey. Thank you. Anybody else? Actually, I believe
it's because your 15 year-old is a teenager. And I swear that I
became humble enough to become a Member of Congress after
raising four teenagers.
Mr. Vander Ark. All of the new schools that we fund that
have advisories, it's a system of distributed counseling where
there is one adult at school that takes responsibility for a
group of students, usually between 15 and 20 of them. They know
how they're doing in every class.
Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Vander Ark. They help to provide some of the counseling
at the school. They inform students when it's time to start
thinking about taking the PSAT and then the SAT. And they do
some of the college awareness.
It works a little bit different at every school, but it
does provide an important conduit for parents so that they
are--like in elementary school, there's one person you can call
that knows your son or daughter well, and is up-to-date on how
they're doing in every subject.
Ms. Woolsey. One adult?
Ms. Howard. Another thing that we have found is that we are
working with parents who may not have been successful in high
school themselves. And a lot of them don't have a picture of
what it takes for their student to be successful. So we've
tried to start in the areas of literacy and we've found that if
you can sit down with a parent and a student and change the way
the conversations happen at schools, rather than the parent-
teacher meeting by the teacher sitting in the front of the room
and 40 parents come in and they say hello, and then you walk
out and go to the next room.
We actually, as part of the advisory system, started
building with these students and parents a clear plan, so that
we can sit down and the student can say to the parent, ``Mom,
this is how I am doing in reading now. I am at this reading
level.'' And the teacher says, ``And this is where the student
needs to be, and this is our plan for getting them there.''
Then we have something specific to talk to those parents about.
Not a nebulous high school experience, but a very specific
roadmap for getting from point A to point B.
Ms. Woolsey. And it could possibly mean that that parent
would put less pressure on the child for doing extracurricular
things so that they can study.
Ms. Howard. Right.
Ms. Woolsey. OK. I've taken up way more than my time. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Castle. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. We'll bring the
hearing to a close.
I would just like to thank each of you for your perspective
on what I would consider to be a significant problem, for your
own personal involvement and engagement, and also for the
organizations that you represent, which have been very generous
in terms of what they have done to try to help with this
problem.
I, like you, really feel that we're coming to grips with
this, and I appreciate what NGA has done, I appreciate what
you're doing, and I feel that we are beginning to make moves in
the right direction. Hearings like this are important.
Just so that you know, we are having a series of these
hearings to try to get our arms around the subject. We don't
have any legislation prepared. We may never prepare legislation
on this. But we are vitally interested in what we can do to try
to push the envelope, as they say.
So we thank you so much for taking the time to be here and
for your insight into the problems, and helping all of us
understanding it better as well.
And with that, we stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]