Paul Thomas, professor at Furman University in South Carolina, takes note of the recent story in the New York Times about the weight of poverty and race on academic outcomes and writes that policy must be based on evidence, not outliers.
The story showed the powerful impact of race and poverty. The subtitle was: “Sixth graders in the richest school districts are four grade levels ahead of children in the poorest districts.”
The story identified two districts that were outliers. Two small districts beat the odds. That set off a discussion about how they did it. What could we learn from Unuon City, New Jersey, and Bremen, Georgia? (I too am guilty of pointing to the outliers as models.)
Thomas writes:
“But then there is this:
[Quoting the story in the Times] The data was [sic] not uniformly grim. A few poor districts — like Bremen City, Ga. and Union City, N.J. — posted higher-than-average scores. They suggest the possibility that strong schools could help children from low-income families succeed.
“There are some outliers, and trying to figure out what’s making them more successful is worth looking at,” said Mr. Reardon, a professor of education and lead author of the analysis.
Well, no, if we find outliers—and virtually all data have outliers in research—we should not waste our time trying to figure out how we can make outliers the norm.”
Thomas vigorously dissents:
“The norm is where we should put our efforts in order to confront what is, in fact, not “puzzling” (used earlier in the article) at all; the data are very clear:”
[Quoting the story]: “What emerges clearly in the data is the extent to which race and class are inextricably linked, and how that connection is exacerbated in school settings.”
“Not only are black and Hispanic children more likely to grow up in poor families, but middle-class black and Hispanic children are also much more likely than poor white children to live in neighborhoods and attend schools with high concentrations of poor students.”
Thomas writes:
“Our great education reform failure is one of failing to rethink our questions and our goals.
“Let’s stop trying to find the “miracle” in a rare few schools where vulnerable students appear to succeed despite the odds against them. With time and careful consideration, we must admit, those appearances almost always are mirages.
“Let’s instead put our energy in eradicating the poverty, racism, and sexism that disadvantages some students, vulnerable populations easily identified by race and social class, so that we can educate all students well.”
Sigh. Don’t most “miracles” end up involving cheating of one kind or another? Yet another reason why no one should care about test scores as a measure [sic] of anything.
Where there be miracles, their be outliars.
oops, there is no their there
Blanket statement: There are no miracle schools. Education is a daily effort, not a lightning strike.
Diane – I think you’ve come up with the title to your next book. Let me know when I can pre-order it. 😉
To quote Dr Howard Gardner “The biggest mistake of past centuries in teaching has been to treat all children as if they were variants of the same individual, and thus to feel justified in teaching them the same subjects in the same way.”
When we realize that all children are different, not only with different brains but with different environments, only then will we develop a system of education that takes children from where they are, moving them forward on their pathway to success.
Only then will we learn that the fundamental purpose of education is to prepare children for THEIR future, not ours, to follow their dreams not ours. Only then will we take shame out of the process recognizing progress on a child’s pathway to success is the only concern. Only then will we recognize that the importance is not WHEN they succeed, it is THAT they succeed.
Only then will we respect the intelligence and abilities of all children.
America was on the right track fifty years ago when we were committed to integration. We have since lost our way. Instead of harming public schools by creating a patchwork of separate and unequal privatized schools, many of whom manipulate information connected to them, incentivizing integration in public schools is a far better approach. Although it would be complicated to enact, the payoff for poor students would far exceed the struggle. Having worked in a naturally integrated school system, I saw many poor students achieve at higher levels than if they had been in an underfunded minority school. Although we still had a “gap” issue, the staff and school district provided supports for hard working minority students encouraging them to take advanced classes. Our goal was always to do our best for all our students. It was a “win win” for all students, and few dropped out.
From the NYT: The Union City (NJ) miracle v. The Newark (NJ) debacle.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/opinion/sunday/how-to-fix-the-countrys-failing-schools-and-how-not-to.html?_r=0
I think Union City is worth learning about. if there was ever a school system that follows Diane’s blanket statement, Union City qualifies. No magic, no showboating, no miracles.
Read David Kirp’s Improbable Scholars. I agree with Thomas as well, but one perspective doesn’t have to negate the other.
To Diane’s blanket statement:
“What makes Union City remarkable is, paradoxically, the absence of pizazz. It hasn’t followed the herd by closing “underperforming” schools or giving the boot to hordes of teachers. No Teach for America recruits toil in its classrooms, and there are no charter schools. … School officials flock to Union City and other districts that have beaten the odds, eager for a quick fix. But they’re on a fool’s errand. … Nationwide, there’s no reason school districts — big or small; predominantly white, Latino or black — cannot construct a system that, like the schools of Union City, bends the arc of children’s lives.”
The rest of the story…
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/opinion/sunday/the-secret-to-fixing-bad-schools.html
I can guarantee there are other districts doing great work with poor minority students, but we don’t hear about them. Unlike charters that are built on exclusionary practices, hype and spin, public schools do not have the means to promote themselves. Lots of great work will not always put these schools at the top of the standardized test pack so they get ignored by the media.
Instead of attempting to replicate outliers, the author says:
“Let’s instead put our energy in eradicating the poverty, racism, and sexism that disadvantages some students, vulnerable populations easily identified by race and social class, so that we can educate all students well.”
Is Finland an outlier? J. H. Underhill
All I know is that Finland must be replicated.
No Harlan, Finland is an example of what is possible when you address social issues and do not expect the schools to fix all of society’s ills. By the way, it is good to see you back.
That may be true, but “Finland is Finished”
Finland is finished
Encouraging play
Future’s diminished
On PISA, they’ll pay
“Proof by Outliar”
Outliers lie
But norm tells truth
Pie in sky
Is shaky proof
“Oh no! The test scores are falling….”
Chicken Little to a Finnish audience as spokesman for the education reform group Test to the Sky
If it seems too good to be true, it is probably false. Is that too cynical? That fantastic winning streak, that perfect student, that perfect couple, all are fictions because they are someone’s perception of a situation from the outside. This is why standards are not really a way to move education forward, and tests are not proving productive in the fight on ignorance.
I’m not sure why we shouldn’t examine outliers and confront poverty and racism and any other “ism” that puts someone at a disadvantage. I don’t see the issue as an “either/or” but as a “both.” Truly successful outliers are going to combine good pedagogy as well as community building and social services. Don’t we want the truly successful outliers to become the norm?
In statistics, outliers indicate something wrong with the measurement or process you are studying. You discard these before you try to use the stat to understand a system.
“In statistics, outliers indicate something wrong with the measurement or process you are studying. ”
I understand that, but, as we often like to say here, people are not numbers, and numbers are a totally inadequate way of studying schools. Investigating why the numbers are skewed may be of value. People have said that nothing out of the ordinary other than every day hard work is going on in Union City, but that is something to note! Why not celebrate those ordinary efforts that mean something? In other words, what Ed Detective said.
but if you are a chetty-picking statistricksian, outliers are very useful
I agree with 2old2teach.
The caveat is that “outliers” should not be determined by test scores. There are certainly better and worse schools, classrooms, ways to teach and learn. Test scores don’t tell us the reality, and are easily manipulated.
If the “outliers” are not determined by the business/politico crowd, but by educators and communities, they can be helpful models. One example would be Deborah Meier’s school(s). Anyone really want to claim that we should not, can not, make schools more like Central Park East?
True “outliers” (in a good way) became that way by making long-term efforts that the “norms” did not make.
My point was that most of the statistics we sort in education do not indicate very much. We should, rather, examine the stories of places where good things are happening, as described by experienced educators. Some good ideas might be worth noting, but a great educator around here once said “don’t be a me too”
We totally agree, and statistics can be made to say anything you want them to. However, that doesn’t mean they can’t provide information that might point us in a direction we may want to explore further. We have seen how programs that are making significant progress are frequently not acknowledged because of the reliance on statistics that cannot capture that progress. However, I only ignore outliers if I am just interested in what the central trend tells me. The outliers might lead me to another investigation. Take my special ed students who were frequently outlier candidates. I want to investigate what made them outliers and what factors might change to “normalize” their behavior. That’s not the best of examples here, but I think you can understand my point.