Opportunity for All 2019 State of Michigan Education Report 9-1 M'ch' an A?higles!? The Education Trust-Midwest works for the high academic achievement of all Michigan’s students, pre-kindergarten through college. Our goal is to close the gaps in opportunity and achievement for all children, particularly those from low-income families or who are African American, Latino or American Indian. As a nonpartisan, data-driven education policy, research and advocacy organization, we are focused first and foremost on doing what is right for Michigan children, working alongside partners to raise the quality of teaching and learning in our public schools. Find all of our reports, including examinations of what works in leading education states, as well as fact sheets and other information at www.edtrustmidwest.org. 2 University Prep Science & Math High School - Detroit, MI (Photo: Marissa Gawel) In 2015, The Education Trust-Midwest launched the Michigan Achieves campaign to make Michigan a top ten education state by 2030. Each year, we report on how Michigan is making progress toward that top ten goal based on both student outcome performance metrics and opportunity to learn metrics that signal the health of the conditions that Michigan is creating that help support – or stagnate – teaching and learning in Michigan public schools. This year’s State of Michigan Education Report includes an up-to-date report card on many of the same benchmarks. For more on those outcomes, please see pages 45-57. Since then, a growing number of partners around the state have come to work together to advance the best practices and strategies from leading education states to Michigan, in order to close achievement gaps and ensure every Michigan student is learning – and being taught – at high levels. Join the movement at www.michiganachieves.com. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 3 INTRODUCTION: A 2030 Vision for Michigan Students In this vision, Michigan is leading the nation for teaching and learning. We will be leading in learning outcomes for every possible measure and for every group of students. By Amber Arellano After the months of analysis our organization conducted for this report, we found that Michigan is not on track to improve on early literacy, nor on other important indicators of student learning. Instead, if Michigan fails to adopt transformational policies and practices, the state is projected to be in the bottom ten states – 45th of 50 states – in fourth grade reading in 2030. Not only is Michigan failing to close the performance gap between Michigan and Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) Four years ago, the Education Trust-Midwest started a campaign called Michigan Achieves! to make Michigan a top ten education state for all groups of students. The campaign has attracted more supporters and partners than we could have ever imagined – and it’s needed more now than ever. Today, Michigan ranks among the bottom states in the nation for key metrics of student learning and success. In early literacy, Michigan students rank sixteenth from the bottom. And for every major student group – African American, Latino, White, low-income and higher income students – Michigan is struggling. 4 A 2030 VISION FOR MICHIGAN STUDENTS leading education states, but achievement and opportunity gaps within the state remain devastatingly wide. In eighth-grade math, only about one in ten African American students in Michigan, and two in ten Latino students, are proficient, compared to four in ten White students. And students face disproportionate access to rigorous coursework, which is a predictor of future academic success. Of all the Advanced Placement (AP) exams administered in the state last year only 4.6 percent were taken by African American students and 5.9 percent by Hispanic students. These disparities in Michigan’s K-12 education system can impact Michigan students as they enter postsecondary opportunities as well – the percent of Michigan’s African American high school graduates required to take at least one remedial course at Michigan’s postsecondary institutions was more than two times the percent of White graduates in 2017. Michigan students are just as bright and capable of success as their peers across the country. Michigan can do better for all of its students by putting the right systems into place now and committing to making effectiveness and equity a priority, as has been done in many other states. For example, Tennessee was performing worse than Michigan sixteen years ago on important indicators of future success, such as early reading. After years of putting into place some of the most sophisticated, improvement-focused systems in the country, especially around supporting teachers in the classroom, Tennessee is now one of the fastest improving states in the nation. It’s also seen impressive improvement for vulnerable students, in particular. For example, African American student performance in Tennessee improved by 13 points since 2003 on the national assessment in early literacy – compared to Michigan’s improvement of eight points. And for low-income students, performance in Tennessee increased by eight points over the same time period, compared to an increase of three points in Michigan. It’s not just with outcomes that Michigan is struggling. It’s also with creating quality conditions for teaching and learning. Michigan chronically underinvests in systemic supports for vulnerable students as well. Today, Michigan ranks 43rd of 47 states in the country for the funding gap between high-poverty and affluent school districts, as reported by the Education Trust’s Funding Gaps 2018 report. Students and families pay the price of this underinvestment every day, and so do teachers: teachers in Michigan’s wealthiest districts are paid about $9,700 more, on average, than teachers in Michigan’s poorest districts. Yes, this is a moment of sobering reality in our state. Yet this is also a moment of great opportunity. There is a deepening commitment among leaders across sectors to make public education in Michigan a real priority again. Michigan’s new Governor, Gretchen Whitmer, has made public education one of her top priorities, as have legislative leaders on both sides of the aisle. The Michigan Department of Education has adopted a top ten framework for its state goals for learning. Civic leaders across the state are increasingly involved in local and statewide efforts to transform their public schools into higherperforming, more vibrant centers of teaching and learning. And there is an emerging consensus among K-12 leaders and civic and business organizations, including members of a new Launch Michigan partnership, on some starting focal areas for how to move the P-12 public system forward in new ways. This is an exciting moment to imagine what public education could be in Michigan in the future: What could Michigan stakeholders and leaders create together to make Michigan a top ten education state? And what moves are needed to get there? As we collaborate with organizations across the state, it’s evident that this is a moment to think and work together to ensure we make the most of this opportunity to do right by all Michigan students. Michigan can do better for all of its students by putting the right systems into place now and committing to making effectiveness and equity a priority To move forward, it’s helpful to know where you want to head. So our organization offers a bold, data-driven vision for Michigan in 2030. In this vision, Michigan is leading the nation for teaching and learning. We will be leading in learning outcomes for every possible measure and for every group 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 5 of students. Teachers across the country will want to come to Michigan to be part of the nation’s most effective and respected teaching workforce. A career ladder will be in place that rewards great performance with leadership and other opportunities for educators, which will help attract and retain top talent to Michigan’s classrooms, not only in the most affluent schools and districts, but in all regions across the state. All students will have equitable access to high-caliber teachers and principals and professional development will be embedded as part of a thoughtful, coherent system of feedback and support that ensures every educator is growing and supported. Indeed, in our vision, Michigan public schools will be leading innovation on how to support educators to be the finest in the world. In our vision, Michigan public schools will be leading innovation on how to support educators to be the finest in the world In this future Michigan, all schools – no matter where they are located – will provide the most rigorous and enriching instruction in the country. The world will be vastly different in 2030, but Michigan schools will be at the forefront of teaching and learning. Public schools will be safe, nurturing, vibrant places where arts, athletics and other extracurricular activities are mainstays – and 21st century learning opportunities are available to all students. Michigan also will be a top ten education state for closing gaps between low-income and higher income students and between students of color and other students. There’s much to do to make this vision a reality, and we must get to work. In this 2019 State of Michigan Education report, our organization reports on Michigan’s progress toward key goals for becoming a top ten state in education. We also offer evidence-based recommendations on high-leverage areas for moving outcomes based on the lessons learned from data and states around the country. It took decades for Michigan’s education system to decline to where it is today, and it will not be transformed overnight. But in order to provide a better future for all of Michigan’s children, we must begin to take thoughtful, evidence-based steps toward excellence for all students. That is the promise of the moment. To our many partners, collaborators and the thousands of parents and teachers who work tirelessly to ensure all children are learning at high levels, we salute you. We are committed to making sure Michigan does a far better job at supporting your critical work. Executive Director The Education Trust-Midwest 6 A 2030 VISION FOR MICHIGAN STUDENTS The State of Public Education In Michigan Today While other states have made progress, Michigan has faced years of stagnation and even declined on key indicators of student learning and success. By Mary Grech, Lauren Hubbard and Amber Arellano The stakes in education are always high. For students, access to a high-quality education can lead to vastly different life outcomes; and for communities, a strong education system can serve as the engine behind thriving economic, civic and social sectors. In today’s highly competitive global economy, the stakes also are high for the future of the state of Michigan. As the Education Trust-Midwest has documented over the last five years, other states have made tremendous progress towards ensuring 21st century teaching and learning is accessible for all students by following evidence-based research and best practices in their education systems.1 While other states have made progress, Michigan has faced years of stagnation and even declined on key indicators of student learning and success. (Please see pages 8 and 10.) Mary Grech and Lauren Hubbard are data and policy analysts at the Education TrustMidwest and Amber Arellano is the executive director of the Education Trust-Midwest. Many staff members and partners contributed to the research and development of this report, including Education Trust President and CEO John B. King Jr.; senior adviser Terry Gallagher; and Education Trust-Midwest director of external relations Brian Gutman. Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 7 Trends Across Key Indicators Since the launch of the Michigan Achieves! campaign, the Education Trust-Midwest has tracked Michigan’s performance and progress towards the goal of becoming a top ten state for education opportunity and achievement, focusing on key data-driven indicators. It’s important for Michiganders to understand how the state’s students are performing compared to other states and the nation overall, especially in a globally connected and competitive world. Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which is the largest nationally representative assessment that provides for long-term comparisons of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas, can help provide this national perspective. Results from leading education states on the NAEP assessment – also commonly known as the national assessment or the Nation’s Report Card – show that it’s possible to improve education outcomes dramatically. Based on Michigan’s current trajectory, national assessment data also show the state is not on track to become a topperforming education state any time soon. In 2017, Michigan ranked 35th in fourth-grade reading and 33rd in eighthgrade math.2 Based on months of modeling and analysis, our organization found that the state is projected to rank 45th and 37th respectively on these measures in 2030 if Michigan’s current trajectory remains as it has since the early 2000s. 8 THE STATE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION IN MICHIGAN TODAY Michigan one of only thirteen states declining in early literacy Average Scale Score Change, NAEP Grade 4 – Reading – All Students (2003-2017) Florida, +10.3 Florida California Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Massachusetts Nevada New Jersey Tennessee Louisiana Rhode Island Arizona Maryland Pennsylvania Georgia Indiana Utah Kentucky Wyoming Idaho New Mexico Nation (public) Virginia Illinois Nebraska Ohio Kansas Oklahoma North Carolina Arkansas Washington Minnesota New Hampshire Colorado Missouri Vermont Texas Connecticut Oregon North Dakota New York Montana South Dakota Michigan Wisconsin Iowa South Carolina West Virginia Delaware Maine Alaska Alabama, +9.3 Massachusetts, +8.1 Tennessee, +7.0 Louisiana, +6.9 Michigan, -1.0 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 Average Scale Score Change SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 208; Proficient Scale Score = 238) 10 12 There are many other indicators, which ETM reports on annually and that can be found starting on page 45, which also signal that Michigan’s trajectory needs to change. Consider: Michigan’s Progress to Become a Top Ten Education State: Current Performance 2030 Projection Fourth Grade Reading 35th 45th Eighth Grade Math 33rd 37th Kindergarten Readiness Not Yet Available Not Yet Available College Readiness 25% enrolled in at least one remedial course 25% enrolled in at least one remedial course College and Postsecondary Enrollment 26th Not Yet Available measures the total number of AP exams administered per 1,000 11th and 12th grade students. Michigan’s 2030 projected rank for this indicator is 28th. College Attainment 31st 32nd Teacher Effectiveness Not Yet Available Not Yet Available Access to Rigorous Coursework 29th 28th College Readiness measures the School Funding Equity 43rd of 47 Not Yet Available Teacher Salary Equity $9,739 Avg. salary gap for highestand lowest-poverty districts Not Yet Available Teacher Attendance 26% of teachers frequently absent Not Yet Available Out-of-School Suspensions 45th Not Yet Available Student Attendance 24% of 8th graders frequently absent 24% of 8th graders frequently absent College Affordability 29th Not Yet Available Student Attendance measures the percent of 8th graders reporting three or more days absent in the past month as indicated on the NAEP math assessment. In 2030, Michigan is projected to have 24 percent of 8th graders reporting frequent absences. Access to Rigorous Coursework percent of Michigan students required to take at least one remedial course in college. Michigan’s projected college remediation rate is 25 percent in 2030 if Michigan’s trajectory is not improved. College Attainment measures the percent of people 25 and older with a bachelor’s degree or greater. Michigan is projected to rank 32nd in 2030 for this indicator. NOTE: More information about the Michigan Achieves! Indicators, as well as additional analyses, charts and data sources, are available starting on page 45. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 9 Trends Across Groups of Students As mentioned, Michigan has declined in rank compared to other states in fourth-grade reading performance for several major groups of students since the early 2000s. In addition to the national assessment, which is an important indicator of progress compared to other states, Michigan’s own annual state assessment system also can provide valuable information about student learning. However, because of significant changes to the state assessment system made by the Michigan Department of Education in the 2017-18 school year, our organization cannot say with certainty whether Michigan’s assessment system still provides data of this quality, like the previous years of M-STEP assessments did. This raises serious implications and questions about Michigan’s educational data quality, which are further explored on page 28. To be clear, Michigan’s assessment system could be telling us more – like how students are performing compared to their peers in other states3 and how performance in Michigan schools has changed over time. Nevertheless, we can look to the M-STEP data to examine achievement gaps between groups of students within Michigan, which is critical for ensuring equitable practices are being implemented across the state. In long-term decline, Michigan ranks low across student groups Relative National Rank, NAEP Grade 4 – Reading – All Students (2003-17) 2003 Rank 2017 Rank All Students 28th 35th Low-Income Students 35th 43rd Higher Income Students 24th 45th African American Students 38th out of 41 states 36th out of 40 states Latino Students 22nd out of 40 states 33rd out of 47 states White Students 13th 45th SOURCE: NCES, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data Explorer NOTE: Unless otherwise listed, relative ranks are out of all 50 states. For African American students and Latino students, relative ranks are among the states that reported data for that subgroup of students. 10 THE STATE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION IN MICHIGAN TODAY The state assessment data shows Michigan is still struggling to support all students, especially African American, Latino and low-income students, and that wide achievement gaps have persisted in recent years.4 (Please see page 40 for recent data.) Make no mistake: These achievement gaps can be closed. All students have the potential to achieve at high levels with access to the right opportunities and support. Leading education states are showing that this can be done. Across the nation, many states have made major progress and continue to raise achievement for historically underserved students. For example, Massachusetts – already one of the highest performing states in the nation and the world – continued to improve, and made three times as much progress as Michigan for low-income students in fourth grade reading from 2003 to 2017 on the national assessment.5 And in this same time period, both Florida and Alabama made over five times more improvement for low-income early readers than Michigan did.6 Massachusetts among top performers in world in reading PISA Mean Scores, Reading – Age 15 – All Students (2015) 600 Massachusetts, 527 International Average (OECD Countries), 493 United States, 497 500 Mean Score 400 300 200 100 SINGAPORE MASSACHUSETTS HONG KONG CANADA FINLAND IRELAND ESTONIA KOREA JAPAN NORWAY NEW ZEALAND GERMANY MACAO POLAND SLOVENIA NETHERLANDS AUSTRALIA SWEDEN NORTH CAROLINA DENMARK FRANCE BELGIUM PORTUGAL UNITED KINGDOM CHINESE TAIPEI UNITED STATES SPAIN RUSSIA B-S-J-G (CHINA) INTERNATIONAL AVERAGE (OECD) SWITZERLAND LATVIA CZECH REPUBLIC CROATIA VIETNAM AUSTRIA ITALY ICELAND LUXEMBOURG ISRAEL CABA (ARGENTINA) LITHUANIA HUNGARY GREECE CHILE SLOVAK REPUBLIC MALTA CYPRUS URUGUAY ROMANIA UNITED ARAB EMIRATES BULGARIA TURKEY COSTA RICA TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MONTENEGRO COL0MBIA MEXICO MOLDOVA PUERTO RICO THAILAND JORDAN BRAZIL ALBANIA QATAR GEORGIA PERU INDONESIA TUNISIA DOMINICAN REPUBLIC FYROM ALGERIA KOSOVO LEBANON 0 SOURCE: PISA Data Explorer, OECD (2015) NOTE: The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is administered every three years to measure math, science and reading achievement of 15-year-old students in the U.S. compared to those in other countries. In 2015, 73 countries and other economies reported PISA results, including Massachusetts, North Carolina and Puerto Rico which took PISA as their own economies. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 11 Trends Across Michigan Regions In order to fully address the scale of Michigan’s challenges, it’s important to continue to dispel the myth that Detroit alone has low performance. Although Detroit schools do perform below the statewide average, overall low performance and major gaps in achievement persist across Michigan. Proficiency rates on the M-STEP English Language Arts assessment, which is an important measure of whether students are meeting the state’s academic learning standards and grade-level expectations, are low across all regions for students in grades three through eight combined. • This includes urban school districts such as Detroit (11.5 percent), Flint (7.4 percent), Grand Rapids (25.0 percent), Kalamazoo (34.7 percent), Battle Creek (14.8 percent), Lansing (19.5 percent), Warren (39.8 percent) and Pontiac (14.3 percent). • And overall proficiency rates aren’t much higher in working-class suburban districts, such as Flat Rock (32.8 percent) and Hazel Park (16.4 percent). • Or in towns in northern Michigan, such as Traverse City (57.7 percent), Alpena (39.5 percent) and Marquette (52.2 percent).7 Schools across the state continue to underperform for Michigan’s most vulnerable student groups M-STEP Proficiency Rates by Geographic Locale, English Language Arts – Grades 3-8 – by Subgroup (2018) 100% Percent Proficient or Advanced 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 48.6% 45.4% 40% 30% 31.4% 44.4% 34.1% 33.3% 34.3% 22.5% 20% 10% 0% Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) Suburb Town n All Students Rural City n Low-Income Students SOURCE: M-STEP Results (2018), Educational Entity Master (EEM) Winter 2019 NOTE: Schools are grouped based on the geographic locale assigned to each district by the Michigan Department of Education as listed on the Educational Entity Master in Winter 2019. 12 THE STATE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION IN MICHIGAN TODAY Michigan low-income students are underserved across geographic settings as well, as shown in the chart on page 12. Improving education outcomes for students in poverty in all types of districts remains a major challenge nationwide, including in rural and large urban districts. For example, schools in rural districts face a unique set of challenges, such as educators struggling to implement collegeand career-ready standards due to a lack of opportunities for collaboration and professional development in rural areas.8 Struggles Common to Both Traditional Public and Charter Schools However, other states, like Florida, have implemented systemic improvements and policies, such as strategically designed initiatives around early literacy,9 that can support and encourage improvement across all districts, including urban districts serving large populations of students of color and low-income students. While there is still work to be done, Florida now has the three highest performing large urban districts in the nation in fourth-grade reading. (See chart on page 40.) Improving education outcomes for students in poverty in all types of districts remains a major challenge nationwide Michigan’s charter sector also struggling Statewide M-STEP Proficiency Rates, English Language Arts – Grade 3 – Low-Income Students (2018) 100% 90% Percent Proficient or Advanced Just as schools across different regions are struggling to support all students to be successful, performance challenges are seen across the different types of schools in Michigan as well, including in the state’s charter school sector. 80% 70% Statewide (Non Low-Income Students), 62.6% 60% Statewide (All Students), 44.4% 50% 40% 31.7% Statewide (Low-Income Students), 30.3% 30% 23.2% 20% 10% 0% Low-Income Students in Traditional Public School Districts (LEA Districts) Statewide Low-Income Students in Charter School Districts (PSA Districts) Statewide SOURCE: M-STEP Results (2018), Educational Entity Master (EEM) Spring 2018 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 13 Michigan Parents: Make Education Top Priority Common Ground Found Across Race, Geography, Income Levels, Gender and Political Affiliation, According to Statewide Poll Results “Parents’ voices are critically important in the conversation about how to improve our state’s public schools,” said Amber Arellano, executive director at The Education Trust-Midwest, a nonpartisan research, policy, technical assistance and advocacy organization based in metropolitan Detroit. “As a parent of a young school-age child, there’s nothing more important to me than my daughter’s wellbeing and future. We commissioned this major survey to better understand how parents – essential stakeholders in public education – think about the issues impacting their children.” The results are telling. Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) No matter where they live, their race or political affiliation or how much their family earns, Michigan parents want a high-quality education for their children – and generally agree on what changes are needed to improve Michigan’s public schools. A majority of parents support effective teachers, greater investment in schools – and greater investment in vulnerable students, in particular – and more transparency and data-driven accountability in the state, transcending perceived divides across race, income levels, gender and political affiliation. Yet the views of Michigan parents – and the views of parents of color – are rarely a focal point of the state’s education conversation. These are among the findings of a recent poll of Michigan parents conducted by EPIC-MRA and The Education Trust-Midwest. The survey entailed phone interviews with 600 parents in Michigan with one or more children age 18 or younger. The margin of error was +/- 4 percent. 14 MICHIGAN PARENTS: MAKE EDUCATION TOP PRIORITY Quality Education is the Top Concern Unlike polls of the general electorate, which often cast education low on the list of priorities, Michigan parents list “improving the quality of education” as their top priority, according to the poll. Education tops fixing the state’s infrastructure, improving the economy and improving healthcare. Indeed, quality education is the top priority for parents in every region of the state, shared by Democrats, independents and Republicans, among parents of all income levels, races and genders. Parents support both transparent accountability and equitable school funding Unlike the often polarized education debate of Lansing, parents of diverse backgrounds share much in common about their core values and priorities for improving Michigan’s public schools. Transcending racial and political divides, Michigan parents say they want greater transparency, public reporting, accountability for school performance and greater investment in vulnerable students, the poll finds. KEY FINDINGS INCLUDE: • Strong majority supports greater transparency and accountability for school performance: Eighty-four percent of all parents agreed that Michigan public schools should be held accountable through “an A through F grading system” based on performance and student improvement, “so parents have a clear understanding of how their school is doing.” • African American parents, in particular, support accountability and public reporting: An A-F grading system enjoys the most support of Black parents (93 percent), Republicans (90 percent) and non-Black parents of color (88 percent). In late 2018, Michigan passed an A-F accountability system for Michigan schools. students simply need more resources to have access to equal opportunity. Governor Whitmer’s fiscal year 2020 budget proposal moves school funding in this direction by significantly increasing funds for vulnerable students. Parents: effective teachers matter Michigan parents also clearly understand the importance of effective teachers and high-quality instruction – and they are united in just how important those are for improving the quality of education: • 94 percent of all parents think that effective teachers and high-quality instruction is important; 77 percent of all parents say it is absolutely essential. • Broad, diverse support for greater investment in vulnerable students: Nearly two-thirds of all parents would support a “proposal to provide more state and local funding than average for school districts that serve students with the greatest need, including high rates of low-income and minority students.” Such a proposal is widely supported by parents of every race, in all parts of the state and across family income levels. • Educator effectiveness and instructional quality is identified as very important or absolutely essential by more than 90 percent of parents of color and White parents. • Majority of both Black and White parents support more investment for low-income and minority students: The poll found the strongest support for more investment in vulnerable students among Black parents (92 percent) and Democrats (84 percent), and garners the support of a plurality of White parents, and parents who politically identify as independent and Republican. And unlike political discourse on the topic, the vast majority of parents support using data on student learning as a significant factor in evaluating teacher performance. Three quarters of all parents think that data on student learning should be “one of several factors,” “a major factor” or “the only factor” in evaluating teachers. This includes: The polling finds strong support for policies that invest more in vulnerable students’ public education, similar to recent proposals from Governor Gretchen Whitmer. The past few decades have seen funding for Michigan schools grow increasingly equal, with all public schools now receiving a similar amount of funding. While making school funding more equal by increasing funding for poorer districts does enjoy broad support, parents also understand that some • This issue has great bipartisan appeal: 95 percent of Democrats and independents, and 94 percent of Republicans consider effective teachers and high-quality instruction very important or absolutely essential. • 61 percent of respondents who are members of a labor union; • 77 percent of White parents and 74 percent of Black parents; • 78 percent of Republican parents, 79 percent of independent parents and 74 percent of Democrat parents; and • Support across every region of the state, with the strongest support in Northern Michigan (83 percent) and the least support in the Bay area region (67 percent). 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 15 Parkview Elementary Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) The Road to Top Ten for All The road to becoming a top ten state for all groups of students – and the best state in the country for closing gaps for vulnerable students – begins with becoming a top state for educational improvement and effectiveness. Leading states demonstrate the impact that evidence-based practices can have on raising student outcomes. As Michigan leaders across sectors look for areas to improve student learning, we provide recommendations rooted in best practice, as well as baseline data and reporting, on five high-leverage focal areas: 1 Early Childhood to Third Grade 2 Equitable Funding 3 Systems of Data, Transparency and Accountability 4 Top Talent: Effective Educators and School Leaders 5 Transition to College and Postsecondary Opportunities 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 17 Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) 1 Early Childhood to Third Grade Research clearly demonstrates the impact that high-quality learning experiences in the early years can have on students’ success in the long term. When children read well by third grade, they are dramatically more likely to succeed – they’re more likely to graduate from high school10 and therefore more likely to participate in the job market, earn higher wages and remain outside the criminal justice system.11 This is especially true for students from families with lower income levels.12 IN MICHIGAN TODAY: Since the Michigan Achieves! campaign began, we’ve been energized by the broad consensus that’s developed around starting the state’s educational comeback with a focus on improving third-grade learning outcomes, including recent investments in preschool to third-grade reading. For example, in 2013, Governor Snyder expanded investment in the Great Start 18 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL Readiness Program (GSRP) – a statewide preschool initiative for low-income four-yearolds. This was a critical investment because when low-income children are given access to both well-resourced early childhood and K-12 systems, they are more likely to see long-term academic benefits.13 In 2017-18, Michigan ranked 18th for access to preschool for fouryear-olds,14 and spent $243,600,000 in 2018-19 to fund just over 32,000 GSRP slots.15 Also, over the last four fiscal years, Michigan has allocated over $120 million aimed at directly improving third-grade reading outcomes.16 This investment has been used for additional instructional time, early literacy coaches and literacy assessment tools – all strategies meant to support the implementation of Michigan’s Read By Grade Three law.17 Passed in 2016, Michigan’s Read By Grade Three Law requires that students are reading at or near grade level in order to be promoted to the fourth grade, beginning in the 201920 school year.18 (For more details on this law, visit edtru.st/MichTGR.) On the upside, Michigan’s Read By Grade Three law has created urgency and focus among educators, parents and community members around an area of critical need. The law also includes important requirements for early identification and support for struggling readers, clear communication with parents about their children’s reading skills and professional support for educators.19 However, on the downside, the design of this law places accountability on young students, rather than on our state’s education system and leadership. If tens of thousands of young Michigan students are unable to read and struggle to keep up with their peers around the country, then it’s Michigan’s education system that is failing and needs to make major improvements. Michigan’s students are just as bright and capable as the children in leading education states – and all of them can become strong readers by third grade with effective instruction and supports. Yet, thus far, Michigan has struggled to implement effective, evidence-based practices for improving early literacy, including a lack of feedback and support for educators in research-based early literacy instruction. As we discuss in the Education Trust-Midwest’s 2018 State of Michigan Education Report, Top Ten for Education: Not By Chance, in many ways Michigan has left literacy improvement and how dollars are spent up to chance instead of providing meaningful guidance and leveraging innovative delivery systems.20 To see the results that students deserve and state leaders have promised, further efforts to improve third-grade outcomes must be more effective, strategic and evidence-based. “Access to high-quality early education and care is the optimal path forward for all children, regardless of their zip code, to reach their full potential and thrive.“ Holly A. Johnson President, The Frey Foundation 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 19 WHAT’S NEEDED NOW TO BECOME TOP TEN: Increased Transparency and Accountability for Effective Implementation • Collect, analyze and report meaningful data on early childhood and early literacy investments, including measures of program quality, impact on student learning and how dollars are being spent. • Hold schools and districts accountable for improving early literacy achievement, including through the state’s accountability system. Evidence-based Strategic Investments • Invest in performance-based grants for districts and proven providers, with a priority on serving low-income students, and evidence-based pilot programs that can be evaluated to best improve early literacy strategies before scaling them. Better Support for Educators • Provide all Michigan teachers and principals with high-impact professional development opportunities that are focused on the nation’s most up-to-date practices in reading instruction, aligned with state standards, and based on the content and delivery mechanisms used by organizations and programs with demonstrated track records of improving student outcomes. • Implement a high-quality, data-driven statewide system of educator feedback, evaluation and support, and leverage it to drive continuous improvement in the quality of literacy instruction statewide. 20 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL / Early Childhood to Third Grade Better Support for Students • Require universal screening and supports for characteristics of dyslexia and other barriers in all schools and districts, like in Tennessee.21 Ensure results are reported in a timely manner to districts, educators and families, and that identified students receive dyslexia-specific supports and further assessment as appropriate. Provide training and support to educators on how to support identified students, including dyslexia-specific intervention strategies and effective reading instruction techniques. • Ensure that students who are behind in reading have access to additional instructional time during the school year and through the summer from well-trained, effective teachers. Equitable Access to High-Quality Early Childhood Opportunities • Prioritize quality alignment between the early-childhood sectors and K-12, including academic standards, curricula, data, educator training and instruction. For example, develop a statewide common data system that encourages communication between early childhood programs and K-12 districts about a child’s learning and development and provides educators with the information they need to support students academically and developmentally during their transition to elementary school. • Implement a high-quality, common statewide assessment of kindergarten readiness that evaluates how well students are being prepared for kindergarten and identifies students in need of additional academic and developmental support early on. Consistent and comparable data from a common kindergarten-readiness assessment that can be disaggregated by subgroup, as well as a robust quality rating and improvement system (QRIS), would provide vital information about the impact of early childhood programs and their effectiveness. This information could be shared with child-care providers to inform improvement strategies and be communicated to parents and families choosing where to enroll their students. • Evaluate state-funded early childhood programs for their impact on student development and alignment with K-12 learning standards. Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) “We have to see the fate of our own child as bound up with the fate of other people’s children.“ John B. King, Jr., President & CEO, The Education Trust, Former U.S. Secretary of Education 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 21 2 Equitable Funding All students need and deserve an education system that invests in their success. Inequities in funding contribute to major gaps in learning opportunities for students from different districts and backgrounds. State and local funding allocations can have major impacts on the learning conditions in each district, such as the availability of student support and extracurricular activities, the amount of instructional time, the quality of instructional materials, the level of professional support and compensation teachers receive, and much more. (For more information on the allocation and use of resources, please see page 23.) IN MICHIGAN TODAY: According to a recent analysis by the Education Trust, Michigan ranks 43rd of 47 states nationally for funding gaps that negatively impact low-income students.22 Michigan’s lowest poverty districts receive 5 percent, or $567, more per pupil in state and local funding, on average, than its highest poverty districts.23 (For more information see page 52.) Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) 22 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL Certainly, this issue has begun to get attention from civic, business and education leaders: - In 2016, former Governor Rick Snyder began increasing investments in at-risk students after a decade of flat funding, including an increase of $120 million to support the education of low-income students in the 2017-18 fiscal year.24 - Over the past two years, reports on Michigan’s school funding have been released, including the Michigan School Finance Research Collaborative report in 201825 and Michigan School Finance at the Crossroads: A Quarter Century of State Control from Michigan State University in 2019.26 - In her first executive budget proposal, Governor Gretchen Whitmer focused on funding schools and districts based on the needs of their students. More specifically, she proposed an increase in the foundation allowance, which translates to a per pupil increase of varying sizes to districts across the state,27 and expanding resources for students with the greatest need by increasing funding for at-risk students and students with disabilities.28 • Provide schools and districts with sufficient funds to meet the additional learning needs of students from lowincome families, students with disabilities and students from other vulnerable student groups. • Build public understanding of the need for investment in systemic improvements and equity in Michigan through crosssector collaboration and leadership by business, civic and education leaders. • Increase compensation and improve conditions and support for teachers who work in the highest-needs districts, including addressing the gap between average teacher salary in higher-income and lower-income districts. (See chart on page 53.) School Funding Instructional Time & Attention Early Intervention Empowering, Rigorous Content & Inclusive erse S c h Div oo ls • Revamp Michigan’s funding formula to systemically prioritize equitable funding to address the funding gap between its highest poverty and lowest poverty districts so that all schools and districts can meet the needs of their students. Dimensions of Resource Equity g-Ready Facil rnin itie a e s L WHAT’S NEEDED NOW TO BECOME TOP TEN: Early Learning Whole Child Approach Teaching Quality Family Academic Engagement y l it Sc ua hoo Q l Leadership SOURCE: The Alliance for Resource Equity; Education Resource Strategies and the Education Trust (December 2018) NOTE: Resource equity is the allocation and use of resources (people, time and money) to create student experiences that enable all children – especially those who have been traditionally underserved by our systems – to reach empowering, rigorous learning outcomes. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 23 Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) 3 Systems of Data, Transparency and Accountability Research from across the nation shows that states with strong accountability systems often also see the largest progress for academic achievement,29 including for historically underserved groups such as African American, Latino and low-income students. Certainly leading states, such as Massachusetts, demonstrate how essential such systems are for serving as a foundation for strong and effective improvement efforts. Accountability is, at its core, about systematically improving schools’ effectiveness for all students. A well-designed, equitable accountability system sends the signal that all students matter – and that all students can perform at high levels with the right supports and systems in place. High-quality accountability systems use several tools (standards, assessments, goals, indicators, ratings, public reporting systems and actions) to communicate whether schools are meeting clear expectations around raising academic achievement – both for students overall, and for each group of students they serve. They celebrate schools that are meeting or exceeding expectations, and prompt evidence-based action in those that are not. They also direct additional resources and supports to struggling districts and schools to help them improve. These systems should provide clear guidance, transparency and supports for each actor in the education system – including schools, districts, intermediate school districts, charter management 24 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL organizations and charter authorizers, and educators – that is appropriate to their respective roles and responsibilities in the system. To be clear, accountability alone doesn’t bring about improvement – schools and educators do. But without strong accountability systems, districts, schools and educators have no meaningful signal or expectation for targeting improvement and growth. IN MICHIGAN TODAY: In Michigan, where academic outcomes are far behind other states, goals and systems that will transform the state’s academic trajectory must be put in place to ensure every student has the opportunity to succeed. Michigan has struggled for years to implement honest and consistent data systems that measure progress and provide transparent feedback aligned with state standards to practitioners and stakeholders. The latest case in point: recent changes to a core component of the state’s accountability system – the state assessment. (Please see page 28 for more information on the impact of assessment churn on Michigan students, educators and stakeholders.) Michigan also has struggled to implement high-quality accountability systems that set the bar high, provide practitioners with guidance and support for implementing effective and equity-focused improvement strategies, provide transparency to stakeholders and hold major actors in the P-12 system – from schools and districts, to teachers and principals, to school authorizers and intermediate school districts and others – accountable for their role in these efforts. Though Michigan leaders have made recent strategic investments to improve student outcomes, state leaders have struggled to build systems of transparency and improvement around these investments – and this has been a major barrier to improvement. Without these systems and data in place, it is difficult to ensure that funding is used for high-impact, evidencebased strategies, communicate what strong performance looks like to all actors and stakeholders, inform continuous improvement and recalibrate when strategies are not working. Overall, there is a major need for more effective, thoughtful accountability and coherent data systems in Michigan education. Michigan needs improved systems around specific initiatives and grant programs, such as Michigan’s early literacy investments, and around educator effectiveness. For more details on Michigan’s challenges and opportunities to improve systems of transparency and improvement in these areas, see: • page 20 about collecting data on early literacy efforts; and • pages 31-34 for more on Michigan’s struggle to fully implement a high-caliber, evidence-based educator feedback, evaluation, and support system and ETM’s recommendations. Michigan also needs a high-quality, thoughtful and useful state accountability system for school performance – and leaders have a new opportunity now for Michigan to implement such a system. In December 2018, Michigan 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 25 adopted legislation requiring the development of a statewide school accountability system that assigns A-F letter grades and descriptive ratings based on a school’s performance on several indicators. (For more information on the details of this law, visit edtru.st/MichA-F.) Before that law, Public Act 601 of 2018, was passed, Michigan developed a state accountability system which was approved in November 2017 by the U.S. Department of Education as compliant with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).30 We are proud to have led a coalition of diverse advocates from across sectors and regions in Michigan who worked together to provide equity-centered and meaningful input on the drafting of Michigan’s Every Student Succeeds Plan. As the Michigan Department of Education works to implement Michigan’s new school accountability law, the department can leverage the state’s approved ESSA plan to inform its work, including carrying over the strengths from the 0-100 index system and identifying – and acting on – opportunities to improve it. For example, Michigan’s way of calculating school performance on each indicator in Michigan’s ESSA plan shines a light on large gaps in achievement within schools, rather than hiding these disparities behind average results – and is something the MDE will have the ability to replicate when implementing the A-F system. To improve the state’s accountability system as the MDE implements the new school accountability law, honest data, transparency and accountability can be put in place for all actors and the MDE can ensure that the goals that are set are consistent with the state’s overarching goal of becoming a top ten education state for every group of students. 26 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL / Systems of Data, Transparency and Accountability Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) WHAT’S NEEDED NOW TO BECOME TOP TEN: Honest, Aligned Data System Comparable to Other States • Stop further efforts to modify or drop the M-STEP assessments, and instead, return to administering the version of the assessment which was fully aligned, independently reviewed, provided data comparable to results in many other states and included rigorous, independentlyreviewed performance tasks. • Provide all educators with the full suite of professional supports, including aligned interim assessments and a digital library of instructional resources. Thoughtful Standards Implementation and Goal Setting • Effectively implement Michigan’s rigorous college- and career-ready standards – and provide educators with more support in doing so. For example, use proven providers from leading states, implement a “train-the-trainer” model,31 and empower master teachers to be the trainers of their colleagues around standards implementation – especially in K-3 literacy instruction. Additionally, provide similar training and ongoing, aligned support to principals to support them in becoming instructional leaders on the Michigan standards. • Use evidence-based practices to drive improvements in student outcomes, such as implementing standards and curriculum with fidelity starting at the local level, generating evidence of effectiveness and then taking effective solutions to scale.32 Louisiana’s curriculum initiative could inform a successful, statewide model for financially incentivizing districts to adopt high-quality curricula in Michigan.33 Local efforts, including the focus on professional development for educators that played a major role in the adoption and implementation of new curricula in Detroit Public Schools Community School District in the 2018-19 school year,34 could be studied and inform state decisionmaking as well. Quality Accountability System As state leaders begin implementing the new state accountability system,35 we recommend: • Taking measures to ensure clear communication about school performance to parents and families. • Putting honest data, transparency and accountability in place for all actors. • Continuing to equally weight the performance of each group of students, including the “all students” group, in Michigan’s school ratings calculations. • Setting interim goals that are milestones along the route to becoming a top ten education state. The purpose of setting goals is to communicate clear expectations for – and build urgency around – the improvements necessary to put all children on a trajectory to be ready for college and career. If Michigan’s goal is to become a top ten education state, the state’s new goals must reflect this, unlike the goals Michigan set under ESSA which call for less achievement in reading and math than a majority of other states, according to a study by Achieve, Inc.36 In turn, Michigan’s goal for math under ESSA only aims to have fewer than half of students proficient by 2025.37 We must have higher aspirations. Accountability for Other Actors • Hold all actors – including schools, districts, intermediate school districts, charter management organizations and charter authorizers, and educators – accountable through accountability systems that provide clear guidance, transparency and supports for each actor that is appropriate to their respective roles and responsibilities in the system. • Given the critical role of charter school authorizers in Michigan, develop policies to ensure that Michigan charter authorizers are dramatically higher performing, that low-performing authorizers are held accountable for 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 27 their performance and that the nation’s best operators are attracted to serve the state’s neediest students. Currently, Michigan’s charter schools are struggling to fully support students from low-income families in critical areas like early literacy, as shown in the chart on page 13. (Please see ETM’s Accountability for All reports for more details and recommendations on this topic.38) Inconsistent data quality leads to murky understandings of progress Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) For Michigan to accelerate its improvement journey, it is critical to track progress over time and in comparison to other states. Due to changes made by the Michigan Department of Education to the statewide assessment system, it’s unclear whether Michigan now has a coherent, reliable data system aligned to Michigan’s standards of teaching and learning. Recent changes to the M-STEP assessment, in particular, reduced confidence in the state’s reporting about education performance, created more churn for educators working to adapt to the rigor of the new standards and assessments, 28 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL / Systems of Data, Transparency and Accountability and reversed progress towards one of the state’s boldest moves towards education progress and equity in decades. The M-STEP assessment, which was first administered in the 2014-15 school year, was a major step forward in the implementation of Michigan’s college-and career-ready standards.39 We are proud to have been one of the 140 organizations and school districts across the state that collaborated to support the implementation of these high academic standards and the aligned assessment system (the M-STEP) alongside K-12, business and other organizations across the state. This decision-making has had serious implications for Michigan students and stakeholders – educators have had to do their best to prepare students to meet a moving target and stakeholders have been left with limited information about student and school performance. For instance, Michiganders can no longer compare the state’s annual performance in key subjects with the performance in other states,40 which could obscure concerning declines as well as opportunities to celebrate progress. This information was possible as recently as 2016-17 when Michigan students took a version of the M-STEP assessment that was known to be comparable to assessments in other states in the same assessment consortium.41 When this comparable data was available, ETM was able to conduct a historic analysis comparing Michigan students’ performance to the performance of their peers around the nation. The analysis shows that Michigan not only declined in third-grade reading, but declined more than other states in the same assessment consortium in the first three years after adopting the new nationally benchmarked and standards-aligned assessment. Percent Proficiency Change, SBAC Grade 3 – English Language Arts – All Students (2014-15 to 2016-17) 7% 5% 3% 1% -1% -3% -5% MI DE VT CT ID WV OR SD WA HI -7% CA Yet instead of continuing this positive momentum and supporting implementation – for example, by making high-caliber tools to support educators, including aligned interim assessments and a digital library of instruction resources, available to all Michigan educators – the Michigan Department of Education has backed away from implementing the M-STEP assessment with consistency and rigor. Michigan shows negative improvement for early reading on state assessment Percent Proficiency Change When the M-STEP was first administered in the 2014-15 school year, the results provided the first truly honest picture of student performance in decades. It was also the first time in Michigan’s history that the state assessment results could be compared to results in other states. SOURCE: Individual state score releases for 2014-2015 and 2016-2017 NOTE: This analysis compares data from the 2014-15 school year because it was the first year the M-STEP was administered and the 2016-17 school year because that is the most recent year of state assessment data the Education Trust-Midwest felt confident in comparing across years and with other states participating in the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. We were unable to update this analysis because it is no longer clear that Michigan’s results are comparable to the assessment results of other states in the same assessment consortium. At this time, our organization is no longer able to update this analysis with certainty – it’s still unclear if the 2018 M-STEP data can actually be compared to results of prior years or in other states because of the significant changes made to the M-STEP by the Michigan Department of Education. Improvement starts with being honest. Michigan families and educators deserve honest information about how well their public schools are performing, including compared to prior years and peers in other states. Going forward Michigan must be consistent and transparent in its data system. (See pages 26-27 for ETM’s recommendations on ensuring high-quality, comparable state assessments moving forward.) 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 29 4 Top Talent: Effective Educators and School Leaders Decades of research demonstrates that the number one in-school factor for student learning is quality teaching.42 Research also shows that our country’s most vulnerable students often don’t have the same access to quality educators as other students.43 Furthermore, research confirms that teaching and learning improve when teachers get highquality feedback and support.44 Honest and courageous conversations on instructional practices are the stimulus for instructional improvement and they signal to educators, principals and school leaders the importance of improving their practice. IN MICHIGAN TODAY: Overall, Michigan has floundered when it comes to supporting educators, in turn leaving students across the state without access to the effective classroom instruction they need for success. Michigan’s lack of supports for educators has led to concerning trends around attracting, retaining and developing effective educators. Data show that these trends are more likely to impact Michigan’s most vulnerable students, including students of color and low-income students: Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) 30 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL • Teachers in Michigan schools with the highest percentage of low-income students earn $9,739 less, on average, than teachers in the wealthiest schools. (For more information view page 53.) • Nationwide and in Michigan, there are teacher shortages in particular geographic areas, most typically in schools that serve the most disadvantaged students, as well as in hard-to-staff subject areas, such as mathematics and special education.49 For example, Detroit Public Schools Community District has long struggled with teacher vacancies50 and research shows schools in rural districts also face staffing challenges.51 There is a major need around improving educator attraction, retention and effectiveness in Michigan, especially in highneeds schools – and the state’s current model of professional development and professional advancement is not meeting this need. Gaps in Access to Experienced Teachers Between Schools Serving the Most and Fewest Low-Income Students 40% 35% 35.0% 30% 25% All Schools, 26.8% 21.7% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Schools with most Low-Income Students Schools with fewest Low-Income Students Between Schools Serving the Most and Fewest Students of Color Percent of Inexperienced Teachers • High rates of teacher turnover, which research shows has a negative effect on student achievement in math and English language arts,46 disproportionately impact vulnerable students in our state.47 The Michigan Department of Education also reported that urban schools have higher teacher turnover rates than other locales and that charter schools have higher rates than traditional public schools in Michigan.48 Low-income students and students of color more likely to have inexperienced teachers Percent of Inexperienced Teachers • Students of color and low-income students are more likely to have inexperienced teachers.45 40% 35% 34.5% 30% All Schools, 26.8% 25.3% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Schools with most Students of Color Schools with fewest Students of Color SOURCE: Michigan’s Plan to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Teachers (2015) college- and career-ready academic standards in 2010, the state left training and implementation efforts completely up to schools and districts, leaving many educators unsupported in preparing students to meet new and more rigorous learning expectations.52 Similarly, due to the state’s weak implementation of a statewide educator feedback, support and evaluation system, many Michigan educators are left without the meaningful feedback they need to improve instruction and advance professionally. Efforts have been made to address Michigan’s long-time lack of a common vision or definition for effective teaching and to develop an aligned statewide system of individualized professional development, including in 2011 when Michigan has a long history of failing to provide its educators with the proper training for new expectations. For example, when the Michigan State Board of Education adopted 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 31 Michigan adopted new laws around tenure and evaluation. Prior to 2011, educators did not have to demonstrate effectiveness through evaluations before being granted tenure – the system was traditionally seniority-based. The formation of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) – a council of state-appointed education experts chaired by Dr. Deborah Loewenberg Ball – was also part of these efforts in 2011. The MCEE was charged with developing a statewide educator evaluation system, including a statewide vision and definition for effective teaching. “You have to take the profession of teaching seriously… the most important people having an impact on children every day…are the teachers in the classroom. That’s the epicenter of reform – the classroom.“ Dr. Nikolai Vitti, Superintendent, Detroit Public Schools Community District Some of the MCEE’s recommendations53 were adopted when the Michigan legislature established a new framework for educator evaluations and feedback in 2015.54 The enacted framework leverages multiple measures to evaluate and provide feedback on an educator’s performance – including a measure of student growth that is aligned to state standards and the same for all educators across the state. Additionally, the Michigan Department of Education is required to publish a list of research-based evaluation tools to be readily accessible to districts and require training on the use of these tools. 32 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL / Top Talent Effective Educators and School Leaders Despite these efforts to better support educators in Michigan, weak implementation has obstructed the potential impact of this proposed system in Michigan. Principals often lack the training and support to provide strong observational evaluations and feedback, and teachers often find professional development and supports disconnected from their individual needs. Moreover, the MDE has not fully leveraged the system to develop teacher leadership pathways and empower effective educators to share their expertise in support of their peers, despite research indicating that teachers find feedback from peers, coaches or mentors especially helpful for improving their instructional practice.55 While Michigan has struggled, other states have leveraged their statewide educator evaluation systems to create systems of support, align professional development opportunities and identify equity trends across the state. For example, Tennessee – one of the fastest improving states in the country – leveraged multiple coordinated strategies when implementing statewide plans to improve instruction, including leveraging highly effective master teachers as instructional coaches for their colleagues through a trainthe-trainer model.56 While this professional development delivery system was initially developed in Tennessee to support standards implementation, it is now being leveraged to improve instruction in specific areas as well, such as in early literacy.57 At the crux of Tennessee’s system is a data-driven educator feedback, support and evaluation system for educators and school leaders. This data is leveraged to identify highly-effective educators to become trainers for their peers and to tailor professional development focus areas to the individual needs of each educator. Tennessee’s system has elevated the teaching profession by improving the system of supports for educators and providing opportunities for leadership and professional advancement for teachers, leading to improved statewide teacher satisfaction rates. In 2018, 72 percent of Tennessee teachers reported that the evaluation process improves their practice and 87 percent of teachers reported being generally satisfied with being a teacher in their school.58 Tennessee’s model is being piloted locally in Michigan through the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Grand Rapids and is demonstrating promising results. Michigan must approach educator effectiveness with a committed, coordinated and researchbased system for quality professional development and continuous improvement, which is a trademark of many top states. By failing to leverage the state’s educator evaluation system to improve teaching and learning statewide and develop professional advancement pathways for effective educators, the state is missing out on a powerful lever for change. WHAT’S NEEDED NOW TO BECOME TOP TEN: Fully implement a high-quality statewide feedback, support and evaluation system based on leading state models, including: • Establishing a common definition for effective teaching. • Building upon work started by the Michigan Council on Educator Effectiveness, including by providing guidance and investment for districts and proven providers to lead evidencebased capacity-building for educators. • Investing in evidence-based, capacitybuilding for districts to ensure delivery of effective annual evaluations for all educators that leverage high-quality, sophisticated common student growth data from the standards-aligned state assessment and provide meaningful, individualized feedback and support connected to each educators’ professional development. Leverage this type of quality statewide educator feedback, support and evaluation system to: • Align educators’ evaluations with their professional development, training and learning opportunities. • More effectively support early-career and struggling teachers. • Identify Michigan’s top educators – those who have received three consecutive highly-effective evaluation ratings and have the proven ability to mentor and train fellow teachers – and offer them master teacher roles with increased compensation as a part of a system of performance-based professional advancement pathways. • Shift to a job-embedded model of professional development, so that professional learning and time to collaborate are built in to each educator’s work day and school context. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 33 “The ladder from poverty to the middle class and beyond has always been a great education... Solving the education challenge for the 21st Century will require new and different approaches from the past – the challenges are different, the pace of change continues to accelerate and many of the foundational building blocks that society used to rely upon are not as robust as they once were ... This is the challenge of our time.“ Sandy K. Baruah, President and CEO, Detroit Regional Chamber Further improve educators’ instructional effectiveness by: • Supporting efforts to help teachers and administrators analyze the quality of classroom assignments,59 identifying and correcting problems along the way, including gaps in quality and rigor between low- and high-poverty schools. • Convening a group of national and local experts and educators to provide guidance on high quality, content-rich and aligned curriculum materials and resources,60 as described in ETM’s recommendation on page 27. Resources should be aligned to the state’s college- and career-ready standards. 34 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL / Top Talent Effective Educators and School Leaders Further support the development of a system of performance-based professional advancement pathways by: • Publishing guidance and providing technical assistance and compensation to support distributed leadership models, as well as lifting up successful districts, schools and programs. “There is no greater opportunity available to improve learning and outcomes for our children than to encourage and methodically prepare educator talent and leadership. Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) Address gaps in access to highly effective educators by: • Making the gaps more visible by leveraging data, setting clear improvement expectations, targeting resources to the districts and schools struggling most, supporting and connecting district leaders, and recognizing the importance of strong teaching and teacher leadership.61 “These types of efforts can benefit children at any age, along with both their families and the educators . . .Ed TrustMidwest through its Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning has demonstrated the impact comprehensive educator preparation can make on teachers and administrators, but ultimately on children and their families.“ Julie Ridenour, President, Steelcase Foundation • Ensuring equitable access to strong educators through incentives, such as increasing compensation for teachers in high-need schools and/or subjects;62 for new teachers with relevant prior nonteaching experience; and for Michigan educators’ full years of experience when they move to another district.63 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 35 Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) 5 Transition to College and Postsecondary Opportunities With almost two-thirds of jobs in the United States requiring some form of postsecondary training by 2020,64 helping our students move from high school to postsecondary education will be key to supporting their social and economic mobility in the 21st century. Moreover, attaining a postsecondary degree is correlated with higher wages and lower unemployment rates.65 Research also shows that having access to rigorous coursework and high-quality instruction in high school is one of the best predictors of postsecondary success.66 Students who participate in high-quality career and technical, Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate and/or dual enrollment courses can explore potential career paths and begin to earn credits toward a college degree or certificate while still in high school. 36 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL IN MICHIGAN TODAY: In Michigan high schools, the rate of students taking Advanced Placement (AP) exams – which provide students with access to college-level work and the opportunity to earn college credit while still in high school – was nearly 30 percent below the national rate in 2018, with only 401 exams administered for every thousand 11th and 12th grade students. Furthermore, of the AP exams administered in the state, only 4.6 percent and 5.9 percent were taken by African American and Hispanic students, respectively.67 The case is different in Florida, a state that has put equitable systems in place to ensure their students not only have access to rigorous coursework, but that they are also receiving college credit while still in high school. Florida is now among the top states for access to AP exams – with 702 AP exams administered for every thousand 11th and 12th students in 2018 – and AP exam performance – ranking in the top five states for high school graduates scoring a 3 or higher.68 To ensure Advanced Placement teachers have high-quality professional development and schools have the proper materials, Florida joined with the College Board to expand programs in high-needs schools.69 Florida also includes the percentage of students who pass AP exams and other rigorous coursework as part of the state’s accountability system to signal the importance of increasing both the access and quality of these programs.70 Furthermore, the state provides financial incentives to teachers, schools and districts when their students receive a passing grade on an AP exam, with targeted incentives for teachers in low-performing schools who help a student earn college credit.71 Michigan struggles to fully prepare all students who graduate high school to meet the rigor of college coursework. Only about four in five of Michigan students graduate high school within four years,72 and of those who choose to advance on to some sort of postsecondary training, many are under-prepared. In 2017, a quarter of Michigan’s graduating students enrolled in at least one remedial course upon entering a community college or four-year institution.73 These numbers are even more troubling for students of color and low-income students – 47 percent of African American students, 36.3 percent of Latino students and 38.6 percent of low-income students enrolled in at least one remedial course.74 Enrolling in these courses often makes it more expensive to attend college and increases the amount of time it takes to earn a postsecondary degree. In addition to academic challenges when transitioning to postsecondary education, many Michigan students face financial obstacles as well. A recent study found that, a low-income Michigan student at one of Michigan’s four-year public institutions who is living on campus, receiving financial aid and earning summer wages will still fall, on average, $1,659 short of being able to afford the full cost of enrollment.75 Another challenge in Michigan is that African American students are under-enrolled – and underrepresented among degree earners – at two- and four-year public institutions in comparison to the state’s share of African American residents, according to a recent report by the Education Trust. To match state demographics, Michigan would need to more than double the percentage of African American students earning a bachelor’s degree.76 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 37 Also, there are gaps between African American and White student enrollment at Michigan’s selective public four-year institutions.77 For instance, only 20 percent of Michigan’s African American undergraduates attending four-year public institutions are enrolled at one of the state’s selective institutions, compared to 30.1 percent of their White counterparts.78 Efforts are being made to address the state’s challenges around ensuring all students are prepared for a successful transition from high school to postsecondary education: in early 2019, Governor Gretchen Whitmer announced a goal of having 60 percent of Michigan adults with a postsecondary credential by 2030. To support reaching this goal, Whitmer proposed two initiatives: Michigan Reconnect and MI Opportunity. If implemented, Michigan Reconnect would make in-demand technical certificates and associates degrees tuition-free for people aged 25 or older who have graduated high school or earned their GED.79 And MI Opportunity would provide all graduating high school students two years of tuition-free community college or assistance to those who are in financial need and are on a path to attain a bachelor’s degree.80 When creating these programs, Michigan has looked to Tennessee, which has similar programs – Tennessee Promise and Tennessee Reconnect – that aim to improve accessibility and affordability of higher education. While there are many admirable aspects of the Tennessee programs, one concern is that they are “last dollar,” which means that the funds participants receive can only go to cover the remaining cost of tuition and fees after other grants have been applied, and not towards the other costs associated with being a student like books, housing and transportation.81 Therefore, low-income students attending community colleges typically do not benefit financially from the programs, since they are already receiving other grant aid, such as Pell Grants, that cover the cost of tuition and fees.82 In order to address this concern in Tennessee, Nashville Grad was created to assist students enrolled in the programs pay for non-tuition expenses.83 As Michigan works to fine-tune the details of its college affordability plans, we recommend state policymakers design Michigan’s programs to fully serve low-income students, including by covering the full cost of attending postsecondary programs for lowincome students. WHAT’S NEEDED NOW TO BECOME TOP TEN: In addition to learning from Tennessee’s lessons in higher education access, we also recommend that Michigan: • Remove barriers to enrollment in rigorous courses in K-12 schools, while implementing systems that identify, encourage and support students from diverse backgrounds to access and complete rigorous coursework. In order 38 THE ROAD TO TOP TEN FOR ALL / Transition to College and Postsecondary Opportunities to do so, schools should adopt a strong open enrollment system coupled with professional development and support for teachers of rigorous courses, a master schedule that promotes rigorous course enrollment for all students, a strong school culture that promotes the success of all students and interventions for students who need additional help.84 Also, districts, schools and educators should receive financial incentives for supporting students in earning college credit while still in high school, particularly in high needs schools, like in Florida.85 • Invest in grant programs that help low-income students cover the full cost of attending two- and four-year colleges and universities, including non-tuition expenses. • Enhance Michigan’s statewide postsecondary attainment goal by setting specific, separate and trackable attainment goals for students of color, as well as identifying plans and strategies for how the state will attain those goals. Chosen approaches should support transparency, including by establishing interim benchmarks and public reporting to show progress over time.86 Conclusion By adopting data-driven, evidence-based practices, by keeping a clear focus on equity, and by mobilizing the support of a diverse set of stakeholders, Michigan can improve educational opportunities for all of Michigan’s students regardless of their backgrounds. As we said at the beginning of this report, and as the data throughout the report shows, this is a moment of sobering reality in Michigan. It has taken decades for Michigan’s education system to decline to where it stands today, ranked near the bottom in so many important measures for student achievement. And it’s clear that we will not transform into a top ten education state overnight. But this is also a moment of great opportunity for Michigan. In the last few months and years, we have seen a growing commitment among leaders across the state to embrace a new vision for public education in Michigan. Our new governor has made enhancing public education one of her top priorities; legislative leaders have indicated their willingness to change our state’s trajectory; and business, civic and philanthropic organizations have given strong support to the measures we’ll need to take to become a top ten state for education. We know what we need to do to begin making steps towards improvement. Leading states across the country have shown us the way. By adopting data-driven, evidencebased practices, by keeping a clear focus on equity, and by mobilizing the support of a diverse set of stakeholders, Michigan can improve educational opportunities for all of Michigan’s students regardless of their backgrounds. This is the right moment for all Michiganders to come together, to ensure we make the most of this opportunity to do right by all Michigan students. We can’t afford to wait any longer. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 39 DATA APPENDIX: Achievement gaps persist despite Michigan’s early literacy investments Wide achievement gaps in eighth-grade math raise major equity concerns Statewide M-STEP Proficiency Rates, English Language Arts – Grade 3 – by Subgroup (2018) Statewide M-STEP Proficiency Rates, Math – Grade 8 – by Subgroup (2018) 90% 90% 80% 80% Percent Proficient or Advanced 100% Percent Proficient or Advanced 100% 70% 60% All Students, 44.4% 52.3% 50% 40% 32.9% 30% 30.3% 19.2% 20% 70% 60% 50% All Students, 33.6% 39.2% 40% 30% 20.4% 20% 10% 10% 0% 17.9% 10.8% 0% African American Latino Students Students Low-Income Students White Students African American Latino Students Students SOURCE: M-STEP Results (2018) Low-Income Students White Students SOURCE: M-STEP Results (2018) Florida’s large urban districts are nation’s highest performing Trial Urban District Assessments, NAEP Average Scale Score, Reading – Grade 4 – All Students (2017) 240 230 Average Scale Score 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 208; Proficient Scale Score = 238) 40 DATA APPENDIX DETROIT MILWAUKEE CLEVELAND BALTIMORE CITY PHILADELPHIA DALLAS FRESNO SHELBY COUNTY (TN) HOUSTON FORT WORTH (TX) ALBUQUERQUE LOS ANGELES CHICAGO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (DCPS) CLARK COUNTY (NV) DENVER ATLANTA NEW YORK CITY AUSTIN BOSTON NAT PUB JEFFERSON COUNTY (KY) SAN DIEGO GUILFORD COUNTY (NC) CHARLOTTE DUVAL COUNTY (FL) HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY (FL) MIAMI-DADE 150 RESOURCES: 1. Sarah Lenhoff and Amber Arellano, “Stalled to Soaring: Michigan’s Path to Educational Recovery,” (Royal Oak, MI: The Education Trust-Midwest, April 2014). https://midwest.edtrust.org/resource/stalled-tosoaringmichigans-path-to-educational-recovery/ 16. Michigan State Budget Office, Fiscal Year 2019 School Omnibus Bill; Michigan State Budget Office, Fiscal Year 2018 School Omnibus Bill; Michigan State Budget Office, Fiscal Year 2017 School Omnibus Bill; Michigan State Budget Office, Fiscal Year 2016 School Omnibus Bill 17. Michigan Department of Education, Michigan’s Action Plan for Literacy Excellence – Early Literacy Grants. Retrieved from https://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,4615,7140-28753_74161---,00.html Michigan Public Act 306 of 2016 2. NCES NAEP Data Explorer 3. Note: Michigan’s 2014-15 through 2016-17 statewide assessment system, the M-STEP, was designed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). Michigan was one of the 13 governing members of SBAC. Comparability across state lines may vary, as it is a relatively new assessment system and each state has control over its state assessment systems. 18. 20. The Education Trust-Midwest, “Top Ten for Education: Not by Chance,” (Royal Oak, MI: The Education TrustMidwest, March 2018). https://midwest.edtrust.org/ resource/top-ten-for-education/ 4. M-STEP State Assessment Results 21. 5. NCES NAEP Data Explorer Tennessee Department of Education, “Dyslexia Resource Guide: Guidance on the ‘Say Dyslexia’ Law,” (Nashville, TN: Tennessee Department of Education, April 2018). https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/education/specialeducation/dys/dyslexia_resource_guide.pdf 22. Ivy Morgan and Ary Amerikaner, “Funding Gaps: An Analysis of School Funding Equity Across the U.S. and Within Each State 2018,” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust, February 2018). https://edtrust.org/ resource/funding-gaps-2018/ 19. Ibid. 6. Ibid. 7. M-STEP State Assessment Results, English Language Arts Grades 3-8 Combined, 2017-2018. Note: Geographic classifications are based on the ‘Entity Locale Name’ column in the Educational Entity Master. 8. Daniel Showalter, Robert Klein, Jerry Johnson and Sara L. Hartman, “Why Rural Matters 2015-16: Understanding the Changing Landscape,” (Washington, D.C.: The Rural School and Community Trust, June 2017). http://www. ruraledu.org/user_uploads/file/WRM-2015-16.pdf 9. Florida Department of Education, Just Read, Florida!. Retrieved from http://www.fldoe.org/academics/standards/ just-read-fl/ 10. Donald J. Hernandez, “Double Jeopardy: How ThirdGrade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School Graduation,” (Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation, January 2012). https://www.aecf.org/ resources/double-jeopardy/ 11. Jason M. Breslow, “By the Numbers: Dropping Out of High School,” Frontline, September 2012. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/by-thenumbers-dropping-out-of-high-school/ 12. Donald J. Hernandez, “Double Jeopardy: How ThirdGrade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School Graduation,” (Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation, January 2012). https://www.aecf.org/ resources/double-jeopardy/ 23. Ibid. 24. Bethany Wicksall and Samuel Christensen, “Budget Briefing: School Aid,” (Lansing, MI: House Fiscal Agency, January 2018). https://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/PDF/ Briefings/School_Aid_BudgetBriefing_fy17-18.pdf 25. School Finance Research Collaborative, “Costing Out the Resources Needed to Meet Michigan’s Standards and Requirements,” (East Lansing, MI: School Finance Research Collaborative, January 2018). https://www. fundmischools.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/SchoolFinance-Research-Collaborative-Report.pdf 26. David Arsen, Tanner Delpier and Jesse Nagel, “Michigan School Finance at the Crossroads: A Quarter Century of State Control,” (Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, January 2019). http://education.msu.edu/edpolicy-phd/ pdf/Michigan-School-Finance-at-the-Crossroads-AQuarter-Center-of-State-Control.pdf 27. The Office of Governor Gretchen Whitmer, Districtby-District School Funding Map. Retrieved from https://www.michigan.gov/documents/budget/ ExecRecTotalFundingIncrease_648672_7.html 28. The Office of Governor Gretchen Whitmer, Michigan FY20 Executive Budget Bill – Education Omnibus. Retrieved from https://www.michigan.gov/ documents/budget/FY20_Budget_Bill_Education_ Omnibus_648336_7.pdf 13. Rucker C. Johnson and C. Kirabo Jackson, “Reducing Inequality Through Dynamic Complementarity: Evidence from Head Start and Public School Spending,” (Cambridge, MA: The National Bureau of Economic Research, February 2018). https://www.nber.org/papers/ w23489.pdf 14. Allison H. Friedman-Krauss, W. Steven Barnett, Karin A. Garver, Katherine S. Hodges, G.G. Weisenfeld and Nicole DiCrecchio, “The State of Preschool 2018,” (New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, April 2019). http://nieer.org/wp-content/ uploads/2019/04/YB2018_Full-ReportR.pdf 29. Chad Aldeman, “Grading Schools: How States Should Define ‘School Quality’ Under the Every Student Succeeds Act,” (Sudbury, MA: Bellwether Education Partners, October 2016). https://bellwethereducation.org/sites/ default/files/Bellwether_GradingSchools_FINAL101916. pdf 15. Michigan Department of Education, GSRP History of Funding. Retrieved from https:// www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Funding_ HistoryADA_10.20.16_538511_7.pdf 30. Note: In 2015, the United States Congress passed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which handed down vast authority to state leaders to redesign state-level improvement systems to ensure high-quality education 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 41 improvement systems to ensure high-quality education is available for all students. Michigan’s ESSA plan was approved in November 2017 and is available at https:// www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Michigan-ESSAPlan_11-15-17_606136_7.pdf. 31. Council of Chief State School Officers, “A Path of Progress: State and District Stories of High Standards Implementation – Tennessee,” (Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers, 2017). https://www.ccsso. org/sites/default/files/2017-10/Tennessee.pdf 32. 33. Jennifer Chambers, “Teachers in school for new curriculum in Detroit,” The Detroit News, July 2018. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/ education/2018/07/23/teachers-school-newcurriculumdetroit/791665002/ 35. Michigan Public Act 601 of 2018 36. Achieve, Inc., “Thinking Long Term: State Academic Achievement Goals Under ESSA,” (Washington, D.C.: Achieve, Inc., February 2018). https://www.achieve.org/ files/ThinkingLongTerm-StateAcademicAchievementGoal sUnderESSA.pdf 38. RESOURCES Robert Pondiscio, “Louisiana Threads the Needle on Ed Reform,” EducationNext, September 2017. https:// www.educationnext.org/louisiana-threads-the-needle-edreform-launching-coherent-curriculumlocal-control/ 34. 37. 42 Chiefs for Change, “Evidence-Building Opportunities Under ESSA: How States Can and Should Generate Evidence to Drive Better Outcomes for Students,” (Washington, D.C.: Chiefs for Change, May 2018). http://chiefsforchange.org/policy-paper/6072/ Michigan Department of Education, “Michigan’s Consolidated State Plan Under the Every Student Succeeds Act,” (Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Education, November 2017). https://www. michigan.gov/documents/mde/Michigan-ESSAPlan_11-15-17_606136_7.pdf Sarah Lenhoff, Sunil Joy and Amber Arellano, “Accountability for All: The Need for Real Charter School Authorizer Accountability in Michigan,” (Royal Oak, MI: The Education Trust-Midwest, February 2015). https://midwest.edtrust.org/accountability-for-all/; Sunil Joy and Amber Arellano, “Accountability for All: 2016; The Broken Promise of Michigan’s Charter Sector,” (Royal Oak, MI: The Education Trust-Midwest, February 2016). https://midwest.edtrust.org/accountability-for-all/ 39. Note: Michigan adopted the state’s first college- and career-ready standards in 2010. The standards are available at https://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,4615,7-14028753_64839_65510---,00.html 40. Note: Michigan’s 2014-15 through 2016-17 statewide assessment system, the M-STEP, was designed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). Michigan was one of the 13 governing members of SBAC. Comparability across state lines may vary, as it is a relatively new assessment system and each state has control over their state assessment systems. 41. See note 40. 42. Steven G. Rivkin, Eric A. Hanushek and John F. Kain, “Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement,” Econometrica, vol. 73 no. 2, March 2005, pp. 417-58. https://econ.ucsb.edu/~jon/Econ230C/HanushekRivkin. pdf 43. Dan Goldhaber, Lesley Lavery and Roddy Theobald, “Uneven Playing Field? Assessing the Inequity of Teacher Characteristics and Measured Performance Across Students,” (Seattle, WA: The Center for Education Data & Research, 2014). http://www.cedr.us/papers/working/ CEDR%20WP%202014-4.pdf 44. Matthew A. Kraft and David Blazar, “Taking Teacher Coaching to Scale: Can Personalized Training Become Standard Practice?,” EducationNext, September 2018. https://www.educationnext.org/taking-teachercoachingto-scale-can-personalized-training-become-standardpractice/ 45. Michigan Department of Education, “Michigan’s Plan to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Teachers,” (Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Education, 2015). https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/equitable/ miequityplan060115.pdf 46. Matthew Ronfeldt, Susanna Loeb and James Wyckoff, “How Teacher Turnover Harms Student Achievement,” (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research, January 2012). https://caldercenter.org/sites/default/files/Ronfeldt-et-al. pdf 47. Jared Robinson and Brian Lloyd, “Teacher Turnover in Michigan: A Look at Teacher Mobility and Attrition Rates,” (Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Education, September 2017). https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ mde/Teacher_Mobility_Brief_Final_2017.09.18_v2_ ada_601772_7.pdf 48. Shannon Stackhouse and Brian Lloyd, “Michigan Teacher Mobility by Geographic Location and Locale,” (Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Education, December 2018). https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Michigan_ Teacher_Mobility_White_Paper_639846_7.pdf 49. Leib Sutcher, Linda Darling-Hammond, and Desiree Carver-Thomas, “A Coming Crisis in Teaching? Teacher Supply, Demand, and Shortages in the U.S.,” (Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute, September 2016). https:// learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming-crisis-teaching 50. Koco McAboy, “Detroit Public Schools Community District makes headway in filling teacher vacancies,” Click On Detroit, December 2018. https://www. clickondetroit.com/news/detroit-public-schoolscommunity-district-makes-headway-infilling-teachervacancies 51. Stephanie Aragon and Micah Ann Wixom, “Recruiting Teachers to Rural Areas,” (Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States, June 2016). https://www.ecs. org/wp-content/uploads/Rural-SPED-Teacher-ShortagesJune-2016.pdf 52. Sarah Lenhoff and Amber Arellano, “Stalled to Soaring: Michigan’s Path to Educational Recovery,” (Royal Oak, MI: The Education Trust-Midwest, April 2014). https:// midwest.edtrust.org/resource/stalled-to-soaringmichiganspath-to-educational-recovery/ 53. Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness, “Building an Improvement-Focused System of Educator Evaluation in Michigan: Final Recommendations,” (Lansing, MI: Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness, July 2013). http://www.mcede.org/ 54. MCL 380.1249 55. Andrea Prado Tuma, Laura S. Hamilton and Tiffany Tsai, “How Do Teachers Perceive Feedback and Evaluation Systems?,” (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, July 2018). https://www.rand.org/pubs/ research_briefs/RB10023.html 66. Clifford Adelman, “The Toolbox Revisited: Paths to Degree Completion from High School Through College,” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, February 2006). https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/ pubs/toolboxrevisit/toolbox.pdf 56. Council of Chief State School Officers, “A Path of Progress: State and District Stories of High Standards Implementation – Tennessee,” (Washington, D.C.: Council of State School Officers, 2017). https://www. ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2017-10/Tennessee.pdf 67. College Board, 2018 AP Program Participation and Performance Data. Retrieved from https://research. collegeboard.org/programs/ap/data/participation/ap-2018 68. Ibid; College Board, AP Program Results: Class of 2018. Retrieved from https://reports.collegeboard.org/ap-program-results/class-2018-data 69. Patricia Levesque, “Education Policies Change Kids’ Lives – How Florida’s Free PSATs Set Off a Chain Reaction of Achievement for State’s Students,” The 74 Million, February 2019. https://www.the74million.org/ article/levesque-education-policies-change-kids-lives-howfloridas-freepsats-set-off-a-chain-reaction-of-achievementfor-states-students/ 57. Tennessee Department of Education, “Building the Framework: A Report on Elementary Grades Reading in Tennessee,” (Nashville, TN: Tennessee Department of Education, February 2017). https://www.tn.gov/content/ dam/tn/education/reports/rpt_bldg_the_framework.pdf 58. Tennessee Department of Education, 2018 Tennessee Educator Survey – Teacher Results. Retrieved from http:// educatorsurvey.tnk12.gov/#1/all-districts/all-schools/0 59. The Education Trust, Do Classroom Assignments Reflect College- and Career-Ready Standards?. Retrieved from https://edtrust.org/equity-in-motion/ 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. Robert Pondiscio, “Louisiana Threads the Needle on Ed Reform,” EducationNext, September 2017. https:// www.educationnext.org/louisiana-threads-the-needle-edreform-launching-coherent-curriculumlocal-control/ Rachel Metz and Allison Rose Socol, “Tackling Gaps in Access to Strong Teachers: What State Leaders Can Do,” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust, October 2017). https://edtrust.org/resource/tackling-gaps-access-strongteachers/ Steven Glazerman, Ali Protik, Bing-ru Teh, Julie Bruch and Jeffrey Max, “Transfer Incentives for High-Performing Teachers: Final Results from a Multisite Experiment,” (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, November 2013). https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20144003/pdf/20144003. pdf; Hanley Chiang, Cecilia Speroni, Mariesa Herrmann, Kristin Hallgren, Paul Burkander, and Alison Wellington, “Evaluation of the Teacher Incentive Fund: Final Report on Implementation and Impacts of Pay-for-Performance Across Four Years,” (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, December 2017). https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/ pubs/20184004/pdf/20184004.pdf Koby Levin, “As Detroit’s schools chief celebrates new salaries, veteran teachers may want to give the district a second look,” Chalkbeat, May 2018. https://www. chalkbeat.org/posts/detroit/2018/05/10/veteranteacherpay/ Anthony P. Carnevale, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl, “Recovery: Job Growth and Education Requirements Through 2020,” (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, June 2013). https://cew.georgetown.edu/cewreports/recovery-job-growth-and-educationrequirementsthrough-2020/ 70. Ibid. 71. Ibid. 72. Michigan Department of Education, High School Graduation Rate 2017-18 73. Michigan Department of Education, College Remedial Coursework 2016-17 74. Ibid. 75. Carrie Warick, Bill DeBaun and Allie Ciaramella, ed., “Shutting Low-Income Students Out of Public Four-Year Higher Education,” (Washington, D.C.: National College Access Network, May 2018). http://www.collegeaccess.org/ affordability 76. Andrew Howard Nichols and J. Oliver Schak, “Broken Mirrors: Black Student Representation at Public State Colleges and Universities,” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust, March 2019). https://edtrust.org/resource/ broken-mirrors-black-representation/ 77. Ibid. Note: Michigan’s selective public four-year institutions included in this study are Michigan State University, Michigan Technological University and University of Michigan-Ann Arbor. 78. Ibid. 79. The Office of Governor Gretchen Whitmer, State of the State 2019 Fact Sheet. Retrieved from https:// www.michigan.gov/documents/whitmer/SOTS19_Fact_ Sheet_646128_7.pdf 80. Ibid. 81. Tiffany Jones and Katie Berger, “A Promise Fulfilled: A Framework for Equitable Free College Programs,” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust, September 2018). https://edtrust.org/resource/a-promisefulfilled/ 82. Ibid; Alain Poutrè and Mamie Voight, “Tennessee Promise: Does it help students with limited financial means afford college?,” (Washington, D.C.: Institute for Higher Education Policy, September 2018). http://www. ihep.org/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/pubs/ihep_state_ free_college_tennessee_promise.pdf Philip Trostel, “It’s Not Just the Money: The Benefits of College Education to Individuals and to Society,” (Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation, October 2015). https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/its-notjust-the-money.pdf 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 43 83. Thomas Mulgrew, “Mayor David Briley Announces Nashville GRAD Program to Close Equity Gaps and Increase Economic Opportunity,” Nashville.gov, December 2018. https://www.nashville.gov/News-Media/News-Article/ID/8147/Mayor-David-Briley-Announces-Nashville-GRAD-Program-to-Close-Equity-Gaps-and-Increase-Economic-Opportunity.aspx 85. Patricia Levesque, “Education Policies Change Kids’ Lives – How Florida’s Free PSATs Set Off a Chain Reaction of Achievement for State’s Students,” The 74 Million, February 2019. https://www.the74million.org/article/levesque-educationpolicies-change-kids-lives-how-floridas-freepsats-set-off-achain-reaction-of-achievement-for-states-students/ 84. Ashley Griffin and Davis Dixon, “Systems for Success: Thinking Beyond Access to AP,” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust, July 2017). https://edtrust.org/resource/systems-success-thinking-beyond-access-ap/ 86. Tiffany Jones and Katie Berger, “Aiming for Equity: A Guide to Statewide Attainment Goals for Racial Equity Advocates,” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust, January 2019). https://edtrust.org/resource/aimingfor-equity/ Photo Credit: Cover: Detroit Merit Charter Academy – Detroit, MI (Photo: Amy Sacka) 44 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 80% 65.3 70% 57.7% 60% 54.2% 50% 40% 2019 Michigan Achieves! Indicators 30% 20% 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 45 4th Grade Reading CURRENT PERFORMANCE 35th 2030 PROJECTION 45th WHAT IT IS: A telling indicator of whether Michigan’s students are being prepared for success is how well our young students read. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative assessment that provides for long-term comparisons of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. The assessment is given every two years and provides necessary information about student performance and growth for several indicators, including fourth-grade reading. WHY IT MATTERS: Reading proficiency is tied to all kinds of academic and life outcomes, and improving early reading is much more cost-effective than intervening with older students, when they are many years behind in school or dropping out. Michigan must drastically improve its early literacy achievement for all students and close the achievement gap that keeps far too many of its low-income children and students of color from fulfilling their potential. Michigan One of Only Thirteen States Declining in Early Literacy Average Scale Score Change, NAEP Grade 4 – Reading – All Students (2003-17) 12 8 National Public, 4.4 6 4 Michigan, -1.0 2 0 -2 -4 -6 FL CA MS AL HI MA NV NJ TN LA RI AZ MD PA GA IN UT KY WY ID NM NAT PUB VA IL NE OH KS OK NC AR WA MN NH CO MO VT TX CT OR ND NY MT SD MI WI IA SC WV DE ME AK SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 208; Proficient Scale Score = 238), 2003-2017 Average Scale Score Change 10 Michigan in Bottom Five for African American Students in Early Literacy Average Scale Score, NAEP Grade 4 – Reading – African American Students (2017) 230 46 INDICATORS Michigan, 197 200 190 180 170 IA WI ME MI SC LA MN AR IL CA NE MO WV AL TN KS OH MS OK WA KY PA NV ND NAT PUB RI AZ CO GA DE NY IN CT TX VA NC FL AK NJ 160 MD NOTE: All states with available data are included in this analysis. National Public, 205 210 MA SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 208; Proficient Scale Score = 238), 2017 Average Scale Score 220 8th Grade Math CURRENT PERFORMANCE 33rd 2030 PROJECTION 33rd WHAT IT IS: The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative assessment that provides for long-term comparisons of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. The assessment is given every two years and provides necessary information about student performance and growth for several indicators, including eighth-grade math. WHY IT MATTERS: In addition to basic reading skills, math skills are essential for all students. Basic algebra is the foundation for high-level math courses. When students have not mastered this foundation, they are required to enroll in remedial courses when they begin college. But eighth-grade math skills are not just for those students who are college-bound. A study conducted by ACT found that along with reading skills, math skills are essential for vocational jobs including those as a plumber, electrician or an upholsterer. i Michigan Eighth-Grade Students Show Little Improvement in Math Compared with Peers in Leading States Average Scale Score Change, NAEP Grade 8 – Math – All Students (2003-17) SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 262; Proficient Scale Score = 299), 2003-17 Tennessee 10.6 Massachusetts 10.5 National Public 5.8 3.1 Michigan 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Michigan Among Bottom Five States for Low-Income Students in Eighth-Grade Math Average Scale Score, NAEP Grade 8 – Math – Low-Income Students (2017) 290 National Public, 267 Michigan, 261 270 260 250 240 230 220 MA WY MT MN NH IN NE WA VA VT OR TX KS ID UT IA AZ NJ ME PA ND SD FL NY WV TN HI WI CO MO GA OH NAT PUB IL KY DE NC OK MS CT NV AR NM SC CA AK MI MD RI LA AL SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 262; Proficient Scale Score = 299), 2017 Average Scale Score 280 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 47 Kindergarten Readiness Michigan has recently made a smart investment in early childhood programs intended to increase the number of its students who enter kindergarten ready to learn at high levels. From 2012 to 2018 the portion of Michigan four-year-olds enrolled in prekindergarten increased from 19.4 percent to 32 percent.ii While access to prekindergarten is improving for Michigan’s four-year-olds, it is still unclear whether these prekindergarten programs are high-quality and aligned with the K-12 system. Data are not currently available because Michigan has not yet implemented a common statewide assessment of kindergarten readiness, nor does the state participate in a national effort to collect these data. Consistent and comparable data from a common assessment of kindergarten readiness would provide vital information on the impact of early-childhood programs and their effectiveness by evaluating their impact on student development and alignment with K-12 learning standards. We will track any state or national data on Michigan’s kindergarten readiness when they become available. College Readiness 25% ENROLLED IN AT LEAST ONE REMEDIAL COURSE 2030 PROJECTION 25% ENROLLED IN AT LEAST ONE REMEDIAL COURSE SOURCE: CEPI College Remedial Coursework Enrollment Trend, 2012-17 NOTE: Remedial coursework includes math, reading, writing or science courses. Data is limited to Michigan high school graduates who enrolled in college the following fall in a Michigan college or university only. 48 INDICATORS WHAT IT IS: Remedial coursework is necessary for students who lack fundamental skills in a subject area – skills that should have been developed in K-12. These courses also are not credit bearing, meaning they don’t count toward a degree. WHY IT MATTERS: About 25.3 percent of all Michigan students were required to take at least one remedial course in 2- and 4-year college or university programs. That’s more than a quarter of Michigan students who must pay for additional instruction in college before moving on to credit-bearing courses. The percentage is even more startling for historically underserved subgroups – 47 percent of African American students in Michigan are required to enroll in college remedial courses. Having to enroll in remedial courses can mean additional costs for students and more time to complete their degrees. Remediation Rates Remain High for Michigan’s African American Students Michigan African American College Remediation Rates (Community Colleges & Four-Year Universities) Percent Enrolled in at Least One College Remedial Course (Any Subject) CURRENT PERFORMANCE 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 College and Postsecondary Enrollment CURRENT PERFORMANCE 26th 2030 PROJECTION NOT YET AVAILABLE WHAT IT IS: This measure represents the percentage of high school graduates in each state who attend college anywhere in the U.S. directly from high school. WHY IT MATTERS: In order for Michigan’s students to fulfill their true potential and be the leaders of tomorrow, more must enroll in postsecondary training, whether that be at a trade school, community college or a four-year university. On this measure, Michigan is slightly below the national average, ranking 26th, with about 61.5 percent of high school graduates attending some form of postsecondary training in the 2011-12 school year. The state department of education reports that 67.3 percent of Michigan’s 2017 high school graduates enrolled in a postsecondary program within 12 months of graduation.iii Michigan Slightly Below National Average with 61.5% of High School Graduates Enrolling in College 100% 90% 80% Nation, 61.7% Michigan, 61.5% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% MS CT MA NY MN NM SD NJ AR RI GA KS SC ND DE HI LA NE VA IN KY FL MO NC NH NAT MI MD TN IL OH PA AL CO WI CA MT OK TX WY IA WV NV ME VT AZ UT ID WA OR AK SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, Table 302.50, 2011-12 Percent of Recent High School Graduates Enrolled in Higher Education Higher Education Enrollment Rate for Recent High School Graduates “ As a state, we need to make sure that students are supported to both enter and complete the degree or certification that they seek. This requires a commitment from the state and postsecondary institutions to reduce the student-counselor ratio, knock down barriers for nontraditional students, and ensure that college and trades are truly affordable for all. “ – State Representative Sarah Anthony, Democratic Vice Chair of the Higher Education and Community Colleges Appropriations Subcommittee 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 49 College Attainment CURRENT PERFORMANCE 31st 2030 PROJECTION 32nd WHAT IT IS: This indicator represents the percentage of people 25 years or older in each state and nationally who have completed a bachelor’s degree. WHY IT MATTERS: In 2017, Michigan ranked 31st in the percentage of adults 25 or older who have completed a bachelor’s degree, at 29.1 percent. Roughly 17 percent of African American or Hispanic Michiganders have completed a bachelor’s degree. Michigan’s Economy Depends on More Adults Earning College Degrees Percent of People 25 Years and Older with a Bachelor’s Degree or Greater in 2017 MA CO MD NJ CT VA VT NH MN NY WA UT IL KS OR CA RI HI MT ME Nation, 32.0% NAT NE DE PA NC GA ND WI FL TX AZ Michigan, 29.1% MI MO IA AK SD OH SC WY TN NM ID IN AL OK NV KY LA SOURCE: United States Census – American Community Survey – 1 Year Estimates, 2017 50 INDICATORS AR MS WV 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Teacher Effectiveness NOTE: *Among the top 20% of teachers; **Among the bottom 20% of teachers; Analysis of test data from Tennessee showed that teacher quality effected student performance more than any other variable; on average, two students with average performance (50th percentile) would diverge by more than 50 percentile points over a three year period depending on the teacher they were assigned. Without a doubt, student learning is dependent on many factors. But, the research is clear – the number one in-school predictor of student success is the teaching quality in a child’s classroom.iv In leading states, sophisticated data systems provide teaching effectiveness data that are used for many purposes, including professional development and early student interventions. In Michigan, those data are unavailable at this time. The Effect of Teacher Quality on Student Learning 100 90th percentile Student with high-performing teacher* Student Performance SOURCE: Sanders and Rivers (1996): Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Student Achievement 50 Student with low-performing teacher** 37th percentile 0 Age 8 Age 11 Access to Rigorous Coursework 29th 2030 PROJECTION 28th SOURCE: College Board AP Program Participation and Performance Data, 2004-18 WHAT IT IS: Access to rigorous coursework is measured by the College Board Advanced Placement (AP) Program Participation and Performance data. The data represent the total number of AP exams administered per 1,000 11th and 12th grade students. WHY IT MATTERS: One of the best ways to ensure more students are college- and career-ready is to increase access to rigorous coursework in high school, such as Advanced Placement courses. Research shows that having access to rigorous coursework and high quality instruction in high school is one of the best predictors of postsecondary success.v Michigan is currently ranked 29th for the total number of AP exams administered per 1,000 11th and 12th graders. Michigan Has Seen a Steady Increase in AP Exam Participation, but Still Lags Nation AP Exam Participation AP Exams per 1000 11th and 12th Graders CURRENT PERFORMANCE 600 500 400 300 200 100 n Nation n Michigan 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 2018 51 School Funding Equity 25% 20% 15% Michigan, -5% 10% 5% 0% -5% -10% -15% -20% IL MO AL NY RI MI poverty districts (not adjusted for additional needs of low-income students). In states shaded in blue, the highest poverty districts receive at least 5 percent more in state and local funds per student than the lowest poverty districts; in states shaded in red, they receive at least 5 percent less. Grey shading indicates similar levels of funding for the highest and lowest poverty districts. Note that although all displayed percentages are rounded to the nearest percentage point, states are ordered and classified as providing more or less funding to their highest poverty districts based on unrounded funding gaps. regional transit, economic development … but if we don’t take this [education] on… these other issues won’t matter. “ David Meador, Vice Chairman and Chief Administrative Officer DTE Energy INDICATORS TX READING THIS FIGURE: In Utah, the highest poverty districts receive 21 percent more in state and local funds per student than the lowest “ We have to deal with roads, infrastructure, 52 NH ME WY ID WV IA PA FL MS MT VT TN CT AZ KS ND NE WI MA NM KY OR OK CO IN VA SC CA MD LA WA DE AR NC GA -25% NJ NOTE: Hawaii was excluded from the within-state analysis because it is one district. Nevada is excluded because its student population is heavily concentrated in one district and could not be sorted into quartiles. Alaska is excluded because there are substantial regional differences in the cost of education that are not accounted for in the ACS-CWI. Because so many New York students are concentrated in New York City, we sorted that state into two halves, as opposed to four quartiles. Funding Gaps Between the Highest and Lowest Poverty Districts, By State SD SOURCE: The Education Trust, Funding Gaps Report, 2018 Michigan is One of Only Sixteen States Providing Less Funding to Highest Poverty Districts than to Lowest Poverty Districts MN 2030 PROJECTION NOT YET AVAILABLE WHY IT MATTERS: Michigan ranks 43rd of 47 states in the nation for funding gaps that negatively impact low-income students. On average, Michigan districts serving the highest rates of students from low-income families receive about 5 percent less in state and local funding per student than more affluent districts. This inequity can lead to further imbalances in our educational system as a whole. UT 43rd WHAT IT IS: This measure represents how the highest and lowest poverty districts are funded based on state and local revenues and whether it is equitably distributed or not. OH CURRENT PERFORMANCE “Teachers take on the responsibility to educate and care for every child who steps into their classroom and are key to student success … As the state works to close the school funding gap across districts, so too I would hope, the gaps be closed in educator compensation. “ Laura Chang, Interventionist, Vicksburg Community Schools – Sunset Lake, Michigan Teacher of the Year, 2018-2019 Teacher Salary Equity CURRENT PERFORMANCE $9,739 AVG. SALARY GAP FOR HIGHESTAND LOWESTPOVERTY DISTRICTS 2030 PROJECTION NOT YET AVAILABLE NOT YET AVAILABLE WHAT IT IS: This measure represents the gap in average teacher salaries between Michigan’s highest income and lowest income districts. WHY IT MATTERS: Teachers in Michigan’s wealthiest districts are paid about $9,700 more, on average, than teachers in Michigan’s poorest districts. That’s alarming, considering what we know about the importance of high-quality teachers in closing the achievement gap that persists between low-income and higher-income students. To recruit and retain highly effective teachers in the schools that need them most, Michigan must close the gap in teacher pay. More than $9,700 Gap in Average Teacher Salaries Between Michigan’s Highest Income and Lowest Income Districts Average Michigan Teacher Salary based on Percent of Free and Reduced Price Lunch $70,000 $66,533 $66,224 $65,000 $59,171 Average Teacher Salary $60,000 $58,380 $56,795 $55,000 $50,000 $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 SOURCE: MDE Bulletin 1011, 2016-17; CEPI Free and Reduced Priced Lunch, Fall 2016-17 (District) $30,000 0-20% 20-40% 40-60% 60-80% 80-100% Percent of Districts’ Students Who Qualify for Free or Reduced Price Lunch 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 53 Teacher Attendance CURRENT PERFORMANCE 26% OF TEACHERS FREQUENTLY ABSENT 2030 PROJECTION NOT YET AVAILABLE WHAT IT IS: This measure represents the percent of teachers absent from work for more than 10 days over the course of one school year at the state level. WHY IT MATTERS: According to a recent report from Education Week, about 26 percent of teachers in Michigan were absent from work more than 10 days, on average.vi That’s about six percent of the school year, which is equivalent to a typical 9-to-5 year-round employee missing more than three weeks of work on top of vacation time. About 26% of Teachers in Michigan Were Absent from Their Job More than 10 Days Average Percentage of Teachers Absent More than 10 Days 50% 40% Michigan, 26% Nation, 28% 30% 20% 10% 0% SD ID WI CA MO NE OK UT MT ND AZ FL MS NM IL MA MI TX ME NJ NY TN CO DE IN KS LA NH OR NAT KY SC GA MN NC VT MD OH WA CT AL AR IA PA VA WY AK WV RI HI NV SOURCE: Education Week, “How Many Teachers Are Chronically Absent From Class in Your State?,” 2018, Civil Rights Data Collection, 2015-16 Average Percentage of Teachers Absent More than 10 Days 60% Out-of-School Suspensions CURRENT PERFORMANCE: 45th 2030 PROJECTION NOT YET AVAILABLE WHAT IT IS: Data from the Civil Rights Data Collection measure discipline rates nationally. WHY IT MATTERS: One of the most troubling practices in Michigan – and around the country – is the overuse of suspension and expulsion, particularly for students of color. Overall Michigan ranks 45th for all students. For African American students, Michigan has the fourth highest out-of-school suspension rate in the country. Twenty percent of the African American students in Michigan schools were suspended in the 2013-14 school year. Michigan Has 4th Highest Out-of-School Suspension Rate Nationally for African American Students 54 INDICATORS 25% Michigan, 20% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% ID HI UT MT ND NY ME SD VT WY MD CT FL AK MA NV OR LA IA WA CA TX CO KY MN VA NM NJ AZ GA RI NC KS MS WV AL DE NE TN MO PA WI AR SC OK OH MI NH IN IL SOURCE: Civil Rights Data Collection, 2013-14 Percent of African American Students with One or More Out-of-School Suspensions African American Out-of-School Suspension Rates Student Attendance Michigan, 24% National Public, 22% 20% 10% OK NM OR WV RI FL SC NV ND MI KY TN OH AZ KS HI AR NE MS AL DE NC MO MD IA WA ID NAT PUB VT PA TX NY MN IN NJ VA IL 0% ME NOTE: AK, CO, LA, MT, SD, UT and WY are not included in the analysis because data was not available. 30% CA SOURCE: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Reported for 8th Grade Math), 2017 40% GA OF 8TH GRADERS FREQUENTLY ABSENT Percent of Eighth Graders Absent Three or More Days in Last Month, NAEP Grade 8 – Math – All Students (2017) CT 24% Nearly One Quarter of Michigan 8th Graders were Absent 3 or More Days in Last Month in 2017 NH 2030 PROJECTION WI OF 8TH GRADERS FREQUENTLY ABSENT WHY IT MATTERS: Not only are Michigan’s teachers missing too much school, but Michigan’s students – especially African American students – are missing far too many days of school, often against their will due to disproportionate rates for out-of-school suspensions. According to the 2017 national assessment, 24 percent of Michigan’s eighth-grade students said they had been absent from school three or more days in the last month. Moreover, Detroit leads the nation for absences among urban districts, with 39 percent of students absent three or more days in the last month. MA 24% WHAT IT IS: This measure represents the number of eighth-graders absent three or more times in the last month based on the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP). Percent of 8th Grader Absent 3 or More Days in Last Month CURRENT PERFORMANCE “ Look at the data and do something about it … then we can begin to turn this around.“ Teresa Weatherall Neal, Superintendent Grand Rapids Public Schools 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 55 College Affordability CURRENT PERFORMANCE 29% 2030 PROJECTION NOT YET AVAILABLE WHAT IT IS: This indicator measures the affordability of four-year public institutions by state for an average Pell Grant recipient who lives on campus, receives the average amount of grant aid, takes out the average amount of federal loans and works over the summer. Data represent the additional dollars needed to cover the cost of attendance. WHY IT MATTERS: It’s not enough to get into college. Young Michiganders have to be able to afford to stay in school and graduate. On average, a low-income Michigan student paying in-state tuition at a four-year public institution, who lives on campus and works over the summer, faces a $1,659 affordability gap. This means that despite financial aid and summer wages, a low-income student still falls $1,659 short, on average, of being able to afford Michigan’s four-year public institutions. Michigan is currently ranked 29th for college affordability. Low-Income Students Fall Short $1,659, On Average, of Affording the Cost of Attending Michigan Four-Year Public Institutions Four-Year Public Institution Affordability Gaps for In-State Students Living On Campus with Summer Work SOURCE: National College Access Network, Shutting Low-Income Students Out of Public Four-Year Higher Education (2018) 56 INDICATORS WA WV MS NC AR NM OK WY MT MO AK FL IN ID TX KY AL GA ND CA UT DE ME LA NE IA MD MN MI KS NAT NV TN AZ CO RI WI OR OH NY HI VT IL SC CT VA SD MA NJ NH PA -$10,000 Michigan, -$1,659 Nation, -$2,011 -$8,000 -$6,000 -$4,000 -$2,000 Affordability Gap (Additional Dollars Needed to Cover Cost of Attendance) $0 $2,000 Sources To ensure the highest quality data available and up-to-date resources are used, the data sources used to track some Michigan Achieves! Indicators have been updated over time. i ACT, Inc., “Ready for College and Ready for Work: Same or Different,” (Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc., 2015). W. Steven Barnett, Megan E. Carolan, Jen Fitzgerald and James Squires, “The State of Preschool 2012,” (New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, April 2013); Allison H. Friedman-Krauss, W. Steven Barnett, Karin A. Garver, Katherine S. Hodges, G.G. Weisenfeld and Nicole DiCrecchio, “The State of Preschool 2018,” (New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, April 2019). ii iii Michigan Department of Education, College Enrollment by High School 2016-17 Steven G. Rivkin, Eric A. Hanushek, and John F. Kain, “Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement,” Econometrica, vol. 73 no. 2, March 2005, pp. 417-58. iv Clifford Adelman, “The Toolbox Revisited: Paths to Degree Completion from High School Through College,” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, February 2006). v vi Education Week, “How Many Teachers Are Chronically Absent From Class in Your State?,” Education Week, June 2018. 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 57 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: Many thanks to members of the Michigan Achieves! Leadership Council, and other partners and supporters, who have provided advice, counsel and support, and helped us lift up public education as a top priority for Michigan. The Michigan Achieves! Leadership Council is a group of thought and business leaders from across the state, committed to making Michigan a top ten education state. Through their diverse experiences and areas of expertise, members of the Leadership Council help further the mission of The Education Trust-Midwest by providing valuable advice on engagement, outreach and strategy. 58 INDICATORS Parkview Elementary – Wyoming, MI (Photo: Rex Larsen) Michigan Achieves! Leadership Council Honorary Members Ken Whipple Chair, Former CEO, CMS Energy and Executive Vice President, Ford Motor Company Richard L. DeVore Regional President for Detroit and Southeastern Michigan, PNC Bank Deidre Bounds President, Ignite Social Media Mary Kramer Group Publisher, Crain Communications, Crain’s Detroit Business Brian Cloyd Retired, Steelcase Inc. Nolan Finley Editorial Page Editor, The Detroit News Ron Fournier President, Truscott Rossman Mike Jandernoa Co-Founder, Jandernoa Foundation David G. Mengebier President and CEO, Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation Diana R. Sieger President, Grand Rapids Community Foundation 2019 MICHIGAN ACHIEVES! 59 306 S. Washington Ave., Suite 400, Royal Oak, MI 48067 Tel: 734/619-8008 Fax: 734/619-8009 www.edtrustmidwest.org