National and state-level reports on education indicators have been produced since the mid-1980s. However, the debate continues over which education indicators to select and report. This paper outlines the lessons gained by a national organization in building an education indicators system through cooperation with federal and state education agencies. Three issues in the indicator development process are emphasized: (a) the role of a consensus process among educators, researchers, and policymakers in selecting and defining indicators, (b) how education indicators can be produced through a cooperative data system with states, and (c) methods for reporting indicators that increase their usefulness for policymakers and educators.

Developing a System of Education Indicators: Selecting, Implementing, and Reporting Indicators.

This article examines the school-based management reforms instituted in Chicago since 1988 and needed changes added to those reforms in 1995. After describing student achievement patterns between 1990 and 1998, the article examines three essential components of the reform effort: higher teacher expectations for students, the opportunity for schools to do things differently including additional resources, and addressing the capacity of teachers to dramatically improve the level of instruction. But school-based management alone was not enough to make improvement happen in all schools. A fourth component was needed. Accountability provisions, strengthened in 1995, addressed the lack of will among school staffs to undertake change and among students to be highly engaged in learning.

Expectations, Opportunity, Capacity, and Will: The Four Essential Components of Chicago School Reform:

Findings of a study that sought to determine teachers' and principals' perceptions concerning state-mandated testing are presented in this paper. Data were gathered through interviews with 30 fifthand sixth-grade teachers and 12 principals in 3 states--Tennessee, Illinois, and New York--where statewide testing has been implemented for 30 years, 5 years, and 1 year, respectively. Findings indicated that teachers and principals mistrusted the State Departments of Education and state legislators; were confused about the purposes of state testing; perceived themselves as powerlessness to influence state testing policy; questioned the effectiveness of the tests in evaluating achievement; believed that test results were used to compare school systems; and expressed concern that scores were overemphasized. Educators did not view testing as an accurate measure of accountability. Because of this alarming communication gap between state educational policymakers and local educators, state-level policymakers should include the input of local educators who are acutely aware of their students' learning needs. Legislators' main focus should be the impact of testing on students, as they are the real constituents of state educational legislative reform. (Contains 51 references.) (LMI) ********************************************.************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ********************************************************************** The Political Influence of State Testing Reform Through the Eyes of Principals and Teachers

/pdf/the-political-influence-of-state-testing-reform-through-the-lmri13l0li.pdf

The Political Influence of State Testing Reform through the Eyes of Principals and Teachers.

This chapter is about how to approach educational policy in a situation of uncertainty about policy effectiveness. It argues that, rather than putting all of our eggs in one basket, like choice, we should experiment with various approaches, such as both curriculum controls and choice. The chapter thus rejects recent claims of choice as a ‘panacea’ (Chubb and Moe 1990b), not because they are necessarily untrue, but rather because they are untested. Maintaining a diversified strategy is especially important because of the potential value of combinations of policies (e.g., enlightened instructional guidance enhancing the impact of decentralized policies of both choice and school restructuring; school restructuring providing models for the supply side in choice systems). Progress for all of the policies depends upon strengthening the system of educational indicators, student assessments, and sophisticated data bases, as does the possibility for a major breakthrough in basic educational technology (such as gre...

Educational policy in a situation of uncertainty; or, how to put eggs in different baskets

A major vAl of state education reforms in the 1980s was to increase the number of courses studev were required to complete for graduation. This document prov. antitative transcript data from high schools enrolling mos%...4 lower achieving students in the 1980s. At 3 points in time, random samples of approximately 25 transcripts of graduating seniors were collected from 4 states (California, Florida, Missouri, and Pennsylvania). An increase in the number of courses taken by the students did not seem to reflect an increase in academic achievement. At the end of the decade, the graduates of lower achieving, heavily urban schools did not reach the averages in the...r states or the nation of the percent of students enrolled in college preparatory courses. The effect from increasing state requirements for graduatieu (an increase in the number of courses required) is mixed and ambiguous. The strongest case for a reform effect was in science. Substantial change in science and in other subjects, however, also occurred prior to reform. This may indicate a genuine reform movement rather than a single powerful policy instrument. Four appendices include: (1) state requirements; (2) characteristics of samples; (3) technical notes on coding; and (4) course classifications. (29 references) (LAP) *********************************************************************** Reprodur:tions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** CONSORTIUM FOR POLICY RESEARCH IN EDUCATION Changes in High School Course-Taking, 1982-88: A Study of Transcript Data from Selected Schools and States William H. Clune Paula A. White Shirley Sun Janice H. Patterson U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement E ATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as received horn the persot or organization originating it 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality Points of view or opinions staled in this docu . merit do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy The Policy Center The Finance Center Rutgers. The State University of New Jersey University of Southern California Harvard University Michigan State University Stanford University University of Wisconsin-Madison

/pdf/changes-in-high-school-course-taking-1982-88-a-study-of-3voi7ief2a.pdf

Changes in High School Course-Taking, 1982-88: A Study of Transcript Data from Selected Schools and States. CPRE Research Report Series.

Many of the education policy initiatives of state legislatures and state boards of education in the 1980s were aimed at improving the quality of elementary and secondary education through upgrading state standards. Researchers are analyzing the effects of the reforms on education in elementary and secondary schools. Many states have expanded their systems for assessing, monitoring, and reporting on schools, teachers, and students. Using data collected from state departments of education, this chapter presents findings from a 50-state comparative analysis of state education policy reforms and curriculum in mathematics and science. Two issues are analyzed: the effects of state policy reforms on curriculum in math and science education, and the strengths and limitations of currently available 50-state indicators of curriculum in math and science. State-by-state data are analyzed on secondary course enrollment in science and mathematics and on the relationship of state curriculum frameworks and statewide asse...

Diane Schilder

Papers

State policies and state role in curriculum