The 2009 Brown Center Report on American Education
How Well Are American Students Learning?

The Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings today released the 2009 Brown Center Annual Report, which each year analyzes the state of American education using the latest measures of student learning, uncovers and explains important trends in achievement test scores, and identifies promising and disappointing educational reforms.
Researched and written by Senior Fellow Tom Loveless, this year’s studies show the persistence of test scores and school performance, and examine the narrowing gap between high and low-achievers. You can read the full report here.
Loveless notes that, “Nearly two-thirds of low-performing schools in 1989 are still low performers two decades later. But there is a ray of hope, as about one-third of these schools show evidence of improvement. Nevertheless, it is highly unlikely that a low-performing school becomes a high-performing school; the chances (four out of 290) are less than one out of seventy.”
Key findings and highlights include:

• Seeking to answer the question of whether failing schools can be saved, the report concludes that test scores are primarily static, and that while turning around these schools can be done, the odds are daunting.
  • Comparing the 1989 and 2009 California Assessment Program (CAP) test scores of 1,156 California schools, results are remarkably stable: Of the 290 low-performing schools, 184 (or 63.4 percent) scored in the lowest quartile again in 2009. Approximately 27.2 percent (79 schools) moved up to the second quartile; 7.9 percent (23 schools) improved to the third quartile, and 1.4 percent (four schools) moved all the way up to the top quartile.
  • The study speculates that the answer to why school performance remains remarkably unchanged may have to do with what Loveless terms “the institutional DNA of schools,” in which a school’s culture is passed down from outgoing students and teachers to incoming generations. Loveless argues that more research is needed analyzing longitudinal data and tracking the institutional trajectories of schools over extended periods of time.
    • When 2009 NAEP results were announced last October, the fourth-grade math scores showed a potential slowing in what has been a nearly two-decade upswing. This news generated an outpouring of concern among educators and set off new calls for comprehensive education reforms. Loveless argues, however, that much of this consternation is unwarranted.
    • After comparing the 2009 math score NAEP gains to gains on comparable tests, Loveless points out, “One reasonable explanation for the flat 2009 main NAEP scores is that the test is simply coming back to Earth, finally reporting progress more in line with other national math tests, and in particular, with the other NAEP test.”
    • The narrowing gap between high performers (90th percentile) and low performers (10th percentile) is one important finding to emerge out of this research.

One significant finding stands out about conversion charter schools: on several key characteristics, conversions look more like traditional public schools than start-up charters. Compared with start-ups, conversions are more concentrated in urban areas, have larger student enrollments, and serve greater numbers of Hispanic and black students. Teachers at conversions are more experienced and more likely to hold teaching certificates, particularly in bilingual education. For a full copy of the report as well as information about other Brown Center events and publications, please visit the Brown Center on the Brookings web site at http://www.brookings.edu/brown.aspx