The Keys to Effective Schools
Don't We Already Know This?
Who is Roland Fryer?
I happened across Professor Fryer while listening to several podcasts discussing how we might make meaningful improvement in our education system. Roland Fryer is an American economist and faculty member at Harvard University. In 2007 at the age of 30, he became the second-youngest professor, and the youngest African-American, ever to be awarded tenure at Harvard.
One of the things, I believe, that makes his work so meaningful is that he “lived it”. If you look back to where he came from – his family life & education prior to receiving a college athletic scholarship – Harvard Yard would be the last place you would think to look for him today. One of my favorite statements of his is when he is talking about being raised by his grandmother; he says that the two most impactful women in his life were: “his grandmother, who was a school teacher, and his aunt who was the CEO of a street-based pharmaceutical company.”
His recent interview on Freakonimcs Radio is a fabulous look into his life and the research he so passionately conducts in the realms of education and race relations. If you want more from Roland Fryer, I encourage you follow the link to this podcast
In 2012, Roland Fryer and his colleagues at Harvard University released the findings of an extensive study to understand what makes a school effective. They selected data from the inner workings of 39 charter schools in New York City and found that traditionally measured inputs such as class size, per pupil expenditures, and the number of teachers with advanced degrees have no correlation to a school’s effectiveness. Conversely, they did find five (5) time-tested policies that could account for approximately 45% of a school’s effectiveness:
· More time in school
· Use data to drive instruction in the classroom
· Small group instruction (a/k/a tutoring)
· Human capital in the classroom (hiring, training & retaining teachers)
· High student expectations regardless of socio-economic conditions
Over the years, many have regarded charter schools as the “R&D wing” of traditional public education – a place to explore new ways to increase and sustain student achievement. So, after looking at these schools in New York, similar analyses were done for charter schools in Washington DC and New Orleans. Fryer also looked at traditional public schools with low SES students in Houston, TX. The results – these five policies played a significant correlation in identifying a school’s effectiveness across all of their studies. Here are some findings in their own words:
Controlling for the other four inputs, schools that give formal or informal feedback ten or more times per semester have annual math gains that are 0.048σ (the equivalent of 4 extra days of school) higher and annual ELA gains that are 0.044σ (2.5 extra days) higher than other schools. Schools that tutor students at least four days a week in groups of six or less have annual ELA gains that are 0.040σ (3 extra days) higher. Schools that add 25 percent or more instructional time have annual gains that are 0.050σ (2.3 extra days) higher in math. Schools that have high academic and behavioral expectations have annual math gains that are 0.044σ (4 extra days) higher and ELA gains that are 0.030σ (2.6 extra days) higher. (Fryer, 2011).
So if we leave out “more time in school”, effectively implementing the four other policies would be equivalent to 10.3 additional days of instruction in math and 7.6 additional days for ELA instruction.
Unless we here at DPS Chalkboard have missed something, we don’t believe these five policies represent a substantial paradigm shift in education. Didn’t we already know this? Have we not understood that this kind of focus in the classroom was the key to success? Perhaps we, as a school district and as a community, should ask ourselves how we can utilize these types of policies to make a truly positive impact on academic achievement in District 61.
More Time in School
It makes sense that more time in school would make a tremendous difference; however, it is the most challenging of the five. More often than not, charter schools are not bound by the traditional school day models nor hamstrung by language in collective bargaining agreements that clearly delineate the exact number of hours teachers can be in contact with students. (Most likely the primary reason the KIPP school initiative failed in Decatur all those years ago.) I understand completely – my wife taught in the public schools her entire career. However, the school district was able to create an extended day program that allowed students to be in school before and after scheduled bell times. This would be the perfect opportunity for students to receive additional, focused instruction that is more than just an after-school study hall. These efforts could be tailored to meet the specific academics needs of the individual student to zero-in on the areas in which they struggle the most. Initially, students will be inclined to push back but it soon will become part of their culture. There is a reason why there are over 55,000 Kumon Learning Centers in the world (over 1,500 in the U.S. alone). And while I am not in the habit of letting Hollywood reinforce my personal philosophy, anyone who has watched Stand and Deliver or Akeelah and the Bee can recognize the benefits of extended and extraordinary instructional time on student achievement!
Small Group Instruction & Human Capital
Small group instruction and hiring, training & retaining of teachers go hand in hand. Since its inception, The DPS Chalkboard has been adamant in our belief that DPS61 needs to do everything possible to hire, train and retain teachers. We have outlined in several articles how the district should – and could – use ESSR funds to not only fill these gaps but to create a teaching staff that can flourish in an environment that promotes autonomy, mastery and purpose.
Small group instruction (or tutoring as Fryer’s grandmother called it) can also play a huge role in a school’s effectiveness and its level of academic achievement. Fryer’s work has proven that small groups (6 students or less) meeting four times per week result in increased test scores. Up until the most recent school year, DPS61 allowed schools to implement response-to-intervention (RTI) programs by bringing in retired teachers to work with small groups on specific areas of deficiency. Not only did this help to mitigate learning loss from the pandemic, it helped to simply get students back to working at grade level. Dennis School had RTI last year and they, along with Parsons and South Shores, were ready to do it again this academic school year. Sadly, this type of program was not “prioritized” by central administration for the 2022/23 school year.
While the information is anecdotal, we have seen situations where school districts in Texas (Austin & Dallas-Ft. Worth specifically) used COVID relief funds to launch tutoring programs (held during the school day & in the buildings) to help students in need. These efforts helped bring about Texas HB 4545:
A new law, approved by state legislators last year, essentially requires schools to provide at least 30 hours of tutoring in each subject that a student failed or missed on state exams. (Texas had more than 2 million failed exams among elementary and middle-schoolers.)
Not only does this codify the need for small group instruction, this legislation allows retired teachers to work with students the entire school year without disrupting their predetermined pensions.
Data Driven Instruction
In general, it is safe to say that collecting data is not an issue for DPS61 or any other school district for that matter. Collecting data is relatively simple; putting the data to use is a different story. Fryer’s work shows that providing data as feedback, as well as using it to craft instruction, is critical to increasing test scores. In a recent interview, Fryer went further to say that we shouldn’t rest on our laurels; if the data shows 50% achievement, don’t stop – go back in the classroom and move the needle higher. This mindset is similar to the approach taken in the Khan World Academy. If a student achieves 80% mastery in a subject over the course of the school year, don’t stop. Continue to work with the student until that rate is 90% or higher.
High Student Expectations
Which ultimately brings us to expectations. I have spent the last three decades talking with local educators and, to a person, not one of them ever lamented about a student’s burden resulting from high expectations in the classroom. Roland Fryer is no different. His research from 2016 backs that up. His study looked at the impact of incentives & expectations on low SES students at traditional public schools in Houston, TX. He focused on horizontal incentives where the student alone was responsible for the educational inputs (attendance, behavior, homework, uniforms, etc.) and vertical incentives where not only the student, but the teacher and the parents we responsible for these inputs. What they found was that the students with horizontal incentives scored higher in both math and reading while the students whose incentives were vertical - shared across multiple people – scored higher in math but saw decreases in other subjects.
In the end, we are left with three choices: 1) no expectations, 2) horizontal expectations where the student is responsible for everything, and 3) vertical expectations where responsibility is shared by the students, teachers and parents/caregivers. No expectations at all leads to utter failure and vertical expectations result in the students focusing on one area while neglecting their work in others. The research is clear – if the expectations are high and the student is responsible for all of the necessary inputs, they achieve! Roland Fryer put it very plainly in a recent podcast interview where he said: “students will live up or down to the expectations we set before them.”
There is nothing flashy, fancy or innovative about the five (5) polices/components we have discussed, yet they truly make a difference in the classroom. Don’t we already know this? Where is the district leadership team on this topic? DPS 61 employs an Assistant Superintendent for Teaching & Learning and a P-12 Director of Teaching and Learning. If anyone should be hammering this home during executive planning sessions, it should be them.