First Annual School Improvement Report

Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U. S. Department of Education

In this 2001 report, federal officials note that although nearly 9,000 schools receiving Title 1 funds had been designated as "needing improvement," only about half the states had procedures in place for helping these schools. At almost half of the Title 1 schools in need of improvement (compared to 20 percent of all Title 1 schools) at least 75 percent of the students were minority and free lunch eligible.

States differed widely in their methods of identifying schools for improvement and in the services offered. This fifty-eight-page report was designed to assist states in sharing information and concepts concerning ways to help their "failing" schools.

As a result of their own initiatives as well as the requirements of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, all states are putting into place systems of challenging standards for all students, aligned assessments to measure and publicly report on school progress toward meeting state standards, and school accountability for results. Consequently, every state has now identified schools that do not measure up, schools that need improvement....

Low-performing schools typically lack the education resources that matter the most. They are likely to suffer from low standards and expectations for their students, watered down curriculum, and limited parental involvement. Teachers and other instructional staff in these schools are often less experienced and less well qualified than those in higher performing schools, and their staff collectively have higher turnover rates and lower morale than those in other schools. Often, the school environment lacks order and discipline.

Yet more than twenty years of research and experience teaches us that there are many high poverty schools that help large numbers of their students achieve to high standards and that low-performing schools can be turned around. Effective schools are characterized by an emphasis on academics and have high standards, a rich and challenging curriculum aligned with standards, and a system for regularly monitoring student progress. The school climate is safe and orderly; teachers are well prepared, receive ongoing, high quality professional development, and work collegially to improve instruction. And there is strong school leadership that sets high expectations and a clear direction and strives to help school staff work as an effective team.

These characteristics of effective schools have been known for nearly two decades. Unfortunately, as a nation we have not always had the will or the capacity to make them a reality on a large scale. However, those who insist on holding schools accountable for results also have an obligation to help those that are struggling to measure up. The primary reason for making information about school performance public is to ensure that identified schools receive the assistance they need. Parents, educators, and taxpayers have a responsibility to insist that state and local education officials work together and with them to improve schools that have been identified as needing improvement....

There are many ways to improve low-performing schools but no simple solutions to the problem. Making changes to improve student performance can be a difficult process for schools. Strong leadership, staff commitment, and a fundamental belief that all children can learn are necessary conditions for turning around low-performing schools. Even then, the task remains great. A history of failure and low expectations can lessen the ability of low-performing schools to even hope to improve. Schools must focus, get control of the school environment, and put in place rigorous curriculum and instructional practices. In order for schools to be able to do this, education leaders on the federal, state, and local levels must support changes that will create and sustain a supportive environment for learning.

Questions

1. What kinds of assistance would be most helpful for low-performing Title 1 schools? What approaches are recommended in the report? Are these forms of assistance available in your state?
2. Why are there no simple solutions, and why is it that "making changes to improve student performance can be a difficult process"? (To read an account of the difficulty, see www.northwestern.edu/IPR/publications/nupr/nuprv03n1/payne.html.)
3. Is a subsequent report to this first annual report available? If yes, what does it indicate about the status of the problem?

Source: School Improvement Report: Executive Order on Actions for Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary and Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, January 2001), available at www.ed.gov/offices/OUS/PES/lpschools.doc.