January 29, 1997
Educational report outlines state’s challenges, possibilities
Continuing progress is “possible but not assured” for the state’s educational system, according to a new, comprehensive report, “Conditions of Education in Washington State,” produced by the University of Washington’s Institute for the Study of Educational Policy and Management Analysis and Planning Associates, a San Francisco- based educational consulting firm.
“Our primary objective was to provide a baseline of information about public education in the state,” said Assistant Professor of Education Margaret Plecki, one of the report’s principal authors. “We hope that the report will clarify some misunderstanding about education and serve as a useful tool for future debates on the subject.”
The report is the product of a year’s research, during which information was drawn from more than 75 different data sources. Although there have been many excellent reports on specific issues in education, Plecki says, this is the first time that information on all those issues has been pulled together into one document. Some of the major findings are summarized below.
* Enrollment and student characteristics: The diversity of the state’s student population is growing. Although the living conditions of students are generally more favorable than those of their counterparts nationwide, the number of children living in economically stressed conditions is increasing, and this trend is not confined to the Seattle area. Almost half of the students in central Washington, for example, qualify for the free-lunch program.
* Teachers and administrators: Teachers are very well educated, and most are certified in the subjects they are actually teaching– something that is often not true nationally. However, there is a need to increase diversity, since about 95 percent of both teachers and administrators are white. There also is an acute need for professional development. The state’s Education Reform Act of 1993 is changing many of the traditional ways teachers do business- -by asking for performance-based assessment rather than standardized tests, for example–and teachers will need to be retrained in these new methods. Full implementation of the act is mandated by the year 2000.
* Student achievement: Standardized tests taken over the last two decades show state fourth graders performing at average levels. There is no consistent achievement information available for secondary students other than SAT scores, which also are at an average level. Central city students do not show the lower scores seen in other large cities nationwide.
* School-to-work: There are a lot of highly-touted pilot programs in the state. The problem now is to “bring them to scale”–to get them working everywhere. Those involved in school-to-work also need to do a better job of explaining what they do.
* Public opinion: Washington’s educational system enjoys broad public support; in fact, education is the public’s top issue right now. Citizens tend to trust their local teachers, administrators and school boards and don’t think they are wasting money. The public wants the three R’s, but they also want higher level skills. They do have a concern about student discipline, however.
* Governance: Because of the state’s populist tradition, there is a multilayered system of organizations, committees and agencies that is responsible for education, with the result that lines of accountability are not at all clear. Perhaps because of this, Washington tends to decide on a reform, then after trying it for a few years, changes course and tries another.
* The finance system: Per-student spending in the state is about average compared to spending elsewhere. The system which is 20 years old, is a state system rather than a local system, with the result that there is an equal distribution of state funds among school districts. However, it also means that the state has allocated money for certain purposes and school districts have tended to spend the money exactly that way. More serious for the future, there is no connection between the financial policy and the new, results- oriented standards in the Education Reform Act. Although equity needs to be preserved, schools also must be rewarded when they do well if the state is to meet the student achievement standards called for in the act.
The research team singles out five “areas of concern” for the future:
* Improving teaching and learning. This will require special attention to teacher preparation and professional development for practicing teachers.
* Fitting the finance system to education reform. As explained above, equity must be preserved while incentives are provided to schools for good performance.
* Rethinking fractured governance. Because of the confused accountability of the current system, a thorough review of government with an eye to clarifying roles and responsibilities is needed.
* Keeping in touch with the public. The public is interested in education but has little understanding of the current reform agenda. Efforts should be made to track public opinion and provide relevant information.
* Staying the course on reform efforts. Washington has made a good start toward reform with the 1993 Education Reform Act. For this plan to be effective, work on it must be sustained in the coming years.
Plecki emphasized that the areas of concern were not intended to tell the state what to do. “Our main focus has not been to provide specific remedies for what we believe to be the state’s main challenges,” she says. “Rather, we wanted to provide a baseline of the existing conditions and some ideas about the considerations that need to be included in future debate on the issues.” Some of the report’s contributing writers have worked on similar reports in California, where the data have been extensively used.
Funding for the report came from the Future of Washington Schools Project, a group of 54 school districts and seven corporations. Copies, at $20 post-paid, are available from the Institute for the Study of Educational Policy, University of Washington, Box 353600, Seattle, WA 98195.
###
Note: For further information, contact Margaret Plecki, (206) 543-1836
<!—at end of each paragraph insert
—>
