Teachers Strike in Madison: Thirty Years Later II

After posting Teachers Strike in Madison: Thirty Years Later which came on the heels of The Capital Times article 30 years of clout: MTI's John Matthews and the '76 teachers strike, I came across a Neocon attack post in the Ann Coulter mold, from a woman at the University of Wisconsin.

The student takes me to task for my assertion that:

All studies have shown us that there are three variables that affect the quality of education. They include money, which translates to classroom size; the quality of the faculty; and parental involvement....

She then goes on to refer to a report that concludes:

McDade 's analysis of scores from tests taken at the high school level by all Wisconsin students shows that socioeconomic factors such as poverty and local property wealth are better predictors for student achievement than school district expenditures. That is, high school students are more likely to score better on the state's standardized test if they live in school districts with fewer poor students and higher property values than students who live in higher-poverty, lower-property value districts.

Now, if I was to criticize my own comments, I should have led off with citations and quotes from David Rusk (yes, the IZ David Rusk).  Our UW critic is certainly correct and would find a companion in Rusk who queries:

Why does where a child lives shape the child’s educational opportunity?   It’s not how much the school board spends.   It’s who the child’s classmates are...

...My own studies have found that, for every one percent reduction in the percentage of a poor child’s classmates that are also low-income, on average, that child’s test scores will increase two- to three-tenths of one percent.   In other words, moving a low-income child from a low-income school where 80 percent of classmates qualify for a free lunch to a middle-class school where only 20 percent of classmates qualify for a free lunch will, over time, yield a 12-18 percent improvement in the child’s test scores.   The results are even more dramatic in terms of high school graduation rates, continuing on to college, and other measures of lifetime opportunities.

Take two districts with the same per student expenditure, but District A has a student body 30% below the poverty level, and District B has a student body at 50% below the poverty level, and District A will consistently outperform District B.   

Poverty counts. There is no question that poverty levels determine educational outcomes.

Now lets get back to the issue:  if you want to improve the quality of education in a school ,what are the items that need addressing?

McDade and the UW student think that by more demanding graduation requirements we will close the gap.  Good.  How?  By pixie dust?  A magic wand?  Wishing won't make it so.

It will take three elements: money, quality of the faculty, and parental involvement.

By the way, the correlation between poverty and academic performance may be stronger than the correlation between per student expenditure and performance, but it does not reverse the obvious: the districts that spend more get better results.  Of course, the districts with the highest levels of poverty usually have the fewest financial resources, the oldest, most dilapidated schools, and the most dated equipment.

Comments

[folkbum]

Paul, you may be interested in this story from today's paper:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/388700.asp

The WPRI has released a new study comparing poverty and achievement (as measured by test scores). I'm still reading the report, and hope to write about it this evening . . .

[Steve S]

Paul-

You've been blogging long enough to know that it's common courtesy to link back to posts you reference - even if they're critical of you. Not providing a link is an incredibly tacky thing to do, except in extremely rare cases.

Moreover, the blogosphere is so powerful because it allows people to read the other side - through links that track back to original posts. Disregarding this is pretty low.

[Paul]

Steve: Allow me to quote one of your own posts
and provide a link to your blog:

"The ad was for the "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust". I'm not providing a link, and I hope you don't google it ..."

http://lettersinbottles.blogspot.com/2006/01/filth.html

By the way, Steve, if you read the authors original post you will note she never provided a link back to me. I assumed she had no interest in my trackingback to her. And I didn't get all out of sorts about it.