1 / 52

PAMTE’S POTENTIAL POLICY ROLE IN PENNSYLVANIA

PAMTE’S POTENTIAL POLICY ROLE IN PENNSYLVANIA. 2 ND Annual PAMTE Symposium Shippensburg University May 15 2008. F. Joseph Merlino, Principal Investigator and Director The Math Science Partnership of Greater Philadelphia. Trends For 2008-2014.

steven-moss
Download Presentation

PAMTE’S POTENTIAL POLICY ROLE IN PENNSYLVANIA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. PAMTE’S POTENTIAL POLICY ROLE IN PENNSYLVANIA 2ND Annual PAMTE Symposium Shippensburg University May 15 2008 F. Joseph Merlino, Principal Investigator and Director The Math Science Partnership of Greater Philadelphia

  2. Trends For 2008-2014 Ten major demographic, economic, and educational trends are converging as America starts its 2nd decade in the 21st Century . The resultant intersection of these trends threaten the vitality of American economic, educational and political institutions.

  3. Trend # 1 Increased Per Pupil Education Expenditures Due to Greater Percent of Students in Special Education, English Language Learners, Poor, Minorities, Increase Demand in Teacher Quality, Low Teacher Supply in Key Areas, Employee Health Care Costs, Retirement Benefits

  4. k-12 Educational Expenditures in constant 2002–03 dollars • From 1988–89 to 2001–02 K -12 educational expenditures increased 45 percent • By 2013–14, expenditures projected to increase up 39% in constant dollars to $ 525 billion per year..

  5. Trend # 2 Persistent “Achievement Gap” • Large Differences in Math and Reading Proficiencies in Elementary, Middle and High SchoolBetween: • Asians and Whites, • Whites and Black and Hispanics • Economically Disadvantaged, Special Education, English Language Learners and those white English speaking students from moderate to high SES backgrounds

  6. 11th Grade PSSA by Race 70 % 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% White Asian Black Hispanic Advanced Below Basic

  7. Trend # 3 Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity as Percentage of US Population Poorer Hispanic and Black Populations Continue to Grow as Percentage of US Population Young People are Fasting Growing Minority Segment

  8. Trend # 4 Persistent or Increased High School Drop-out Rate (non GED) High School Graduation Rates Stay Flat or Decline Owing to Greater Percentages of Poorer Hispanics and Blacks in the Student Population

  9. # 5 Increased Demand for Post Secondary Studies but many students not prepared Rising to the Challenge Are High School Graduates Prepared For College & Work? Key findings from surveys among public high school graduates, college instructors, and employers Conducted December 2004–January 2005 for

  10. Few Employers Feel High SchoolGraduates Prepared For Advancement Applicants with no high school degree Recent public high school grads who have no further education/training Recent grads of two-year college or training program Recent graduates of four-year colleges

  11. College instructors Employers/Instructors Dissatisfied With High Schools’ Skills Prep (In each area, % saying they are somewhat/very dissatisfied with the job public high schools are doing preparing graduates) Employers 29% very dissatisfied 22% very dissatisfied16% very dissatisfied 17% very dissatisfied Thinking analytically Work and study habits Applying what is learned in school to solving problems Computer skills

  12. College Instructors Are Harshest Critics Of High School Do public high schools adequately prepare graduates to meet the expectations they face in college In first-year classes, how much class time do you spend reviewing material and skills that should have been taught in high school? 70% Some class time Do not adequately prepare graduates 28% Very little class time Adequately prepare graduates Significant amount of class time (24%) Employers No class time

  13. # 6 Stiffer Competition from Abroad in STEM Talent

  14. Program for International Student Assessment

  15. High School Graduate Science Performance

  16. High School Graduate Math Performance

  17. China

  18. # 7 Rising Asia, Russia and European Union Economies 1,628 mil 269 mil 529 mil 323 mil 3,075 mil 450 mil

  19. Fastest Growing Economies are China, India & Russia

  20. Trend # 8 Declining Student Interest in STEM Pennsylvania SAT Reasoning Test Test-Takers Mean Scores SAT I Mean Scores SAT I Mean Scores Intended College Major Number Pct Critical 1998 2006 Reading Math Writing Verbal Math Agriculture or Natural Resources 794 0.8% 473 471 455 1,453 1.6% 487 477 Architecture or Environmental Design 2,048 2.0% 483 517 476 1,767 1.9% 491 513 Arts: Visual and Performing 5,847 5.7% 508 490 497 5,333 5.9% 511 486 Biological Sciences 3,676 3.6% 530 534 518 4,412 4.9% 539 534 Business and Commerce 9,363 9.1% 479 498 470 10,281 11.3% 479 492 Communications 3,062 3.0% 514 490 509 3,395 3.7% 515 485 Computer or Information Sciences 2,715 2.6% 503 527 474 3,644 4.0% 497 514 Education 9,627 9.3% 477 481 473 10,206 11.2% 481 474 Engineering and Engineering Technologies 4,498 4.3% 524 577 507 5,670 6.2% 525 562 Foreign or Classical Languages 596 0.6% 577 547 562 412 0.5% 547 526 General or Interdisciplinary Studies 247 0.2% 516 497 512 179 0.2% 536 512 Health and Allied Services 13,067 12.6% 475 483 470 13,489 14.8% 490 492 Home Economics 296 0.3% 466 465 456 410 0.5% 456 447 Language and Literature 1,233 1.2% 595 529 583 1,033 1.1% 606 541 Library and Archival Sciences 47 0.0% 586 515 533 41 0.0% 537 495 Mathematics 679 0.7% 534 614 530 437 0.5% 549 619 Military Sciences 302 0.3% 502 510 482 328 0.4% 495 502 Philosophy, Religion, or Theology 405 0.4% 546 518 516 419 0.5% 551 523 Physical Sciences 1,153 1.1% 547 579 530 1,331 1.5% 557 571 Public Affairs and Services 2,202 2.1% 457 451 442 2,696 3.0% 459 448 Social Sciences and History 6,396 6.2% 527 503 511 8,366 9.2% 523 496 Technical and Vocational 1,023 1.0% 426 440 408 1,184 1.3% 437 442 Undecided 2,482 2.4% 491 504 479 5,173 5.7% 493 496 81,659 71,758 69.4% 89.8% Blank 30.6% 9,286 31,687 10.2% Total Test Takers 90,945 103,445 100.0% 493 500 483 100.0% 497 495 SD 107 113 106 89,198 PA 1st Time College Freshman Enrollment 2005-06

  21. Trend # 9 Retiring Baby Boomers + Insufficient Numbers of Skilled Foreign Workers “Substantial increases in those segments of America’s young population with the lowest level of education, combined with the coming retirement of the baby boomers—the most highly educated generation in U.S. history— are projected to lead to a drop in the average level of education of the U.S. workforce over the next two decades, unless states do a better job of raising the educational level of all racial/ethnic groups. ""Policy Alert" by the Nat'l Center for Public Policy and Higher Education

  22. Washington, DC Feb. 24-27, 2007

  23. August 2005 GOVERNOR RENDELL CREATES NEW COMMISSIONS TO TRAIN TEACHERS AND PREPARE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS FOR COLLEGE AND CAREERS

  24. Trend # 10 Continued and Increased School District Accountability by Federal and State Governments • Due to: • Rising Education Expenditures in constant dollars per pupil and overall • Importance of Higher Levels of Education to the Economy • Political Disenfranchisement of Growing Portions of Latinos and Blacks resulting from inequities in “opportunities to learn”.

  25. What does Adequate Yearly Progress Measure? • AYP measures student results for three indicators, • Attendance (for schools without a high school graduating class) or Graduation Rate (for schools with a high school graduating class); • Academic Performance; and • Test Participation. • The details of AYP measurement can be complicated

  26. States determine AYP performance targets based on students' standardized test scores each year. The Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) uses the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) to determine AYP performance. Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 11 Participation in and performance on the PSSA is a cornerstone of measuring AYP results. As measured by the PSSA, students' scores fall into one of four levels: Advanced (highest) Proficient ************************************ Basic Below Basic (lowest)

  27. AYP STATUS LEVELS

  28. RESULT: The “Accountability Squeeze” • No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Federal Requires • K-12 Public School Districts Must Make Steady Progress Toward Reaching 100% Proficiency • For 41 Subgroups of Students in Math and Reading • All Schools within a District by 2014 • Risk Losing Federal Education Money Each School must make “Adequate Yearly Progress” (AYP) based on a ever increasing percentage of their student being “Proficient”.

  29. Reading Math

  30. Proportion of PA High Schools that Reached AYP Proficiency Overall in 11th Grade Math

  31. LikelyOutcomes • 1. 50% of all PA high schools will not reach AYP in 2008, • 2. More than 90% of PA schools will fail to reach 100% Proficiency in Math ,Reading and Science by 2014 for all students. • 3. Persistent Achievement and Graduation Gaps in NCLB categories • Crisis points: • Credibility of NCLB and “Corrective Action” sanctions. • “So what if we fail? What can the state really do with so many?” • 2. Inability of states and schools to improve student learning for all students at sufficient levels as reflected in high stakes state tests. • 3. Widening social and personal inequities, increased proportion of low knowledge young people in a high knowledge economy.

  32. "Policy Alert" by the Nat'l Center for Public Policy and Higher Education "The projected decline in educational levels coincides with the growth of a knowledge-based economy that requires most workers to have higher levels of education. At the same time, the expansion of a global economy allows industry increased flexibility in hiring workers overseas. As other developed nations continue to improve the education of their workforces, the United States and its workers will increasingly find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. "In addition, a drop in the average level of education of U.S. workers would depress personal income levels for Americans, in turn creating a corresponding decrease in the nation’s tax base. The projected declines in educational and income levels can be reversed, however, if states do a better job of increasing the education of all their residents, particularly those populations that are growing fastest.

More Related