Focus on the Prize of Higher Standards and More Graduates

Abstract

A few reforms in the Obama Administration's big, stimulus-funded Race to the Top, Investing in Innovation (i3), and school improvement grant contests--ending state caps on charter school expansion, rating teachers on the basis of student test scores, turning around failing schools by re-staffing them and other means--have drawn tremendous press coverage. But when one steps back from the blog posts, press releases, and news stories, the contours of two larger policy priorities emerge from the Obama education canvas: raising academic standards and raising graduation rates, particularly in urban school systems. With American teenagers lagging behind their international peers and about a third of entering students requiring remedial courses, the Administration wants high school students to become college and career ready. And with more than 50% of students failing to earn high school diplomas in some cities, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is pressing to raise graduation rates. But there's an inherent tension between these two priorities. Higher standards make it tougher for students to graduate, and it's a lot harder to lift graduation rates when standards are higher. The question for policy makers and local educators alike is how to resolve the two conflicting goals. Higher standards won't mean much if students don't meet them, and the value of higher graduation rates would be greatly diminished in the absence of meaningful graduation standards. Goal Tension Over the years, one goal has frequently been sacrificed for the other. Nearly three decades ago, when the nation first began to expect more than a basic education for most students, A Nation at Risk famously called for all students to study a core curriculum in high school. Within five years of the report's 1983 publication, the share of high school students who studied that proposed curriculum more than doubled, to 28%. But studies found that many students were studying arithmetic for four years in courses like Applied Basic Math Skills and not the algebra, geometry, and calculus that had been envisioned. They were expanding their English credits with typing and other nonacademic courses, not delving deeply into literature or writing extensively. More recently, the continuing tension between standards and graduation rates was reflected in the Center on Education Policy's study of state high school graduation exams. CEP reported that the 24 states with required exit exams typically measure 8th-grade math concepts and 10th-grade language skills; 19 of the states allow students who fail the tests to show they're diploma-worthy in other ways. This happens even though there's considerable research that higher graduation requirements and higher graduation rates don't have to be mutually exclusive. With the right strategies, schools can both expect more from students and have more students earn diplomas. But piecemeal dropout-prevention steps aren't enough. To get large numbers of struggling students through high schools with higher standards, school districts need a more systematic strategy, the research suggests. The first step is getting to struggling students early. Using attendance rates, course grades, and course failure statistics, researchers can now pinpoint 9th-graders' chances of earning diplomas. This means schools can target students early for intensive tutoring and other interventions. Even though the trajectory of dropping out is increasingly clear, school systems often neglect to collect such data, so students who are on a path to failure remain invisible, says Michele Cahill, vice-president for national programs and director of urban education at the Carnegie Corporation of New York. As a result, many high schools lose the battle fo higher graduation rates before it's barely begun. Cahill led New York City's campaign to raise graduation rates between 2003 and 2006. …