A story in the New York Times reports on a study released by a Washington think tank. The study is the work of economists, who calculate that closing the achievement gap and raising up everyone’s test scores, would have a dramatic effect on the economy.
If Americans were able to match the scores reached in Canada, which ranks seventh on the O.E.C.D. scale, the United States’ gross domestic product would rise by an additional 6.7 percent, a cumulative increase of $10 trillion (after taking inflation into account) by the year 2050, the report estimated.
Robert G. Lynch, an economist who wrote the Washington Center report, explained why he took the trouble to make these what-if calculations.
“One of the main goals was to see how we could promote more widely shared and faster economic growth,” he said. In the three decades that followed the end of World War II, almost all Americans, no matter where they fell on the earnings scale, enjoyed at least a doubling of their real incomes.
But that balanced growth has evaporated. While those at the top have continued to experience robust income increases, everyone else’s income has either stalled or dropped. The average income of the bottom 20 percent of households sank by more than 8 percent from 1973 to 2013, while the inflation-adjusted incomes of the top 20 percent grew by about 60 percent, according to the report. The top 5 percent enjoyed an 80 percent jump.
One point of this exercise, Mr. Lynch explained, is to show that the added cost of improving educational achievement at the bottom would be more than made up for by the rise in economic output and tax revenue….
The report includes the types of changes, which include expanding early childhood education, reducing exposure to lead paint and starting school later so teenagers can get more sleep, that the center views as necessary to raise achievement scores, though it does not include specific costs in its calculations.
The report also notes how widely achievement scores vary within the United States, not only from state to state but county to county. Montgomery County, a generally affluent suburban area in Maryland just outside of Washington, for example, was able to reduce the gap and increase scores after instituting all-day kindergarten programs, reducing class size, investing in teacher development and reducing housing-based segregation in its schools.
All of these are good ideas, all of them should be speedily implemented. But I don’t understand how these changes by themselves will generate more and better-paying jobs to create the economic growth that is predicted. None of these proposals addresses intergenerational poverty. Schools are very important, and we should do whatever we can to make sure that every child has equal educational opportunity. But schools alone cannot reduce the source of the achievement gap, which is poverty. Nearly a quarter of our children live in poverty, the highest proportion of any advanced nation; and 51% live in families that are low-income or poor. A strategy is needed to create good jobs, good housing, and a range of services to help families live decent lives and provide for their children. That’s what other nations do. Across Europe, for example, there is a sturdy safety net that includes both school-based improvements and socioeconomic strategies to help families and communities. Some of the comments following this article make the same point.

I’m amazed at the audacity (and simple-mindedness) of economists who see a cause-and-effect link between test scores and income! It’s backwards. Why not study the effects of income on school performance? (oh yeah, that would require doing something about poverty and income inequality 🙂
LikeLike
The high paying jobs have been being gutted systematically for years now. You can’t close an achievement gap and then send those who academically achieved in their respective studies to the soup line. The achievement gap myth is simply a scapegoat for the lack of high paying jobs that have vanished due to Corporate greed. There is no STEM crisis especially when you have STEM graduates working for peanuts or looking for jobs all together.
LikeLike
I so agree with both of you. Where’s the student motivation for college-track high-schoolers to perform well on tests (let alone study & learn something or even go to college) when they see their elder brothers’-sisters’ degreed cohort manning the minimum-wage retail counters– & where’s the motivation for poor & working class kids to even finish high school when they see their elder siblings’ cohort squeezed out of minimum-wage jobs by the non-STEM kids?
My guess is these economists are working from 60+-yr-old paradigms showing improved education as the engine of a booming economy… Where what was actually happening was, US economy was booming in the absence of competitors (who were rebuilding a WWII-bombed out infrastructure), spreading the wealth to middle & lower class via higher tax revenue to educate vets (GI bill) & ramping up ed quality in all quarters (spread even to very poor areas via ’60’s civil tights laws).
Our gov’t’s bass-ackwards answer to globalism (I e the inevitable rise as those nations rebuilt)– outsourcing jobs to the rising 3rd world while consolidating wealth in untrammeled financial sectors– gave birth to the current hollowing out of the working & middle classes. No amount of testing, ‘accountability’ etc can fill that piggy-bank back up.
LikeLike
Not to mention that in the 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was 91% (it’s now 39.6%) and the unionization rate in the 1950s was in the 30% – 34% range. Now after decades of union busting, the unionization rate is down to 11.2%.
LikeLike
Their reasoning is a reverse cause and effect. I would like to see economists do a computational model on what impact higher taxes on the wealthy, higher taxes on capital gains, penalties for setting up a bogus foreign headquarters for the purpose of tax evasion, smaller class sizes and more social safety nets, would have on the poor.
LikeLike
btw, Diane, when I read the NYT story this morning, I figured you’d be on it. Thanks!
LikeLike
Better yet where is the motivation for students going to come from when the very people who are teaching them the skills that they will need to succeed are in the poor house themselves? You would be surprised by the number of times a student asked me why I went to school to become a teacher only to end up making less than a garbage man. Factor in the student loans and those students had a very valid point and I told them such.
LikeLike
These economists didn’t review enough of the literature. How do they explain this: White high school drop outs have more wealth than Black & Hispanic college graduates.
http://www.demos.org/blog/9/23/14/white-high-school-dropouts-have-more-wealth-black-and-hispanic-college-graduates
LikeLike
One of the good reasons for using wealth rather than income as a measure of prosperity or poverty
LikeLike
Economists practicing science, wouldn’t make it, an either/or proposition.
When parsing starts, it is either Fox dittoing or sincere attempts to justify disproportionate reward for the labor of others.
LikeLike
Each of them measures something that’s meaningful, for certain. I find that non-economists tend to focus almost exclusively on income versus wealth, possibly because it’s easier to come by the figures (because we have to report our incomes each year). I generally think that income is usually, at best, a kind of quick-and-dirty proxy for wealth, which ultimately is the true measure of “richness” and “poorness.” Income, especially at the highest end of the curve, is very volatile. And it tends to obscure big differences in wealth at the low end.
LikeLike
I also don’t think economics is a “science.” I’m sure there are a lot of arguments about what “science” is in the first place, but whatever it is, I don’t think economics is in that category. I would describe an economist as a person who analyzes the causes and effects of human behavior for the purpose of making policy arguments.
LikeLike
Flerp,
The motives for undermining the truths that economics can provide, are suspect.
Revisionist economic history attempts to deny the importance of Keynesian policy in changing the course of the depression.
Moneyed interests can frame an issue, deny data, focus on false indicators….., all to the detriment of those who actually power the economy.
Because, some, many, are guilty of economic malpractice, does not mean that taking the advice of Stiglitz, Krugman, Baker and Picketty would not advance the world.
LikeLike
Diane has it exactly right. Higher graduation rates do not produce higher overall incomes; HS and coll grad rates are now at their highest ever, but incomes of the bottom 80% are not rising to reward these educational gains of the majority. And, that form of education called “job-training’ does not produce jobs except for job-trainers, the clerical help and custodial staff in new job training programs. Family income has always been the most reliable predictor of student achievement, future income, and SAT scores. Poverty is the largest obstacle to higher student achievement; only an incomes policy can affect the high rate of child poverty which translates into lower rates of school success for those low-income millions. Obama meekly calls for a minimum wage of $10.10/hr while Seattle passes one for $15/hr, while the real need of poor working adults is $20/hr, which would be a big step forward towards raising school achievement of students. More obvious proposals which are anathema to the status quo of the billionaires: High tax rates on the richest 1% and on corporations now eluding taxation, to release billions for social needs. The answers are simple but political situation is not; no PhD in economics required to figure out what students, teachers, communities, and families need. The political power to act on the obvious is not yet in our hands.
LikeLike
IRA, AMEN…again.
LikeLike
The capacity of economists to get everything exactly backwards never ceases to amaze me. And the capacity of the powers that be to continue to rely on economists really astounds – and baffles – me.
LikeLike
“amazes me”?
American economists who think they will find reward for papers that favor the money men, write them and get them published, in the controlled media. When they tour the federal and state capitols advocating policy, their freight is paid by someone, like anti-pension “scholars”, funded by hedge funds.
The statistical picture of economic reality, came from across the ocean- French scholar, Picketty.
For amusement, read the silly answer to Picketty, at tank PEI, (anti-Social Security, Peterson Economic Institute). It is so far from economics, that it doesn’t even justify the title, economic malpractice.
Picketty’s work has proven to be unassailable.
LikeLike
Every one seems to get every thing wrong.
LikeLike
Is that a truism?
LikeLike
It should be a truism, Duane!
LikeLike
I think we should start paying economists based on the value they add to the economy.
I figure the profession as a body would need to start paying reparations to the tune of several trillion dollars a year for the next 20 years, just for starters.
LikeLike
I am really impatient with economists who make inferential leaps by crunching test scores while ignoring the failure of any serious corrective action for the wizards of Wall Street who tanked the economy and have aided/abetted the real poverty evident in schools, where 51% of children are eligible for free or reduced price lunch.
The reliance on PISA scores in math and science for these inferential leaps is based on a lot of unstated assumptions about the importance of those two subjects as job-creators, sources of tax revenues, and drivers of the economy.
I regard the gist of this report as tissue thin on serious thinking about education and the economy. It is, however, an exercise in common is think tanks where the originators of schemes to improve education latch on to snippets of research (teens starting school later so they are wide awake) or suddenly discover abundant research on the virtue of programs such as pre-school programs with teachers CERTIFIED in early childhood education.
I am underwhelmed by yet another think tank report.
I am also momentarily amused by the semantic reach of the term TANK as an environment for thinking.
LikeLike
Not so much a tank as a half-track …
LikeLike
“Economic Think Tanks”
Better at tanking
Than at thinking
Bringing the banking
To the brinking
LikeLike
“I regard the gist of this report as tissue thin on serious thinking about education and the economy.”
You’re giving way too much credit to the report for “serious thinking”.
LikeLike
Without any doubt, there are economists who are skewing their research focus, based on rewards, either anticipated or given, by the 1%. The first objective of the U.S. Dept. of Education should be to allocate funds to colleges that demonstrate they graduate students with integrity.
Climate change scientists speak with one voice (excluding fringe), while U.S. economists dither and wait for a French scholar to expose the truth.
LikeLike
” A strategy is needed to create good jobs, good housing, and a range of services to help families live decent lives and provide for their children.”
Gee, is that all?
LikeLike
oh wait – that would cost a lot of money – we aren’t suggesting MONEY
could help poverty are we?????
LikeLike
The fastest, most efficient, most effective way to alleviate poverty is to give poor people money. Decide how much money a family needs each year to live with dignity and comfort, and cut a check for that amount each year. It’s not the same thing as “creating good jobs,” true, and it would cost a lot of “MONEY,” but only a terrible person would object to spending a lot of money to eradicate poverty.
LikeLike
Well, then there is a political party and a half full of terrible people. Nearly all Republicans and at least half of the Democrats object to spending a lot of money to eradicate poverty. Many Republicans and far too many Democrats object to spending any money at all to eradicate poverty.
LikeLike
Flerp,
On occasion your arguments warrant a skim. You’re capable of better than this one.
LikeLike
Flerp,
I see in the comment below, by way of explanation, you are ill.
LikeLike
I have a relentless case of the flu, nonstop anxiety, and I can’t sleep. I think to myself, my God, how I hate being sick. Then I think to myself, each day the time draws nearer when I will wish I felt like this. I’ve gone too long without taking care of myself, and the falling apart has begun.
LikeLike
Even when you do take care of yourself, the falling apart begins—usually slower but still …
LikeLike
Arne Duncan tweeted about this: https://twitter.com/arneduncan/status/562711248769671170
LikeLike
I wonder if these so-called economists know that Canada has a higher ratio of its adults who are functionally illiterate than the U.S. does, but, at the same time, Canada has a lower ratio of its population living in poverty.
I wonder why there’s no mention that America has more than 100 million adult citizens with college degrees, more than three times the total population of Canada and that the U.S. has about 65 million avid readers—about twice the total population of Canada.
In fact, when we look at gross numbers instead of ratios, the U.S. has more college graduates than any country on the planet.
LikeLike
Poverty, crime, violence, trauma, incarcerations, absentee fathers, hunger, and lack of safety for children living in poverty is where we -USA – are NUMBER 1 of industrialized countries in the world.
NUMBER 1! Sick!
We LOVE BEING NUMBER 1!
The gaul of ‘stink tank deformsters’ to blame all this on teachers just gets my goat! The millions spent to bring down dedicated educators, ruin their careers and lives, is unthinkable…but real.
We must fight these social-engineering-economists.
Let’s send them to Canada during this winter.
Although, I like Canada and would not wish these sociopaths on them.
LikeLike
Also #1 in:
> number of people in prison
> in defense spending
> more aircraft carriers than every country in the world combined
> for the production of pornography that’s sold to the world—by a huge margin
> for selling weapons to almost anyone who wants them—even our enemies—the U.S. has the largest private sector weapons industry in the world by a huge margin
LikeLike
I think we should drop them of in Antarctica in the middle of winter there dressed for a Florida Summer—-at least a hundred miles from the nearest shelter.
LikeLike
God help the Canadians if they start paying attention to our economic think tanks. They will provide a road map to ruin for most of their population.
LikeLike
2old2teach,
Like Europe listened to Harvard economics professors, Rogoff and Rhinehart, driving the continent into widespread and unnecessary despair.
If the courts reject Harvard’s Chetty, the U.S. will be better off.
LikeLike
Schools are a REFLECTION of our society! When the economy is good and there are more jobs and less poverty, our schools perform better. Would an economist even understand that idea?
LikeLike
It’s the economy, stupid!
American politicians have been derelict in their duty to effectively manage the US economy. The damage done to American families/children by flawed macroeconomic policies (e.g., inflation hysteria, austerity, underinvestment in infrastructure, etc.) over the past 30 years has been immense. It’s convenient for policymakers to shift the blame onto teachers for “achievement gaps” and/or poverty, but the persistence/exacerbation of these issues ultimately rests with them. In a similar vein, the American public has completely failed to hold elected officials accountable for their repeated failures. That is, after all, the crux of the problem.
There is a choice in front of us: we can continue to accept mediocrity or we can recommit ourselves to bold action. Our society doesn’t need guidance from billionaire investors to pursue substantive, and humane reforms. On the contrary, we simply need ordinary citizens to speak up for themselves.
The authors of a recent Stanford report on inequality and poverty within the fifty states eloquently described the defeatist attitude(s) that contributed to our current predicament: “The current tendency, unfortunately, is to treat the institutional landscape as given and move quickly and immediately to piecemeal discussion of piecemeal reform. If a second war on poverty and inequality is to be a real war founded on a real commitment to win it, we might want to step back and open up to larger reform, no matter how daunting doing so may now seem.”
Click to access SOTU_2015_executive-summary.pdf
LikeLike
You can’t hold them accountable when they can remain in office forever and gerrymander their respective districts. In addition, you cant even validate the authenticity of elections when votes can’t even be counted in a truly valid way now that we all vote digitally. Its a big giant scam and we are really going to pay the price for not taking a stand against this nonsense. They things that we are allowing to be done to our citizenry and our Nation would have never been allowed to happen in prior generations. Today we are too busy watching football and getting our fix of reality TV to even pay attention to our own slow and painful demise.
LikeLike
In the post above it should read “The things” not “They things”. These smartphone keys are way too tiny I apologize for the grammatical error.
LikeLike
“It’s convenient for policymakers to shift the blame onto teachers for “achievement gaps” and/or poverty, but the persistence/exacerbation of these issues ultimately rests with them.”
To whom does the them in ‘rests with them’ refer?
LikeLike
None of those ideas, by themselves, will create that economic output as predicted. Rising educational attainment without serious economic incentives to create jobs worthy of a well-educated workforce is a recipe for further depressing the workforce’s wages. This isn’t a system that works with input from only one side. If you look at the wages by educational attainment since the late 1970s, you see that the college wage benefit exists mostly from crashing incomes below the BA level.
LikeLike
I just found that article impossibly muddled. I don’t know what the study shows.
“One point of this exercise, Mr. Lynch explained, is to show that the added cost of improving educational achievement at the bottom would be more than made up for by the rise in economic output and tax revenue.”
There’s really two issues. There’s “the bottom” and then the stagnation/decline in the middle- wages, benefits and job security. Is he talking about bringing up the bottom or maintaining/benefiting to the middle group? Bringing up the bottom would add to the middle, there would (theoretically) be more people moving up to “the middle”, which is a good and admirable goal but it doesn’t do anything to address the stagnation/decline IN the middle income group.
LikeLike
I’m not sure I follow why we would expect the study to address the issue of middle-income wage stagnation in the first place.
LikeLike
Well, because there’s a graph in the center of the story that’s titled “the shrinking middle class”.
Maybe the study wasn’t intended to address that.
LikeLike
I think I see your point. I’m fairly ill today, so I may be seeing things even less clearly than usual.
LikeLike
Feel better soon, FLERP! We need you around here.
LikeLike
If we bring up the bottom, his “average” for students goes up, but is that where all the gains are? The bottom 20% moving to the “declining” middle creates all those gains? But we all agree the middle is declining. The bottom 20% join the middle and then what happens to the remaining problem of the declining middle? Solved? How? Because the bottom 20% joined it?
LikeLike
I know this will get me skewers on this blog, but you’re attacking my life’s work, so I’m going to take a stab at it.
It is true that kids from high SES families can be poor students and still be as successful as high achieving kids from low SES families.
But, educational attainment affects financial success in many ways. Take a look at the unemployment rate vs. educational attainment: http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm. There are lots of jobs available for people with the right skills, but those without a high school diploma are much less likely to find a job.
Then, look at earnings by educational attainment: http://www.avance.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/education-to-income-level-e1393258840939.jpg. Or if you want to see something shocking, look at lifetime earnings.
Then, assuming you believe that educational attainment can make the difference between a life of limited choices and poverty vs. a life of more options and middle class, you apparently don’t believe that schools and teachers can influence whether a student completes high school or whether they attend or complete college
So, since 100% of you so far think the economists don’t have a point, are you arguing that teachers and schools can’t make a difference in a student’s life or something else? There is a huge difference in expectations for low SES students in different schools and by different teachers.
Here’s another: Poor reading skills correlate with higher teen pregnancy rates even after adjusting for race and poverty. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/27/us-reading-skills-pregnancy-idUSBRE8BQ0BR20121227
I could go on, but the idea that schools and teachers can’t influence poverty for students is just not true, even if the odds are stacked against it. Yes, it’s much harder work to overcome influences from outside of school, but it can be done with investment in education that makes it to the classroom in the form of universal preschool, extended days and years, meaningful professional development, wraparound services, etc.
Yes, poverty is pretty much destiny without intervention, but school is most cost-effective place for that intervention.
LikeLike
John, your arguments and data are strong, but you still miss the point. Of course, children–all children–should get the best education we know how to provide. But if all of them did, we would still have huge pockets of poverty, because the job creators are creating jobs in low-wage countries. The very deep income inequality and wealth inequality that have been well documented will not disappear because poor kids get a better education. Don’t misunderstand me: I want all kids to get a great education. But that won’t change the tax policies and entrenched inequality that are now features of our society. The 1% will not suddenly lose its vast economic power, nor will the 99% see a big increase in their income unless there is a massive investment by the federal government in job creation. During the Great Depression in the 1930s, our schools did a fine job; many teachers were Ph.D.s who could not find jobs. But the Depression was not ended by the schools. It was ended by World War II and the jobs it created.
LikeLike
Diane,
This may be the only time you ever hear me say this ;-), but I agree 100% with what you said.
That said, we don’t live in the world we would like to live in, and 51% of our students are low income. That won’t change soon, so we need to relentlessly focus on how to increase educational attainment for low income students. There is room to change a lot of lives while waiting for the “war on poverty” to get anywhere.
This is why the arguments about charter vs. district schools are disappointing, as are the blanket statements about either. We should be looking at the best schools of either type and trying to replicate success.
LikeLike
Thanks, John. I would agree with you but I see what is happening in the growth of charter schools. In district after district, they are sucking the funding out of public schools, leading to a near-collapse of public education in fragile districts like York City, Pennsylvania. I hear the same story repeated in district after district: charters schools open with the support of philanthropists and hedge fund managers, removing resources from the public schools, which have fixed costs and experienced (relatively expensive) teachers. The charter has outside resources, but the budget for the public schools shrinks, and sometimes is cut by the legislature (think Philadelphia, where the schools have been stripped to a carcass by a negligent state legislature and governor). Competition in this case does not raise all boats. One boat rises, buoyed by handsome funding, while the other boat (public education) sinks, because it has been defunded. I don’t think we can afford to destroy our nation’s public education system and expect to have a bright future, dependent on the whims and fancies of deregulated and unsupervised charters.
LikeLike
“We should be looking at the best schools of either type and trying to replicate success.”
If we are going to determine success and/or failure by test scores then we cannot ignore that public schools with 25% or less children living in poverty top the world in test score performance. So, that would indicate that communities that are economically stronger have stronger schools. H-m-m-m. So we under resource or even destroy schools in low economic communities and turn them over to charters because they are poor? How are we changing the underlying problems? An education can be a powerful tool for getting out of poverty, but I would think that should mean fully resourcing the public school system first before we divert funding into charters. Perhaps it is more important that economists study ways to create an economy that serves more than the top 10%. Obviously, they have failed miserably when so few own so much.
LikeLike
“Yes, poverty is pretty much destiny without intervention, but school is most cost-effective place for that intervention.”
I’m not sure that anyone would argue your contention, but if cost effective means demonizing teachers and substituting low cost “Teach For Awhilers,” teaching to the test, scripted programs, elimination of arts…the list goes on. If cost effective is determined only by a rating and ranking system that is dependent on problematic test scores, we are not talking about education.
LikeLike
No one stays in teaching for long unless they believe, and act on that belief daily, that they do make a difference in children’s lives.
But schools are not set up to eliminate poverty. In places where a small percentage of students are poor, small interventions will work. Right now, more than 50% of kids in the public schools are poor. I agree that schools probably are the most cost effective place for intervention. But the public schools are being defunded, eviscerated and turned over to for profit businesses.
(And what’s up with the notion that “There is a huge difference in expectations for low SES students” ? Do you mean by teachers? That’s one of those talking points that, well everyone just knows that, right? I’d like some evidence.)
LikeLike
Christine,
My point is that schools in economically disadvantaged areas *should* be “set up to eliminate poverty”. I definitely believe that we need to get adequate funding for urban and rural schools, and that includes less reliance on property taxes. But, we can’t just say these schools need more money. We have to say why that investment will result in better outcomes for kids.
As for differences in expectations, they are more between schools than within schools, but there is plenty of data on that. Here’s one example: http://www.edtrust.org/dc/press-room/news/study-finds-low-teacher-expectations-dim-student-achievement. You can also look at how much better low-SES kids do in high-SES schools than high-SES kids do in low-SES schools. I also see it every day in the amazingly talented kids who have been passed along from grade to grade and told they are doing fine, but in fact are so far below grade level. That’s what it looks like in practice.
LikeLike
John,
As far as I am concerned, EdTrust, despite their moniker, is hardly trustworthy. They are funded by all the usual suspects- BillandMelinda, John Enron Arnold, The Joyce Foundation, Jeff Bezos, ad infinitum. They have an agenda, which is the dismantling of public schools, and the “study” you cite is more than a dozen years old, and of course, blames teachers.
Moreover, you have me confused – are you a classroom teacher?
“I also see it every day in the amazingly talented kids who have been passed along from grade to grade and told they are doing fine, but in fact are so far below grade level. That’s what it looks like in practice.”
Teachers, schools cannot solve poverty. Solving poverty can solve poverty. All the rest of the article is just a thought experiment, like the VAM nonsense spouted by Raj Chetty, another principal in the organization which put out this study.
See the NYT for more on class mobility:
“Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless society, about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 percent born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.”
LikeLike
John the problem is that while it may very be well be true that low expectations can hurt student achievement, which logically makes sense, students won’t magically achieve things you never told them about, it ignores a lot too.
It is not the ONLY thing and it is at the very least unfair to generalize the statement because when teachers over a decade ago began to be judge on the failure of the very least of their students, and were at best marginally rewarded for growth of higher performing students, it became all about the bottom third % of students and “closing the gap”.
When you focus on the needs of your lowest, it is at the best difficult to hold wildly different differentiated expectations for entire course loads of students. and especially when your continued teaching existence/school are predicated upon those lowest students. Of course teachers went to focus their resources on those students who had the least to gain – the system built that into accountability and is either a perverse side effect (unintended consequence) or one of those bugs that is really a feature.
Further, this study is used to punish teachers as scapegoats for these absurd rules (as opposed to doing what’s best for ALL students), by inferring that if students fail then a strong probability is the teacher didn’t expect enough and it is therefore the teachers fault when it is quite possible that very few people could possibly have done a better job with that mix of students – we can only “know” theoretically and mix-in imprecise probabilities to try to know which is what VAM is.
Low expectations may impact student learning, and should be paid attention to, but this argument becomes for many a diversion away from the system that incentivizes low expectations, punishes failure from high expectations, and outright ignores other factors that are non-school based that are way more influential than expectations.
As Diane so eloquently puts it (and I’m going to bungle it) – raising a bar and telling the high jumper to clear it because you expect them to doesn’t at all necessarily mean they will be able to jump high enough to clear it, and what that person could reasonably clear at some point in their lifetime may have a limit not imposed by the coach on the side.
I expect to be invited to big league baseball any day now, except that I haven’t played the game in over a decade…but I have high expectations! How this argument is used and abused in education is simply absurd.
LikeLike
Raising expectations, in fact, often widens “achievement gaps”. Continuing with the high jump metaphor, a jumper who can already clear a four foot bar with ease will probably be excited to raise it to five foot – it’s just the challenge they need. Someone who can’t clear a four foot bar at all will probably just give up if the bar is raised to five foot.
LikeLike
Dienne,
To close the achievement gap requires raising the scores of those at the bottom while keeping the top unchanged. If everyone gets higher scores, the gap will remain the same or widen, since those at the top have a strong head start.
LikeLike
I disagree. The achievement gap is an actual real thing distinct from the numbers. Yes, raising cut scores increases a particular measure of the achievement gap, but that is not changing the underlying skills deficit. It’s no different than lowering the bar for high school graduation. That will increase the graduation rate, but does not change how prepared students are.
LikeLike
Diane – right, which is why if “closing the achievement gap” is really the goal, we should lower expectations. Put the bar at 4 inches, then nearly everyone has equal chance of getting over it. Voila! No achievement gap!
LikeLike
Dienne, yup. An itty-bitty bar.
LikeLike
I personally know a generation of 20 somethings with college degrees working as barista, waitstaff, receptionist, proofreader, bartender. They and their families are shouldering a boatload of debt. The jobs, the jobs, the jobs….they just don’t exist. If you come from an affluent family with connections, the jobs exist for you. If you come from that same family, doors are opened for you. Debt, for those kids from affluent families, does not exist. I see it every day.
LikeLike
Schools can influence educational achievement directly (with some limitations), but as long as the economy isn’t creating good-paying jobs, there is a very finite limit to how much we can influence poverty. For instance, contrary to the commentary we often hear, we have an oversupply of college graduates with STEM degrees in most fields, with computer science and engineering being the exceptions. If we were to invoke some masterful changes in our educationa system and dramatically improve the high school and college graduation rates of our poorest kids, it won’t do any good if there aren’t jobs waiting for them. Until we make some fundamental improvements in the economy, wages, and job security, increasing student success will have no impact on overall rates of poverty.
LikeLike
“we have an oversupply of college graduates with STEM degrees”
Perhaps that’s a good thing. If we didn’t have an oversupply of college graduates with STEM degrees, we might have an even bigger oversupply of college graduates with non-STEM degrees.
LikeLike
Free trade agreements, from NAFTA to the upcoming Trans Pacific Partnership, are the real problem
LikeLike
Yes you are absolutely correct and Clinton and Obama are at fault for both of those atrocities. Now you see why I always say there is no Difference between a crook who has an R or D in front of their respective names. In the end, they are all thieves and know exactly what they are doing.
LikeLike
I posted this earlier this morning on post about Gary Rubinstein’s letter to Bill Gates:
Raj Chetty is on the steering committee at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, the thinky-tank responsible for this report. Need to know anything else?
What really bugs me is that these folks get their spotlight in the NYT, just as do “thoughts” from NCTQ, as if they are disinterested parties.
LikeLike
From an earlier HP article:
There are many problems with the logic chain in this prevailing theory of action, but I’ll address the just final one. The logic about escape from poverty only works on the individual level. While individuals are certainly better off with the best possible education, there is no evidence that attaining a significantly increased percentage of high achieving students would eliminate the need for people to clean our offices, homes and hospitals, stock our store and warehouse shelves or serve us in fast food restaurants. There is no evidence that that employers will suddenly agree to pay such better-educated workers a living wage that would enable them to provide adequate food, clothing and shelter so that poverty would cease to exist.
Maybe, more effective teaching will increase the size, diversity and creativity of the nation’s knowledge workforce, who will subsequently spur innovation and new kinds of well-paying employment for others. Maybe, our superior innovation capacity will offset the competitive advantage of lower wage countries. These would be good outcomes, but they will not end poverty. Unless, we commit to real high-quality universal health care, food and housing security, and full employment at fair living wages for all (through, for example public investment in infrastructure improvement), it is illogical to believe that universally high-quality education will significantly reduce, much less end poverty. Imagining that it will do so represents magical, not evidence-based logical thinking.
More here;
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arthur-camins/escape-from-poverty-for-a_b_5344285.html
LikeLike
Correlation is not necessarily causation.
As other far more informed than I have put it:
Musical genius has been correlated with long hair. Males. Nineteenth century. Oh, and arm length and sleeve length correlate. And so do rising markets and hemlines.
So obviously if we need more male musical geniuses we should mandate longer hair, right? That if we want longer arms we need to make sleeves longer? Oh, and to help the economy we need to get those hemlines up?
😱
This makes the same sort of sense as asserting that charter schools get 100% graduation rates, that a leading rheephormista took “her” students from the 13th to the 90th percentile, and that charter midyear dumps on public schools exemplify the “rising tide that lifts all boats” [and not the “tsunami that swamps everything in its path”].
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
If only one—just one!—of the beneficiaries and enforcers and enablers of “education reform” understood that George Orwell meant the above as an admonition against, not an encouragement for.
😎
P.S. I enthusiastically recommend Gerald Bracey, READING EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH: HOW TO AVOID GETTING STATISTICALLY SNOOKERED, 2006.
LikeLike
Peter Greene often uses the example of big red trucks always being found at fires. Ergo, those big red trucks must have caused the fires, right?
LikeLike
“It’s so much easier to suggest solutions when you don’t know too much about the problem.”
~ Malcolm Forbes
LikeLike
Add to that:
1), “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” [H. L. Mencken]
2), “All you need is ignorance and confidence and the success* is sure.” [Mark Twain]
*$tudent $ucce$$.*
Thank you for the quote.
😎
LikeLike
The poverty problem economists solve best, is the employment problem for those who get degrees in Economics.
LikeLike
JOBS…
I have been keeping a tally on my 23-26-y.o.’s & their peers in my hi-income, hi-taxed, everybody-goes-to-college NJ town.
I will preface the details with my general impression: in my wealthy town (35k population), the downtown retail jobs– the faces I see when I shop– are held by the best & brightest of my kids’ generation. Twenty-five years ago when I moved here, these jobs were held by folks of my generation who were mostly not college-educated.
My kids, BA’s who inherited their dad’s music-tech but not his STEM abilities, work (a)in his field for a restaurant-night-club which can only afford to pay him $20/hr off the books, so he’s coming up against the 26yo limit on dependent-healh ins, (b)supports his band/albums/music-prod work w/delivery for a catering estab (no benefits). Both live at home. Eldest’s co-singer/songwriter band-member [very hi intell in arts] works at local tobacconist & lives at home. Another former band-member (BA & a high-achiever in h.s.) manages the local yogurt place.
Childhood friends, 2 STEM-inclined brothers, did better. (a)as a math teacher (w/master’s) — acquiring more ed to get into admin because 3 yrs’ teaching is has proved burnout-demanding/ unremunerative (b)got an engrg job pronto thanks to engr-dad’s connections… their elder sister, aged 29 & inclined to soc work, approaching PhD via scholarships & interim jobs very low-pay.
Another pair of bros, both hi-intell/grades in non-STEM fields are (a)[this was a kid who could have been on Jeopardy] tutoring SAT’s for 3yrs, living at home (b)getting intermittent TV/ theatrical work & another degree via scholarship.
A peer couple of sisters both hi-achieving/ grades in social studies are (a)approaching PhD via scholarships, interim jobs have been rewarding but low-pay, (b)chose to double-major in public policy & got a gov job in DC.
Another of my kids’ bff got BA. went to Germany to teach English for 3 yrs, returned so his sign other (German) could study Arch here. Best he can find is PT subst teaching, & retail counter-work weekends.
My eldest’s bff paid his way thro community college, first in retail, then learning to operate heavy eqpt (digging graves!). He & wife (BA who found admin-asst office work) moved to TX to afford starting family.
One of my bff’s 3 kids all super-intell BA/BS: eldest age 30 spent 20’s in bartending, retail work, helping w/family biz. Elder son (prestigious engrg school) worked low-pd internship 2 yrs, finally found engrg work at Navy base. Youngest (CPA) found work right away; the other two live at home.
Other bff moved to FL while kids in secondary school. Both very hi-achieving, did high school/ early college yrs jointly. One excels in computers the other in STEM-bio (had hoped to be a dr); early death of dad put further studies out of reach. They run a computer-repair biz.
Granted, this is a small cohort– perhaps anecdotal. I hope you will see, as I have concluded: there is a serious lack of opportunity for those inclined to teaching & social work, as well as for those inclined to artistic (musical/ theatrical) work. It is also significant that those highly-talented in the arts have not sought teaching work. For the STEM-inclined, the opportunities are better, however, not at all a bed of roses.
LikeLike
Here’s an interesting article on education, social mobility, and HOUSING vouchers and decreasing segregation and how programs that actively target breaking up pockets of black poverty and integrating them into white suburbs is a win for the families involved.
Gee, desegregating housing and moving low income students into well resourced schools with high achieving students produces high achieving students from those same low income students.
It must be that the teaching in the suburbs is clearly the difference even though the program moving the students is focused on poverty and segregation…right?
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/is-ending-segregation-the-key-to-ending-poverty/385002/
LikeLike
As a teacher in a high poverty urban school, I would like to weigh in here. My school is not set up to eliminate poverty. That argument is rubbish. Would any of these economists like to put a price on the psychological toll of poverty? My kids are worried about getting shot. It is a common occurrence in the neighborhood. They eat the school breakfast totally lacking in nutrition as if it were mana from heaven. Some wear the same clothes day after day. The vast majority are not focused on their studies due to shouldering the unrelenting burdens of poverty.
LikeLike
I worked in a school similar to this. Many of the students would come to school sick as a dog only because that free breakfast and free lunch were the only meals they were going to have that day. However, when I see the lunches that the Obama children are provided with in their schools it pisses me off to a point of no return. When are we going to stop letting these cronies tell us what’s good for us and our children while they turn around and provide something totally different for themselves and their children?
LikeLike
To simplify what others wrote, higher educational attainment is NOT a guarantee of more and/or better paying jobs. These economists apparently believe that if one achieves a certain standard academically, they will automatically receive job offers that correlate to that level of achievement.
But employers still have to hire people and pay a decent wage. I have many former students with STEM college degrees making under $50k. A decent proportion of them don’t even have STEM careers at the moment.
LikeLike
Why does every discussion in education have to turn logical fallacies? Reductio ad absurdum? Who said anything about a guaranteed job?
Higher educational attainment equals better employment picture. End of story. BS rationalizations for why this won’t work are nothing but excuses for not tackling the problem. There are plenty of challenges regarding how it might work without starting out by questioning the value of it.
And for those who say this works for individuals, but not for all of society because wages will just get depressed, do you seriously think we’re in imminent danger of creating too many overachieving students?
And for those who say that hard working low-SES kids make the same amount of money as slacker high-SES kids, yes! All the more reason why low-SES kids need higher expectations and more educational opportunities (and yes, more money spent on them as well).
Yes, job situation is terrible right now. Yes, wealth distribution is abhorrent in this country. Yes, spending is too low in low-SES schools. Yes, smart people like all of us need to be working to decrease the influence of money in politics and create progressive taxation and spending policies. Yes, there are unemployed and underemployed people with college degrees.
But, if you don’t have a high school diploma, your chances of ending up in jail are higher than the chances of leading the life that most people on this blog probably enjoy. Another life and family wrecked. But I guess you would say sorry, better education wouldn’t have guaranteed you a better life, or even if it benefitted you, it would have depressed wages for others.
That is not a progressive ideology.
LikeLike
I don’t think anyone is saying students don’t deserve a good education John – good job setting up that straw man of arguing against students’ education and that we need to choose.
We can lobby for the best ways to support students, while, at the same time, education is used as the scapegoat for all of these problems. Giving students a solid education does give them the best opportunity, but we can’t ignore that over a decade of focusing on education, accountability, and expectations has led to the greatest rate of poverty our nation has ever seen.
All of the other things you listed including the school to prison pipeline are barriers that hurt what happens in the classroom (such as students having low expectations of themselves because of the values they see on the crime ridden streets).
If classrooms don’t generate good jobs themselves, and they don’t, it’s kind of absurd to think that by standardizing education we’re going to unleash a wave of creativity and innovation that will solve all of our current problems when we see the test and punish model leads to the exact opposite of creativity.
In 2008 we were united in seeing what the banks did to hurt the “99%” and calling them on it, and our government saved them. In 2015, we are seeing that those same people benefited more than ever before from the crisis THEY CREATED, and the people still suffering from it, do not deserve the same “Too big to fail” status.
In this time of serious inequity, education may be a puzzle piece to a productive and meaningful life, but it won’t create opportunities for people to use those degrees.
It’s not to tell this faux family “we didn’t give you an education because it would hurt the job market” – it’s to try to give them an education while we can simultaneously understand that the value of that education/college degree are seriously impaired by a weak job market, and in fact creates debt spirals for many families who are gambling with an uncollateralized loan that it will get their children jobs that will pay for them.
So even if we boost educational attainment (and we should still be trying to do that) – it is not going to make the debt-ridden unemployable college degree problem go away.
LikeLike
Where is the “like” button?
You have written some exceptionally clear, persuasive, and compelling comments on this post. I thank you!
LikeLike
“Robert G. Lynch, an economist who wrote the Washington Center report, explained why he took the trouble to make these what-if calculations.”
Because “what-if”, otherwise known as the fantasy world in which economists operate, is the lifeblood of an occupation that believes in such fantastical concepts as “invisible hands” and “free markets” that are capable of interceding in human affairs causing either much greatness of a capitalist system or great harm for those who refuse to believe in such fantasies.
LikeLike
What if?
What if grass were blue?
What if red were gray
What if economists knew
About the things they say?
LikeLike
What if?
What if economists were paid the same way teachers are compensated?
Then all of them would cry that a college degree is terribly overrated.
What if the achievement gap was the reason for paltry pay?
Then these idiot politicians would have trouble earning a single dollar every day.
LikeLike
America has lots of things it needs to learn from Canada. (Single-payer health care for $138.50/month for a family of four with no copays or deductible and Canada goes back to a balanced budget in 2015) If America truly wanted to improve its educational system like Canada’s, it would test a whole lot less and concentrate on teaching the child a whole lot more. The North Carolina teachers I used to work with could score just as well if they were allowed to teach to the child as well.
British Columbia in particular is the one to watch. It ranked above Finland in the 2012 PISA Report (http://cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/318/PISA2012_CanadianReport_EN_Web.pdf) with a diverse population. To improve its educational system even more, British Columbia is following the research exposing the ill effects of testing and is considering dropping standardized tests altogether. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-eyes-personal-learning-as-expert-calls-for-end-to-standardized-testing/article22715653/?cmpid=rss1)
LikeLike
This is what discussions on this topic usually look like on the internet. Someone says that education can increase economic opportunity and offer a way out of poverty, the response is that education doesn’t guarantee those things. Or someone says that wealth and achievement are strongly correlated, and the response is that poverty is not destiny. I suppose the answer to every one of these statements is, yes, that’s true.
LikeLike
A study, probably cited here before, found that the greatest determinant of success, in finding a good job, was having contacts with people who had influence in the well-paid work world. Graduates of ivy league schools were only able to make significantly more income than public college graduates, if they made contacts, while in school, that led to their jobs.
There was the promise of a strong Black middle class
when there were ample civil service jobs. Discrimination, based on who you know, played a lesser role in government jobs. There are people among the 0.1% who loathe minorities and, the current agenda to dismantle the public sector, serves their purpose.
LikeLike
Self-proclaimed economists are not much different from government bureaucrats who know how to get ahead in career with their faculty of smart-test taking strategy. They’re just like national bureaucrats of country J who like to procrastinate any agenda that requires long and careful deliberation because they don’t know how to wrack their brains to hammer out a solution. That surely will become a huge problem that leads to a graving consequence–like costing the lives of their two innocent citizens by rogue ISLS terrorists due to their indecisiveness.
LikeLike
I think we should focus on the difference between self-proclaimed, anonymous economists (who are probably far right freaks) who leave comment here bashing the truth about corporate school reform, and real Economists, for instance, The Economic Policy Institute that agreed with Stanford’s study: What do international tests really show about U.S. Student performance?”
For instance, from the report: “Mother’s education, parents’ education, ESCS (Economic, Social, and Cultural Status), and books in the home as correlates of students’ test scores”
http://www.epi.org/publication/us-student-performance-testing/
And of course, it’s worth mentioning repetitively a few key points from the Stanford study:
Because in every country, students at the bottom of the social class distribution perform worse than students higher in that distribution, U.S. average performance appears to be relatively low partly because we have so many more test takers from the bottom of the social class distribution.
Disadvantaged and lower-middle-class U.S. students perform better (and in most cases, substantially better) than comparable students in similar post-industrial countries in reading. In math, disadvantaged and lower-middle-class U.S. students perform about the same as comparable students in similar post-industrial countries.
But a sampling error in the U.S. administration of the most recent international (PISA) test resulted in students from the most disadvantaged schools being over-represented in the overall U.S. test-taker sample. This error further depressed the reported average U.S. test score.
If U.S. adolescents had a social class distribution that was similar to the distribution in countries to which the United States is frequently compared, average reading scores in the United States would be higher than average reading scores in the similar post-industrial countries we examined (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom), and average math scores in the United States would be about the same as average math scores in similar post-industrial countries.
A re-estimated U.S. average PISA score that adjusted for a student population in the United States that is more disadvantaged than populations in otherwise similar post-industrial countries, and for the over-sampling of students from the most-disadvantaged schools in a recent U.S. international assessment sample, finds that the U.S. average score in both reading and mathematics would be higher than official reports indicate (in the case of mathematics, substantially higher).
LikeLike
Thanks Lloyd, for once again, taking the time to bring clarity to an issue. It’s important to correct misunderstandings.
LikeLike