Edutopia reports on new research by Professor C. Kirabo Jackson of Northwestern University, who finds that a “good school” does much more than raise test scores.
In a new study released by the National Bureau of Economic Research, C. Kirabo Jackson, a professor of education and social policy at Northwestern University, and his colleagues found that schools with robust impacts on student well-being may be helping students in ways that aren’t picked up by standardized tests. These schools may not have the highest test scores, but they’re the most likely to motivate students to graduate and attend college, especially those students who are less likely to do so in the first place.
“Test scores aren’t everything, and schools that promote socio-emotional development actually have a really big positive impact on kids,” Jackson told me. “And these impacts are particularly large for vulnerable student populations who don’t tend to do very well in the education system.”
This is the latest in a series of studies examining the broad impact that teachers and schools have on students. Jackson’s previous research looked at the impact that teachers had on noncognitive skills such as self-regulation, and found that teachers who improved these skills improved their students’ long-term outcomes, boosting not only grades, but also attendance and high school graduation rates. The skills that are valuable for future success aren’t usually measured on tests, Jackson points out. So while teachers and schools are often evaluated by their ability to improve students’ test scores, broader measures should be used.
In the current study, Jackson and his colleagues looked at over 150,000 ninth-grade students who attended Chicago public schools between 2011 and 2017, analyzing test scores and administrative records. They also examined responses on an annual survey students completed on social and emotional development and school climate. The survey covered a range of topics, including peer relationships, students’ sense of belonging, how hard they studied for tests, and how interested they were in the topics they were studying. The data were then combined into a three-part index: one that included test scores and other academic outcomes, a “social well-being” index, and a “work habits” index.
Jackson’s team found that schools that scored high on the latter two indices—those that promoted social and emotional development—were also the most effective at supporting long-term student success. In these schools, there were fewer absences, and more students graduated and went on to college. And perhaps more importantly, the benefits were greatest for student populations who struggled the most in school.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
DUH!…most smart people have known this for years.
Maybe the researchers found the below summation because the students thought education was about them. . . . and not in a commonly-understood selfish way . . . but in a way that means education prepares people to aim their interest beyond themselves. CBK
“Jackson’s team found that schools that scored high on the latter two indices—those that promoted social and emotional development—were also the most effective at supporting long-term student success. In these schools, there were fewer absences, and more students graduated and went on to college. And perhaps more importantly, the benefits were greatest for student populations who struggled the most in school.”
In my experience, parents are much more interested in the social, philosophical, religious aspects of the fellow students that their children will have over the school’s test scores. For example, if parents do not accept evolution, they would rather that their children go to school with other kids from families that also do not accept evolution.
Rick Lavoie used to run a school for students with learning disabilities, autism spectrum, etc. As Rick Lavoie said in one of his fantastic videos, he’s never had a parent break down in tears because their child is dyslexic and can’t read. He has had parents break down in his office distraught that their child doesn’t even have one friend.
Frances Kelsey Fan Unless I misunderstand what you say, it seems to me we have an apples/to/oranges problem?
APPLES: I’m responding to the (brief) research findings and suggesting at least a partial answer to the question: why do students do better in situation A than in situation B?
In the report, “better” refers to schools who offer social and emotional development as distinct from those who don’t or offer opportunities (or offer fewer probably formal) for such development:
THE REPORT: “In these schools, there were fewer absences, and more students graduated and went on to college. And perhaps more importantly, the benefits were greatest for student populations who struggled the most in school.”
It seems to me, the report (though only briefly given here) points to aspects of student interior development and so implicitly to their motivation . . . my point, it’s THEIRS.
Whereas you are talking about ORANGES: What parents want according to their own “social, philosophical, and religious” context, citing a rejection of evolution and friendlessness (<–but given time . . . ?).
Also, I haven’t seen the video you speak of; however, this issue, as you state it, speaks to the very question of why PUBLIC education is so important in the first place insofar as it’s THE place where students can become civilized in the sense of being able to familiarize themselves with, and raise questions about, both themselves and others in a peaceful but vibrant context.
It’s not a given that all parents’ social, political, philosophical, and religious contexts draw on hard-and-fast ideologies, but they CAN be. As such, they can harbor all sorts of biases, including various forms of group bias, e.g., racism and classism. Such ideologies are “hard” because they are resistant to questions and more generally, to others who do not subscribe to the same ideological thinking.
Wouldn’t it be THESE subscriptions that would be most likely to resist the question-raising and being around “strange” students and groups in a public setting, and be most likely to isolate-away from what democracy and the well-being of ALL of “the people” in its public spheres are about? Is it difficult for most, as the demand for growth and adjustments goes forward? YES. Is it a central tenet for sustaining a vibrant democracy? YES.
Though it’s oranges and not apples, I think your note still strikes at the core of the crisis in education . . . between public and private . . . that we presently find ourselves in. In my own reflections on WHERE WE ARE, I think even good change is difficult for most of us and, in our case, it has been multi-dimensional and come way too fast. On the other hand, . . . CBK
Frances Kelsey Fan My response to your note went into moderation. But if this one doesn’t, I can add to it the reference to rejecting evolution . . . anti-scientific thinking is just one of those biases. CBK
Apologies if my post came across as arguing with your post, not at all my intent.
I do disagree with the Mayors, Governors, that regard test scores as valid measures of teachers.
I highly recommend Rick Lavoie’s video [1] Frustration, Anxiety, Tension workshop and [2] Last One Picked, First One Picked on.
Also, appreciate that you recognize that my first name is not Frances. Frances Kelsey’s portrait should be on the $100 bill.
Frances Kelsey Fan Yes about teachers being judged by their students’ tests. I think that legislators embrace of that whole idea only reveals how ignorant they are about all-things-education. CBK
Students are so much more than test scores. High test scores alone do not make young people function better in the real world. With so many students spending so much time on-line, students’ social skills are diminishing. Schools that promote pro-social behavior, mutual respect and a sense of social justice as well as quality academics are serving students better than those that only produce good test takers. Social and emotional skills matter.
I taught very poor ELLs in an integrated school district that had decent test scores, but not the highest in the county as the district was diverse. The teachers in the district always included poor students, even when parents could not afford to pay for class trips or other activities. The district was very socially conscious, and my poor students were always included in activities. The ELLs were fortunate to attend schools that always aspired to be equitable.
retired teacher “Social and emotional skills matter.” Indeed, and hidden in that mix is a comfort with conversation, which inspires new questions for knowledge, and on and on; and of being better able to relate to others’ experiences and knowledge through discourse. CBK
To put it succinctly, a good school is a fully funded, local neighborhood, public school, run by the people in the neighborhood.
Or, to put in the Potter Stewart-esque terms: I know it when I see it.