Head of the Class: Characteristics of Higher Performing
Urban High Schools

November 20, 2003

Moderator
S. Paul Reville, Executive Director, Center for Education Research & Policy at MassINC
Lecturer, Harvard University Graduate School of Education

Research Presentation
Maxine Minkoff, President, Educational Transformations

Policy Presentation
Sue Goldberger, Director of New Ventures, Jobs for the Future
Dan French, Executive Director, Center for Collaborative Education

Panelists
Senator Robert Antonioni, Co-Chair, Joint Committee on Education, Arts, and Humanities
Irwin Blumer, Research Professor, Boston College, Lynch School of Education
Donna Rodrigues, Director of Early College High School Initiative, Jobs for the Future; Former Principal, University Park Campus School
Theresa Perry, Vice President for Community Relations, Wheelock College
Rep. Marie St. Fleur, Co-Chair, Joint Committee on Education, Arts, and Humanities

The following is a summary of the main points of the forum. It is not an exact transcript and should not be relied upon. This summary was prepared by State House News Service and is reprinted here with their kind permission.
While education reform efforts in Massachusetts generally receive passing grades and, sometimes, high marks, policy makers continue to search for ways to improve student performance at urban high schools. Several solutions were offered at a policy conference here today.

Experts said one way to buck the trend is for urban school administrators to take a page out of the lesson plans of city high schools that have excelled. They generally agreed that the findings of a pair of new reports lay out the traits of successful urban high schools - small schools, supportive cultures, high standards and expectations, and a focused curriculum.

The forum began with a presentation by Maxine Minkoff, president of Educational Transformations, in which she discussed research findings on characteristics of higher performing urban high schools. This presentation was followed by policy presentations from Susan Goldberger, Director of New Ventures at Jobs For the Future, and Dan French, Executive Director of the Center for Collaborative Education. A five-person panel then discussed the findings, moderated by Paul Reville, Executive Director of the Center for Education Research & Policy.

Event Transcript
Moderator Paul Reville: The session is entitled Head of the Class and we will be talking about urban high schools. Thanks for coming out in bad weather and heavy traffic. I acknowledge the nine schools that we recognize today. We single them out for recognition because of the work that they have done serving challenging populations, under challenging circumstances, and making remarkable progress. We are committed at the Center to placing evidence into a civil discourse about education policy. We know that high school, in many respects, is probably the most challenging frontier of education reform in this country and urban high schools are the most challenging area. We have many expectations of urban high schools. They at the same time are responsible for getting students to levels of achievement that are higher than ever. We must get all, not just a few, students to high standards, and there are consequences if that is not achieved. So there is extraordinary pressure to meet the expectations.

Susanne Beck, Managing Director, Trefler Foundation: Since the foundation signed on - a deliberation that took five minutes - the Center for Education at MassINC has gone overboard in expressing its appreciation. When Pam Trefler asked me six years ago to join her, we decided to focus resources in Boston at the high school level. It was a challenging and lonely place to be. MCAS pressures were coming. Attention was being directed at the early grade levels. And there was not much information available. We are lonely no more. Thanks to research centers, we also feel significantly more informed. No doubt the challenges are still great, but they are better defined, and the options for change are clearer. This is an important conversation to enlighten our discussion about high school reform. Thank you again.

Moderator Paul Reville: We will first hear about the research from Maxine Minkoff. Then our colleagues will present a policy response to this paper. A distinguished panel will then discuss the research and findings. It will be a conversation. Then we will have three breakout sessions. This has been a long complicated project, and we have been thrilled to have Maxine working with us.

Maxine Minkoff, President, Educational Transformations: We know that all students from every socio-economic and ethnic group can achieve at high levels, yet a significant portion of students are not meeting the high performance levels. Low achievement is so prevalent that it's urgent, and the problem be tackled immediately. The report lays the foundation for policy development. The study is limited. It was designed as a preliminary review and not an in-depth look at the schools included. No schools were included which would enable a comparison with similar schools with lower achievement.

With respect to the selection process, we looked for schools and districts where poverty and minority rates were close to 50 percent. The districts that included were: Chelsea, Lawrence, Boston, Holyoke, Springfield, Somerville, Lynn, Lowell and Worcester. The criteria included poverty rates, MCAS pass rates, dropout rates, attendance rates, students planning to attend college, and minority population as a proportion of the total school population.

We used the criteria to identify nine schools, which were visited and conversations were held. We asked - why are students here performing better than in other urban schools. We were dismayed to find that only one school met all the criteria and could be called high performing, when using 2002 data. The University Park Campus School in Worcester was the only school with 100 percent passing both the 10th grade English and Math MCAS.

Eight schools were still doing better than other urban high schools. We labeled these schools as "higher performing". The findings underscore the urgency for action and the utmost importance of identifying successful strategies for raising student achievement. We can describe unique features of University Park. It is a partnership with Clark University and the neighborhood. University facilities are open to students. In the junior and senior years, students can take classes at Clark. The school starts at grade 7, and during the middle school years, students nd teachers focus on improving reading skills. Also, on a daily basis students at UPCS attended an additional two hours of classes. UPCS is structured to support high performance. Students feel teachers know and care about them. College prep courses are the norm. There is a minimum of two hours of homework a night. Students are expected to perform community services. Teachers have myriad professional development opportunities. There is a strong connection to the community.

In all of the eight "higher performing" schools, students are held to high standards. They know what they are expected to do, and they do it well. One student said that in this school you can run, but you can't hide. Students receive tutoring as needed. There is a real sense that teachers care. Many schools have longer days and/or school years. Small class sizes are common features. Even the large comprehensive schools try to break down into smaller units and make it a point of knowing students. Curricula are data driven and designed to prepare students for college. Decision-making is shared and involves students as well as teachers. As encouraging as it is to find these schools, the fact that there were so few points to the challenge.

A confluence of factors determines whether a school works. We can identify a focus on and support for academics, community partnerships and size. This research was as intended, merely a start. We need to develop a consensus about what exactly constitutes high performance. We need to identify and look at other schools that have succeeded. We need to take a close look at school leadership and teacher behavior that makes a difference. Thank you.

Moderator Paul Reville: We take a couple of important lessons. The fact that high performing urban high schools are scarce tells us this ought to be an urgent area of attention and focus for policy makers and practitioners. Secondly, we are encouraged by the existence of these themes and strategies we have noted. We're very excited about the possibility that that presents. As we did the work together, we had two partners - the Center for Collaborative Education and Jobs For The Future. We gathered people to make this a stronger and richer study. It wasn't always easy. Conversations extended well into the night. We wanted our study to be presented by our colleagues with a vision of what policy makers ought to do to take this study seriously.

Sue Goldberger, Program Director, Jobs for the Future: It was a good year ago when the three of us got together and we were a bit naïve. We thought we would look at MCAS scores and work with a researcher. Little did we know how difficult that would be to accomplish this work. It's a complicated but important piece of research.

We will focus by asking what the Commonwealth and urban districts can do to create high-performing schools. Are these schools organized differently than others? What can we do, in terms of policy, to have more schools to establish more schools with effective design features? We identified eight design elements.

Small is better. Less than a third of the schools in the pool for consideration were small schools of less than 400. This is backed by a growing body of evidence that small schools are in a much better position to organize and motivate folks around a common purpose and high standards. Students ordinarily not engaged in school are not left behind.
Autonomy really matters. The small schools were free of bureaucratic constraints that typically hamper other schools. They had autonomy in hiring and were able to organize limited resources in different ways. They organized their school days differently.

Choice is associated with achievement, it appears. Not parents and students shopping around but choice for students, and parents and faculty being committed in what it takes to meet a mission. It's important that students make the decision upfront and give it a fair chance.

Extra resources do make a difference in urban schools. If you look at University Park, their core budget is the same as other high schools in Worcester. That was not the case in the first five years of existence when they had extra for a longer school day. It's unfortunate that they had to lose their extended day. There is extra help time, extra adult time and Saturday sessions available.

Another striking observation is that these schools were able to successful include English language learners and students with special needs into their streamlined system. Students came into school with little or no English. The other schools make a strong effort and are organized to include special education students throughout their programs.
Next is college and community partnerships. This helps with teacher and professional development. It tells us an important story about where we need to go. The other observation is it appears effective and important to start schools in earlier grades. University Park and Academy of the Pacific Rim start in grades 6 and 7.

Finally these schools are distinguished in having strong school and student accountability and constantly reexamining standards and practices.

Dan French, Executive Director, Center for Collaborative Education: I want to go back to the comment about diversity of players. No measure should be the sole determinant of a student's future [Applause from the crowd]. We had some vigorous discussions but it has been a fruitful partnership. I have nine sets of recommendations.

The first one is the notion that we need to do more at the state and district level to provide financial incentives for urban school districts to create small high schools, including a new state renovation fund for conversions and targeting existing state construction funds toward building small urban high schools. The way construction funds work is they provide incentives to build large schools because of economies of scale.

At the district level, we would like to see a policy to set the districts on a path toward building small schools. Seven of nine schools had some degree of charter-like autonomy. Schools, if they are going to be held accountable, need to have control over their own resources. At the state level, we would love to see increased incentives to districts that create pilot-like small high schools and encourage additional Horace Mann schools. Maybe it's through allowing faculty to vote for the status and apply to the state. Boston is a landmark district. The teachers' union and the schools negotiated pilot-like schools. We would love to see that dialogue replicated in other schools.

long with increased autonomy comes stronger accountability. There needs to be multiple measures. What is successful is a school quality review that is focused on the school and not solely on the students. At the district level, districts can create such models.

Most of the schools were schools of choice. We do not mean vouchers; we mean public schools. We would love to see greater incentives at the state level around creating choice, including targeting charter awards to under-performing districts. At the district level, voluntary membership in small urban high schools should be a cornerstone of district policy. We need effective inclusion policy incentives and more 6-to-12 and 7-to-12 schools.

The seventh recommendation is to create college and community partnerships. There is no reason why we can't require every public college or university to participate in a substantial partnership, much like Clark University has done.

Increasing spending in the state's dual enrollment program is another idea. Spending has been decreasing at the state level on that. All schools in this study were entrepreneurial - they raised significant amounts of cash to operate at a higher level per pupil.

It takes a greater higher level of resources to effectively educate at schools with higher percentages of kids of color and low-income kids. We still do not have it right in the state even with education reform. There needs to be continued re-weighting for urban schools. Allowing urban schools to carry over funds from one year to the next gives them a lot of flexibility.

The last recommendation is that if we have successful models, why not find ways to replicate them at the state and district levels? We are not going to get there solely by clapping our hands, but by getting a policy context that enables more of these schools to flourish.

Moderator Paul Reville: I want to ask everyone associated with the schools to stand up [Applause]. I want to ask our panelists to join us. We are going to extend our schedule here. I can't imagine a better panel. I want to ask Irwin Blumer as a practitioner and former leader of urban school systems, does the research resonate with your experience. What do you see as the particular challenges?

Irwin Blumer, Research Professor, Boston College: A simple answer is yes, but simple answers don't carry in this world. I look at replicability and equity. I would love to see small public independent high schools but I don't believe that is going to happen in my lifetime. So how do you create attributes of small? The first is in a high school you need a clear focus on learning and high standards and you need a culture that says you are going to bring teachers and teens together and give them time to talk and do professional development and to look at data to see where they should go. It strikes me as strange that we see this wonderful ninth and tenth grade structure and then it goes away. I would like to see teachers stay with kids for two years.

What works in terms of teachers? Students boil it down to those that had high expectations, went out of the way to make sure they met them and respected them. As I look at African-American and Hispanic students, we give implicit messages that the school does not belong to them. In my mind, equity is not equality, but a level playing field. The state attempts to address equity with a foundation budget. Education in urban environments is too complex to think that way. We ought to visit Wellesley, Wayland and Weston. We ought to look at what they have and add to that the cost of moving to the smallest scale and then pay for it in urban settings. [Applause] Money doesn't solve all of your problems, but you are not going to accomplish very much without it. The ideas are wonderful and attainable. We should be held accountable for attaining it.

Moderator Paul Reville: I don't want this reduced to a conversation about money yet. Theresa, you have been in and out of different kinds of schools and have looked at race in small schools.

Theresa Perry, VP for Community Relations, Wheelock College: All partnerships are not created equal. I know few schools that have the kind of partnership University Park had with Clark. We had a difficult time getting Boston to organize authentic partnerships. Partnerships, most schools don't configure them the way University Park did. Even when we put a lot of resources in the schools, the relationship is on the ends, not at the center of the schools. At the beginning of University Park, there was a real partnership at the very beginning. Many partnerships are not centrally involved, and there will be complaints. Often they are pretend partnerships on the edges.

Moderator Paul Reville: Donna, how important was it to be a new school starting from scratch at University Park?

Donna Rodrigues, Former Principal, University Park Campus School: It was critical, but it had pluses and minuses. We had a steering committee. It was hard work. The neighborhood was not that fond of Clark because it had been buying up property. Everything was not in place when I took the job over. Everything was a bit of a negotiation. The good part was you only get the chance to be new once. There were many things going through my mind that I could not fail for these kids.

Moderator Paul Reville: You worked in a comprehensive high school and then established a school for your own. What are the special challenges of taking back what you learned and making it happen at a regular comprehensive high school?

Donna Rodrigues: We have union problems. The autonomy issue has to be worked out. If the union won't allow the smaller schools to advertise within the city, it should happen within the schools. Larger schools should be able to attract their own staff. You need charismatic leaders.

Moderator Paul Reville: What strikes you as most feasible for the state to do?

Senator Robert Antonioni, Education Co-Committee Chairman: Anything that doesn't involve money. That's a little tongue in cheek but I have to highlight that. The fiscal situation the state faces is not much better than last year. We are looking at a structural shortfall of between $1.5 billion and $2 billion. Last year it was $2.5 billion to $3 billion. When we look at some of these questions and talk about small is better, I asked what we did with small class size funds and my aide, said they are gone. We did all we could do with considerable fee increases on the heels of the large tax increase to keep our respective heads above water. We didn't do such a good job. For the first time in a decade, Chapter 70 aid was cut. To encourage outside interests, private institutions, to step in, that is a good thing. For public universities to become involved is going to require funding and they have been cut.

There is a moratorium on the school building assistance program. Annual funding is a bit over $400 million. We just included an additional $3 million to make up for the 1 percent cut this past summer. We might be able to provide incentives to districts that prioritize funding for smaller schools within schools. That might mean looking at projects in large urban areas that have already been approved and are awaiting funding.

Moderator Paul Reville: As a former district leader Irwin, does incorporating the type of changes mean more money?

Irwin Blumer: If you talk about urban settings, the recommendations are right on and the resources need to be found and identified to do it. The deficit is from a revenue shortage. UMass published a report about 42 different tax reductions. If you repeal those, you have $5 billion in revenue, if there was a will to do this.

Moderator Paul Reville: We can't really have a budget discussion here, but what kind of incentives can the state hold out there?

Representative Marie St. Fleur, Co-Chair Education Committee: I do concur with my Senate chair. We do not have any new money that we are going to be able to direct anywhere. There have been clear signals given that raising new revenue is not where people want to go. You have to redirect existing resources. It takes the city and town and the state to put forth the budget. I don't know what city or town will be willing to take less from the Commonwealth to meet the objectives set forth here. We always think about where the Legislature ought to go. But some of the things articulated need the will of the education community to move forward.

Relationships and respect, what is the relationship and respect for the parents and the teachers and the students, the parties involved in this every day? You need to look at collective bargaining when you talk about time and governance. Those are not everyday issues that we on the Hill are in control of. I take it back to you. If you have an objective, you need to figure out how you can have your silos interact to reach your objective. It does require adults to put aside some self-interest. The dollars that you have are what you are going to get. I pray that you won't receive less. You have to make a decision about more autonomy about your budgets. You redirect resources to meet needs. We could push it on the Legislature. We do broad policy and allocate funds.

Moderator Paul Reville: It's a fair point. Horace Mann schools create more autonomy and it has to be agreed to at the local level. Not many school systems have taken advantage of it. What are the impediments?

Rep. Marie St. Fleur: The reality is I don't see how you create incentives now. Maybe we can educate the communities who want Horace Mann schools. Some communities have met and stayed the course. There is some responsibility that has to come on the other side for folks who want the autonomy. A superintendent from Lynn said parents at a private school were ready to fight for their kids, yet parents from low-income areas come in with hat in hands and believe the schools are the one with the power. Parents want to be involved but don't know how or feel they can. Perhaps helping those people organize might be a way to create Horace Mann schools.

Moderator Paul Reville: A vision of small schools has been laid out. What has been your experience Theresa?
Theresa Perry: We have to create a culture that is so strong that it shapes kids' cultural identity as achievers. Persistence, a commitment to hard work and doing what is best. I have been to small schools that do neither. We have to say what is necessary and sufficient? I want the racial and ethnic breakdown on the Boston schools and on the Lynn and Somerville schools, because we don't know if we have an achievement gap.

Moderator Paul Reville: Autonomy has been discussed in a number of ways. What are the costs and benefits?

Donna Rodrigues: Autonomy is good. You create a leadership team. We did that early. I was only alone during the planning year. I gave the same autonomy to my teachers, even though many of them were young. The colleague issue became difficult. It does for any school that has success. I taught in the city for a long time, but I felt pressure from people I had been with for many years. My mind was on getting kids to college, and they all did.

AUDIENCE QUESTION: I wanted to hear more about Somerville High School. We are not going to get dozens and dozens of these smaller schools.

Senator Robert Antonioni: One key factor has to be the involvement of the parents. One way to do that might be through the involvement of school councils and giving school councils more authority. Now they are an advisory group if they meet at all. I met yesterday with Sen. Magnani. He suggested we might give the councils the authority to approve the local budget submission for the school to the school committee. Now the principal will make a recommendation. Under this suggestion, the council would approve the recommendation before it went to the school committee. If the budget doesn't get there, that would be a red flag for the school committee. My concern was there might be a handful of parents who have it in for the principal. But eventually that will shake out. Parents have to feel involved and have a say. In urban schools and larger schools, parents don't feel involved.

Maxine Minkoff: I don't think we can put the problem off when parents are not involved. High standards and opportunity for teachers to work collegially can make a big difference.

Dan French: There is no reason why you can't extend the qualities of smaller schools to a greater number of schools.

AUDIENCE QUESTION: An impediment in Boston to more choice is a cap on new charters. Would you support efforts to amend the law to allow the cap to be lifted for more charters?

Rep. Marie St. Fleur: No. I would not support a lift of that cap. We need to figure out how to make those charter schools in Boston have a real impact on district change. There is some very good work being done. Part of what the charters was supposed to do is change the way our public schools operate. To me, that should be the focus. We have not figured out the tuition and funding issue. To increase the cap without figuring that out jeopardized the education of 80 or 90 percent of the others.

Senator Robert Antonioni: I was the chief sponsor of the bill that increased the number of charter schools a few years ago. I hear a lot about charters not doing enough to promote replication, but there is a limited dialogue between charter and district schools. It just doesn't exist. To have dialogue, you need two people who want to communicate. The funding issue is at the heart of the problem with the expansion of charter schools now. Marie and I have discussed in a preliminary way the need to look at that. That's really the issue, making the funding mechanism fairer. The reimbursement funds have been cut, like virtually every item in the budget. That has made it more difficult. It's not a matter of spending on charter schools but whether or not there should be a moratorium on charter schools. That did not pass in conference, but grew out of the lack of reimbursement and the lack of new dollars going to district schools under Chapter 70.

Moderator Paul Reville: What's one thing we ought to think about to move the agenda for effective urban high schools?

Donna Rodrigues: You can't just do it, you have to do it right. Raise the expectations for kids. If you are in the large school make it personal. Don't assume they can't do it.

Theresa Perry: Have a school that is organized around the potential of black and Latino kids and challenging curricula with adequate supports and building authentic partnerships with community institutions.

Senator Robert Antonioni: Establish the political will at the state and local level to redirect resources to targets that need the money. That may mean taking from some districts and giving to others.

Irwin Blumer: There's no guarantee that a small school is a good school. It is all about beliefs and values. Parents feel disenfranchised. You have an obligation to those people.

Rep. Marie St. Fleur: It's about funding and accountability and adult accountability. It's about building relationships, new paradigms among different segments that deliver education to our children.