< Back Virtual Schools in the U.S. 2013: Politics, Performance, Policy, and Research Evidence Summary Major virtual schools report uncovers underperforming schools: In the last decade, virtual schools have expanded rapidly although there is little data to support their growth. The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, released the first of a planned series of annual reports on the performance of virtual schools, the policy issues that virtual schools raise, and the available research evidence on virtual education. Authors urge policymakers to slow or stop the growth of these schools until more research is done and accountability measures can be put into place. Publication Date May 1, 2013 Authors Alex Molnar, University of Colorado Boulder (editor) Gary Miron, Western Michigan University Luis Huerta, Teachers College, Columbia University Jennifer King Rice, University of Maryland Larry Cuban, Research Areas Governance & Public Education; Technology & AI Publication Type Policy Brief Download the Policy Brief Press Release Major Virtual Schools Report Released Analysis uncovers underperforming schools EAST LANSING, Mich. (May 2, 2013) – In the last decade, although virtual schools have expanded rapidly there is little data to justify their growth. The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, released the first of a planned series of annual reports on the performance of virtual schools, the policy issues that virtual schools raise, and the available research evidence on virtual education. Virtual Schools in the U.S. 2013: Politics, Performance, Policy, and Research Evidence , is edited by Alex Molnar, a research professor at the University of Colorado Boulder. Contributing authors to the research brief include Gary Miron of Western Michigan University, Luis Huerta of Teachers College, Columbia University, Jennifer King Rice of the University of Maryland, and Larry Cuban of Stanford University. Contributors to this study also included professors Sheryl Shafer of Teachers College, Columbia University, Brian Horvitz of Western Michigan University, and Charisse Gulosino at the University of Memphis According to Cuban, "Policymakers know that business, civic and community leaders expect them to work tirelessly to improve student academic performance through every available means, including better school organization, governance, curriculum, instruction – and especially better technology. Unfortunately, good politics does not automatically result in good policy." The report offers a number of troubling statistics: In the 2010-11 school year, only 23.6 percent of virtual schools made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) compared to 52 percent for traditional and charter schools. Three-quarters of the students in virtual schools are white, compared to the national mean of 54 percent. Black students account for only 10.3 percent of the virtual school enrollment, compared to 16.5 percent for all public schools. The gap is even wider for Hispanic students, which is surprising given the large presence of virtual schools in states with large Hispanic populations like Arizona, Florida and California. The number of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch in virtual schools is 10-percentage points lower than all public schools – 35.1 percent compared to 45.4 percent. The proportion of students with disabilities being served by virtual schools is half the national average – 7.2 percent compared to 13.1 percent. Profits, rather than student outcomes, is clearly the main driver behind the rapid growth of virtual schools. Because virtual schools have lower costs associated with teacher salaries and benefits, facilities and maintenance, transportation, food service and other in-person services – compared to their brick-and-mortar counterparts – Huerta and King Rice recommend developing a new funding formula based on the actual costs of operating virtual schools. It's imperative for policymakers to slow or stop the growth of these schools until more research is done and accountability measures can be put into place, the report's authors concluded. "Even a cursory review of media reports and a passing acquaintance with the research on virtual education reveals that policy is being made in an environment much like the legendary 'wild west'," according to the report editor Molnar. "These reports will analyze the performance of full-time, publicly funded K-12 virtual schools; describe key policy issues raised by virtual education; assess the research evidence that bears on K-12 virtual teaching and learning; and provide research-based recommendations to help guide policymaking." Find the report on the Great Lakes Center website: http://www.greatlakescenter.org This report is also found on the NEPC website: http://nepc.colorado.edu/ The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org . Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent . Contact: Jamie Horwitz, (202) 549-4921, jhdcpr@starpower.net Dan Quinn, (517) 203-2940, dquinn@greatlakescenter.org Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back The (Mis)Treatment and (Non)Education of Unaccompanied Immigrant Children in the United States Summary Beginning in 2014, an increasing number of children from northern Central American countries (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) and Mexico, fleeing violence and poverty in their countries, have arrived and been apprehended at the U.S. border. Many of these children are unaccompanied or became so upon separation from a parent or another adult. NEPC is releasing today a policy brief addressing the education of these unaccompanied immigrant children (UICs), including their experiences prior to, during, and after apprehension at the border. The (Mis)Treatment and (Non)Education of Unaccompanied Immigrant Children in the United States is authored by University of Houston assistant professor Ruth M. López. Publication Date March 7, 2021 Authors Ruth M. López, University of Houston Research Areas Assessment & Accountability; General / Needs Review; Equity & Civil Rights Publication Type Policy Brief Download the Policy Brief Press Release Contacts: Michelle Renée Valladares : (720) 505-1958, michelle.valladares@colorado.edu Ruth M. López : (713) 743-9124, RMLopez3@uh.edu Another Border Crisis: The Neglected Education of Unaccompanied Immigrant Children A NEPC Policy Brief Funded By the GLC Key Takeaway: Policy brief explains the educational issues surrounding unaccompanied immigrant children in the United States. EAST LANSING, Mich. (March 9, 2021) - Beginning in 2014, an increasing number of children from northern Central American countries (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) and Mexico, fleeing violence and poverty in their countries, have arrived and been apprehended at the U.S. border. Many of these children are unaccompanied or became so upon separation from a parent or another adult. NEPC is releasing today a policy brief addressing the education of these unaccompanied immigrant children (UICs), including their experiences prior to, during, and after apprehension at the border. The (Mis)Treatment and (Non)Education of Unaccompanied Immigrant Children in the United States is authored by University of Houston assistant professor Ruth M. López. Upon arrival, these children are expected to navigate everything from a complicated immigration legal system to overcrowded detention centers, abuse, and anti-immigrant sentiments. Considering this sociopolitical context, Professor López examines what the available research tells us about UICs' educational experiences in detention, in shelters or foster case, and in public schools. It also considers legal requirements as well as research about how schools and districts can support these children in asset-based and equity-centered ways. Using the theoretical frameworks of Critical Race Theory and Latino Critical Race Theory, she examines the ways UICs are framed, the legal and historical contexts that impact their lived reality, and their recent experience as immigrants to the United States. In the brief López shares the following: Before migration and in their interactions with various federal agencies, UICs often face traumatic experiences, including prolonged separation from their families. After navigating a complicated immigration system, where they may not receive proper services such as education, health, or legal support, UICs have the right to attend public schools once placed with a sponsor. However, the transition to schooling is not seamless and can present other unique obstacles that affect learning conditions. Humanitarian and legal offenses toward UICs predated the Trump administration, but Trump's immigration policies, particularly since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbated these injustices. This legacy leaves the new administration—and others—with much to do to alleviate the trauma suffered by UICs and to ensure that they receive necessary educational and coordinated supports. To this end, Professor López concludes her brief with recommendations for national-level policymakers, district and school leaders, and researchers. Find The (Mis)Treatment and (Non)Education of Unaccompanied Immigrant Children in the United States, by Ruth M. López, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org/ This policy brief was made possible in part by the support of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice ( greatlakescenter.org ). The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, produces and disseminates high-quality, peer-reviewed research to inform education policy discussions. Visit us at: http://nepc.colorado.edu research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Review of Pennsylvania's Education Tax Credit Scholarships: How EITC Serves Children and Families in the Commonwealth Summary A recent Commonwealth Foundation report praises Pennsylvania's tax credit scholarship programs, which create private-school vouchers funded through tax-credited donations. The report argues in favor of the programs' expansion, but it has at least three major shortcomings. Publication Date November 11, 2024 Authors Rachel Langan; Bruce Baker, University of Miami Research Areas School Choice & Vouchers; School Funding; Assessment & Accountability Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release Report Reiterates False Claims Overstating Voucher Benefits An NEPC Review funded by the Great Lakes Center Key Takeaway: Commonwealth Foundation report uses invalid findings and conclusions to claim that expanding private school voucher programs will improve student outcomes and economic gains. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (November 12, 2024) - A recent Commonwealth Foundation report praises Pennsylvania's tax credit scholarship programs, which create private-school vouchers funded through tax-credited donations. The report argues in favor of the programs' expansion, but it has at least three major shortcomings. Bruce Baker of the University of Miami reviewed Pennsylvania's Education Tax Credit Scholarships: How EITC Serves Children and Families in the Commonwealth , and found that these shortcomings render the report of little use for policymakers. The first weakness Professor Baker points out is that the report trivializes the amount of spending on the tax credit scholarship programs, asserting that the $630 million (FY24-25) dollar program is a small fraction-about 1.7%-of the $37 billion spent from all sources (including local and federal) on K-12 public education in the state. But when compared with just the state's $8.16 billion contribution, that fraction jumps to 7.7%. One of every $13 spent by the state on education goes to this voucher program. This would amount to nearly $4,000 per pupil if distributed to public school district students in Philadelphia, Allentown, York, and Reading-which are among the state's least well-funded public school districts. Secondly, the report relies on five cherry-picked "case studies" with limited descriptive information. These case studies cannot therefore support a key causal inference underpinning the report: the assertion that private schools provide better services at bargain prices. The case studies do not adequately report either the resources available (in the private schools or public districts) or the differences in students served. Finally, the argument that voucher programs yield substantial long-run economic benefits lacks a credible foundation. In sum, Baker concludes, the report is of little use to policymakers. It essentially pushes them to ask the wrong questions and ignore the right ones when allocating significant sums of taxpayer dollars. The report's finding that the existing $630 million spending cap on tax credit scholarships should be increased fails to consider better, more equitable, efficient and accountable alternatives for allocating similar amounts of funding. Find the review, by Bruce D. Baker, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org Find Pennsylvania's Education Tax Credit Scholarships: How EITC Serves Children and Families in the Commonwealth , written by Rachel Langan and published by the Commonwealth Foundation, at: https://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/research/pennsylvania-education-tax-credit-scholarships-eitc/ NEPC Reviews ( https://nepc.colorado.edu/reviews ) provide the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice is to support and disseminate high-quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at GreatLakesCenter.org Contacts Michelle Renee Valladares Bruce D. Baker Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Expanding Choice in Elementary and Secondary Education: A Report on Rethinking the Federal Role in Education Summary This report calls for a federally led, universal expansion of school choice programs and makes the argument that increased choice is what the majority of parents want in federal education reform. Publication Date March 2, 2010 Authors Janelle Scott, University of California at Berkeley Research Areas Assessment & Accountability Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release Report Advocating School Choice for All Lacks Evidence March 3, 2010 EAST LANSING, Mi., (March 3, 2010) – A new review of a recently released Brookings report finds that it fails to provide the necessary evidence to support its call for a federally led, universal expansion of school choice. The Brookings report, Expanding Choice in Elementary and Secondary Education: A Report on Rethinking the Federal Role in Education , was reviewed for the Think Twice think tank review project by Professor Janelle Scott of the University of California at Berkeley. In her review, Scott identifies three major shortcomings of the report: it relies too heavily on research in progress and research produced by advocacy organizations; it neglects prior research concerning the nature of parental choice; and it fails to acknowledge that unconstrained school choice has segregative effects. Scott points out that much of the research used to support the authors' central arguments for expanding school choice is generated by advocacy organizations and, to some degree, reflects research in progress. Accordingly, the report's enthusiasm for school choice's ability to generate desirable education policy is oblivious to empirical research that overwhelmingly points to complications in school choice formation, implementation, and evaluation. Scott also highlights the research showing that parents tend to choose schools largely based on racial and social class demographics as opposed to indicators of school quality. Because the Brookings report fails to acknowledge this, its recommendations do not include elements that would prevent those choice patterns from undermining the report's stated equity goals. "An expansion of school choice without provisions that incentivize and support the creation of diverse schools would likely inhibit the open enrollment choice terrain the authors imagine," Scott writes. Further, while Scott credits the authors for setting the goal of expanding quality educational choices, and acknowledges that many parents generally want better schooling options for their children, she concludes that the report "never supports its underlying assumption that this particular expansion of school choice is what parents want in federal educational reform." By contrast, national polls find that for parents, the No. 1 priority is the lack of resources for schools. "Accordingly, if policy makers wish to attend to parental preferences, the best approach would seem to be more attention to resource shortages in schools and across schooling systems," Scott writes. Find Janelle Scott's review as well as a link to the Brookings report at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org . About The Think Twice Project The Think Twice project provides the public, policy makers and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected think tank publications. It is a collaboration of the Education Policy Studies Laboratory at Arizona State University and the Education and the Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder and is funded by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. ### The mission of the Great Lakes Center is to improve public education for all students in the Great Lakes region through the support and dissemination of high quality, academically sound research on education policy and practices. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org Contact: Janelle Scott (510) 642-4740; jtscott@berkeley.edu Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Giving Students the Chaff: How to Find and Keep the Teachers We Need Summary This report asserts that school choice, in the form of private-school vouchers and charter schools, will improve the quality of teachers. Publication Date October 24, 2006 Authors Raymond Pecheone & Ash Vasudeva, Stanford University Research Areas Teacher Workforce Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release CATO Report Linking School Choice with Improved Teacher Quality Ignores Contradictory Evidence October 25, 2006 For Immediate Release Education Research and Practice (517) 203-2940 (e-mail) greatlakescenter@greatlakescenter.org Raymond Pecheone, Stanford University (650) 723-4106 (e-mail) pecheone@suse.stanford.edu EAST LANSING, Mich. — A recently released policy analysis from the CATO Institute which asserts that school choice, in the form of private-school vouchers and charter schools, will improve the quality of teachers and relies on selectively cited research and ignores many other factors that have a bearing on teacher quality according to a Think Twice review of the report. The report, Giving Kids the Chaff: How to Find and Keep the Teachers We Need, by Marie Gryphon, claims that the current educational system is a major barrier to attracting highly qualified teachers because of compressed pay scales and the fact that public school administrators fail to hire and support the best applicants. School choice, she argues, will provide the incentives necessary to change such practices. In their review of the report, Raymond Pecheone and Ash Vasudeva of Stanford University find that Gryphon’s initial premise – that teacher quality plays an important role in improving educational outcomes – is well founded in the educational research literature. However, her subsequent conclusion – “competition and choice induce improved hiring practices and more flexible compensation policies, which in turn attract and retain high-qualified teachers” – lacks the same sort of broad-based evidentiary support, the reviewers write. “In the end, the report’s failure to consider alternative interpretations of empirical research on hiring and compensation undermines the validity of the findings and conclusions, as does the failure to identify research that does not corroborate an ‘achievement effect’ for charter and private schools.” The CATO report contends that administrators in school districts where there is competition, in the form of charter schools or other school-choice programs, “gave quality higher priority in the hiring and retention process.” Pecheone and Vasudeva note, however, that a more accurate and compelling explanation for variation in teacher quality in these districts may be that teachers self-select into schools with better working conditions. “If teacher self-selection into schools (rather than managerial hiring policies and practices) is chiefly responsible for placement, then improving school working conditions should be the priority,” Pecheone and Vasudeva say. “While it may be argued that schools competing for talented teachers will improve working conditions to attract them, this argument ignores resource disparities between and across schools and districts as well as the communities in which they are located.” Find the complete review by Raymond Pecheone and Ash Vasudeva as well as a link to the CATO Institute report at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org About Think Twice The Think Twice project provides the public, policy makers and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected think tank publications. It is a collaboration of the Education Policy Studies laboratory at Arizona State University and the Education and the Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder and is funded by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to identify, develop, support, publish and widely disseminate empirically sound research on education policy and practices designed to improve the quality of public education for all students within the Great Lakes Region. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at: http://www.greatlakescenter.or g Contact: Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Measures of Effective Teaching—Asking Students About Teaching Summary A recent report from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project presents advice on administering and using information from student surveys to evaluate teachers and provide feedback to teachers. Publication Date November 14, 2012 Authors Eric M. Camburn, The University of Wisconsin-Madison Research Areas Teacher Workforce; Curriculum & Instruction Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release Gates Report on Student Surveys Oversells Strengths, Ignores Weaknesses EAST LANSING, Mich. (November 15, 2012) –A recent report from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project presents advice on administering and using information from student surveys to evaluate teachers and provide feedback to teachers. A new review, however, finds that the report doesn't provide sufficient justification for many of its conclusions. Professor Eric M. Camburn of the University of Wisconsin-Madison reviewed Asking Students about Teaching for the Think Twice think tank review project. The review is published by the National Education Policy Center with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. Asking Students about Teaching seeks to establish that student surveys provide valid evidence usable to evaluate teachers. The report then offers guidance about optimal practices for using and acting on such surveys. Camburn agrees that student surveys are potentially useful and that the report "contains many practical pieces of advice that are sensible and worth putting into practice." However, he cautions that the report's claims of a strong relationship between student survey results and teacher effectiveness are not supported by evidence in the report itself. He further warns that a "broader limitation of the report is that many of the findings and conclusions are presented too uncritically and without sufficient justification." "Developers of the MET project embrace the idea that multiple measures of teaching effectiveness are needed to represent such a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon. However, in discussing the potential uses of student surveys, this report's stance is lopsided, placing too much weight on the strengths of student surveys and not enough weight on their weaknesses." In short, student surveys can potentially provide useful information, but the report's policy recommendations far outpace the available evidence. Find Eric Camburn's review on the GLC website: http://www.greatlakescenter.org Find Asking Students about Teaching on the web: http://www.metproject.org/downloads/Asking_Students_Practitioner_Brief.pdf Think Twice, a project of the National Education Policy Center, provides the public, policy makers and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. The project is made possible by funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. The review is also available on the National Education Policy Center website at: http://nepc.colorado.edu/thinktank/review-asking-students --###-- The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org . Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent . Find us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/GreatLakesCenter. Contact: Eric M. Camburn, (608) 263-3697, camburn@wisc.edu Dan Quinn, (517) 203-2940, dquinn@greatlakescenter.org Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back The Academic and Behavioral Consequences of Discipline Policy Reform: Evidence from Philadelphia Summary A report from the Fordham Institute attempted to investigate the impact of a student discipline reform in the School District of Philadelphia (SDP). The report concluded that the reform was a failure. The reform in question eliminated suspensions for certain low-level school misbehaviors. The Fordham report in question looked at district out-of-school suspension rates for students, academic and behavioral outcomes, and racial disparities in suspensions. Publication Date February 14, 2018 Authors Matthew P. Steinberg and Johanna Lacoe; Yolanda Anyon, University of Denver; and Kathryn E. Wiley, University of California San Diego. Research Areas Curriculum & Instruction; Assessment & Accountability Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Pluck & Tenacity: How Five Private Schools in Ohio Have Adapted to Vouchers Summary This report highlights perceived challenges facing private schools brought on by the introduction of vouchers and calls for policymakers to strengthen Ohio's voucher programs. It praises the private schools profiled and cautions against state accountability programs that may "trample" on private schools' ability to provide a unique learning experience. Publication Date March 5, 2014 Authors Ellen Belcher; Christopher Lubienski and T. Jameson Brewer, University of Illinois Research Areas School Choice & Vouchers Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release Fordham's Ohio school voucher report flawed EAST LANSING, Mich. (Mar. 6, 2014) – A recent report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute examines the impact of school vouchers on five private schools in Ohio. The report highlights perceived challenges facing private schools brought on by the introduction of vouchers and calls for policymakers to strengthen Ohio's voucher programs. However, an academic review out today finds the report unsuitable for policy consideration. The report, Pluck & Tenacity: How Five Private Schools in Ohio Have Adapted to Vouchers , written by Ellen Belcher, praises the private schools profiled and cautions against state accountability programs that may "trample" on private schools' ability to provide a unique learning experience. Dr. Christopher Lubienski of the University of Illinois, along with doctoral student T. Jameson Brewer, reviewed the report for the Think Twice think tank review project. The National Education Policy Center (NEPC) published the review with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. Overall, the reviewers found the report to be a case-study in how to engage in a slanted selection and interpretation of research evidence. The reviewers note that the report is supported by a total of three endnote references "cherry-picked" to support a contested policy agenda. "Thus, the report is grounded in a twice-skewed and intellectually dishonest view of the research on vouchers and their academic outcomes." The original report sought to examine how private schools changed as a result of enrolling voucher students, but little attention was given to research on the academic effects of vouchers. "Policymakers should be aware that this report is not supported by empirical findings, and is a good example of how ‘cherry-picked' evidence is used to support or reinforce the agendas of various advocacy organizations" Find this Think Twice Review on the Great Lakes Center website : http://www.greatlakescenter.org Find Pluck & Tenacity on the web: http://edexcellence.net/publications/pluck-and-tenacity-how-five-private-schools-in-ohio-have-adapted-to-vouchers Think Twice, a project of the National Education Policy Center (NEPC) , provides the public, policymakers and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. The project is made possible with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice . The review can also be found on the NEPC website: http://nepc.colorado.edu The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org . Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent . Find us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/GreatLakesCenter. Contact: Christopher Lubienski, (217) 333-4382, club@illinois.edu Dan Quinn, (517) 203-2940, dquinn@greatlakescenter.org Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Research-Based Options for Education Policymaking—Preschool Education Summary Dr. William Mathis, managing director of the National Education Policy Center, summarizes research findings on the effects of high-quality preschool programs. This three-page brief is part of Research-Based Options for Education Policymaking, a multipart brief that takes up a number of important policy issues and identifies policies supported by research. Publication Date November 12, 2012 Authors William Mathis, University of Colorado-Boulder Research Areas Early Childhood Publication Type Policy Brief Download the Policy Brief Press Release New Brief Summarizes Academic and Fiscal Benefits of Universal Preschool EAST LANSING, Mich. (Nov. 13, 2012) — Universal preschool education has become an increasingly supported topic by the American public. Sound research evidence supports the expansion of high-quality preschool opportunities, according to the third in a series of two- and three-page briefs summarizing key findings in education policy research. According to Dr. William Mathis, managing director of the National Education Policy Center, "There is near-universal agreement that high-quality preschool programs more than pay for themselves in economic and social benefits." Mathis also notes, "In terms of academic effects, preschool programs show large and immediate pay-offs." This three-page brief is part of Research-Based Options for Education Policymaking , a multipart brief that takes up a number of important policy issues and identifies policies supported by research. Each section focuses on a different issue, and its recommendations to policymakers are based on the latest scholarship. Indeed, high-quality preschool for at least two years has been found to close as much as half the achievement gap. Such preschool participation is also associated with a wide range of more positive adult outcomes, including less drug use, less welfare dependency, higher graduation rates, higher college attendance, and higher employment. The brief explains the key elements of a quality pre-school program. It also discusses research findings concerning basic issues such as the entrance age for preschool, comparisons of center-based and home-based programs, and whether preschool should be universal or targeted by socioeconomic group. This three-page brief is part of the multipart brief Research-Based Options for Education Policymaking . Find the brief on the GLC website at: http://greatlakescenter.org/research_based_options.php This report is published by the National Education Policy Center, housed at the University of Colorado-Boulder, and is made possible by funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. This brief is also found on the NEPC website at: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/options The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org . Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent . Contact: William J. Mathis, (802) 383-0058, wmathis@sover.net Dan Quinn, (517) 203-2940, dquinn@greatlakescenter.org Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back What Do We Know About the Outcomes of KIPP Schools? Summary Click the button below and signup to receive the latest news and information from The Great Lakes Center. We value your privacy and do not share email addresses with any other organizations. Publication Date November 9, 2008 Authors Jeffrey R. Henig, Ph.D., Teachers College, Columbia University Research Areas Charter Schools; Assessment & Accountability Publication Type Policy Brief Download the Policy Brief Press Release Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Review of Testing Theories of Why: Four Keys to Interpreting US Student Achievement Trends Summary A recent American Enterprise Institute report does a good job of identifying and describing long-term trends in student performance using national and international assessment data. However, a review finds that the report then falls short in its attempts to analyze and understand the factors driving these trends. Publication Date April 23, 2025 Authors Nat Malkus; Chris Domaleski, National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment Research Areas Assessment & Accountability; Governance & Public Education; School Funding Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release Report Highlights Student Achievement Trends But Lacks Meaningful Interpretation An NEPC Review funded by the Great Lakes Center Key Takeaway: Recent AEI report successfully identifies patterns in student performance but falls short in explaining the causes behind them. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (APRIL 24, 2025) - A recent American Enterprise Institute report does a good job of identifying and describing long-term trends in student performance using national and international assessment data. However, a review finds that the report then falls short in its attempts to analyze and understand the factors driving these trends. In his review of Testing Theories of Why: Four Keys to Interpreting US Student Achievement Trends ,Chris Domaleski of the National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment explains that the report identifies four major trends: (1) student performance peaked in the early 2010s before declining, (2) lower-performing students have seen the sharpest declines, (3) achievement gaps in the U.S. are widening more than in other countries, and (4) similar declines appear in adult literacy and numeracy scores. The report also attempts to challenge implicit theories, such as the idea that recent declines are solely due to the pandemic or that all students are affected uniformly. While Dr. Domaleski praises the report for effectively highlighting these key trends, he points to problems with the report’s analysis. He notes, for example, that the report overlooks important data sources that could provide a more comprehensive picture. It also fails to account for uncertainty or offer guidance on identifying meaningful differences. Finally, its effort to "pressure test" possible explanations is underdeveloped-its theories lack depth and fail to engage with established research on causal inference. Though the report serves as a useful starting point for discussions on U.S. student achievement, Dr. Domaleski concludes that it falls short of providing a framework for understanding why these trends exist. Find the review, by Chris Domaleski, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org Find Testing Theories of Why: Four Keys to Interpreting US Student Achievement Trends , written by Nat Malkus and published by American Enterprise Institute, at: https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/testing-theories-of-why-four-keys-to-interpreting-us-student-achievement-trends/ NEPC Reviews ( https://nepc.colorado.edu/reviews ) provide the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org Chris Domaleski (603) 516-7900 cdomaleski@nciea.org Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More

< Back Review of Learning Systems: Shaping the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Education Summary A recent three-part report from Bellwether explores the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in K-12 education and offers recommendations for policymakers and practitioners to navigate this emerging landscape. Publication Date November 25, 2024 Authors Amy Chen Kulesa, Michelle Croft, Brian Robinson, Mary K. Wells, Andrew J. Rotherham, and John Bailey; T. Philip Nichols, Baylor University Research Areas Technology & AI; Governance & Public Education Publication Type Think Twice Download the Policy Brief Press Release While Touting Benefits of AI in Education, Report Downplays Known Risks An NEPC Review funded by the Great Lakes Center Key Takeaway: Bellwether's report is a useful starting point for understanding the landscape of artificial intelligence in schools, but its advocacy for AI implementation is not supported by adequate evidence. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (November 26, 2024) - A recent three-part report from Bellwether explores the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in K-12 education and offers recommendations for policymakers and practitioners to navigate this emerging landscape. In his review of the reports that make up Learning Systems: Shaping the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Education , T. Philip Nichols of Baylor University finds these recommendations to be unjustifiably skewed toward imagined future advantages of AI, instead of wrestling with its actual present risks. The report's stated aim is to provide a holistic picture of the opportunities and risks that AI presents for education stakeholders. Part of this aim involves highlighting current and potential uses of AI for streamlining administrative tasks and personalizing instruction; another part identifies challenges for capitalizing on these potentials. The report argues that educators have a responsibility to develop capacity and infrastructure to support the effective integration of AI in schools while trying to mitigate the risks involved in doing so. However, these risks are downplayed as temporary obstacles, which undermines the report's value. By allowing the projected benefits of AI to drive decisions related to its development and implementation, the report overlooks substantial research literature documenting its known limitations and harms. As a result, instead of the comprehensive view it purports to present, the report leans into the questionable potential future promised by AI's developers and investors. Professor Nichols praises the report's goal of ensuring that technology adoption and implementation prioritizes equitable learning for all students. But, he concludes, the report falls short of meeting this goal because of its failure to grapple with the evidence about the thorniest issues. Find the review, by T. Philip Nichols, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org Find Learning Systems: Shaping the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Education , written by Amy Chen Kulesa, Michelle Croft, Brian Robinson, Mary K. Wells, Andrew J. Rotherham, and John Bailey and published by Bellwether, at: https://bellwether.org/publications/learning-systems/ NEPC Reviews ( https://nepc.colorado.edu/reviews ) provide the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org T. Philip Nichols (254) 710-3027 Phil_Nichols@baylor.edu Previous Next sign up for emails Get the latest K-12 education policy research delivered straight to your inbox! Read More