Check out an op-ed that I co-authored with my doctoral student Robert Kelchen on income-contingent loans, over at the Chronicle. Then, be sure to check out Robert's new blog!
Today, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. released the final report of its IES/U.S Department of Education -funded randomized controlled trial (RCT) of comprehensive teacher induction. It shows a statistically significant and sizeable impact on student achievement in mathematics (0.20 standard deviations) and reading (0.11 standard deviations) of third-year teachers who received two years of robust induction support. That's the equivalent of moving students from the 50th to 54th percentile in reading achievement and from the 50th to 58th percentile in math achievement. As a basis of comparison, I note that in 2004, Mathematica conducted a RCT of Teach for America (TFA). In that study , it compared the gains in reading and math achievement made by students randomly assigned to TFA teachers or other teachers in the same school. The results showed that, on average, students with TFA teachers raised their mathematics test scores by 0.15 standard deviations (versus 0.20 standard d
I'm no Diane Ravitch. If I were, I'd use this blog to bravely state my concerns about the direction the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is heading with educational policy. I'd follow her lead and ask hard, pointed questions about the role that people with money play in driving major decisions in a democracy. But I won't. Because while I'm tenured, I am still fearful. I have receiving more than $1 million in support from the Gates Foundation for my research on financial aid, and I am grateful for it-- and in need of much more. That's the honest truth. It's harder and harder to find funding for research these days, and while my salary doesn't depend on it, getting the work done does. So I won't say all that Diane just did. Yet I have to say something, and as I wrote recently, I always attempt to do so. Her questions deserve answers. And they should be asked of the higher education agenda as well. Why the huge investment in Complete College
Welcome to another new miniseries of the Education Optimists. Once in awhile we get a chance to sit and read-- it's rare, but when it happens it's crazy fun. Here's a taste of what we've liked lately. For those pondering the reform of financial aid programs, I want to draw your attention to two papers--one very new, and one a year old. In Postmortem for the Current Era: Change in American Higher Education, 1980-2010 , Penn State historian Roger Geiger cogently tackles the many dismal trends of the last several decades. Among my most favorite of his observations is the following: "The four vectors of the current era—-the financial aid revolution, selectivity sweepstakes, vocationalism, and research intensification—all bear an underlying signature by invoking private, as opposed to public or social, interests. They do not necessarily contradict public interests. On the contrary, to significant degrees, financial aid has allowed students with limited means to pursu
Comments
Post a Comment