The Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993 sparked an unprecedented era of reform activity in schools and districts that continues to this day. Over the past decade, the state has more than doubled its local aid to schools and districts, and held local entities accountable by creating standards and assessments on which the progress of all students is measured. Massachusetts' standards and assessments have become national models of rigor and quality, and evidence from national exams such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) shows that students of the Commonwealth regularly perform at or near the top of comparisons across states. However, these indications that the state has made strides in creating and enforcing high standards do not account for the unevenness in the outcomes of education reform in Massachusetts.
The purpose of this report, Reaching Capacity: A Blueprint for the State Role in Improving Low Performing Schools and Districts, is to clarify the state's role in helping schools and districts address their needs. This report begins from the premise that the state has an obligation that it is not meeting. Schools and districts -- disproportionately those that serve low-income and non-white students -- are struggling and need tools, resources and assistance to raise student achievement. Evidence from the past decade demonstrates that adding unrestricted funding is an insufficient remedy to the problem of chronic low performance. Both in Massachusetts and nationally, there is limited knowledge about how to educate poor and diverse students well at scale. Yet, this is the challenge that stands as the unfinished business of education reform in the Commonwealth, and this is the challenge that remains in completing an equitable and enforceable accountability system in which all students have equal opportunities to learn.
Drawing on research with principals and superintendents in struggling, urban districts, the Rennie Center's report offers considerations that the state develop its intervention capacity in specific areas where school administrators cite the greatest need. Report considerations include:
- Increase state guidance on curricular and professional development options;
- Develop a formative, value-added system to analyze MCAS data;
- Increase state capacity to provide professional development, particularly in math, special education and strategies for English Language learners; and,
- Create state-level incentives to strengthen leadership at the local level.
To address these considerations, the report calls for the Department of Education to make significant infrastructure changes, including increased collaboration with external turnaround partners.
Summary of Examining State Intervention Capacity
State accountability systems and the No Child Left Behind Act force policymakers and the public, alike, to recognize the large numbers of schools that are failing to educate all students to high standards. More schools and districts than ever are being identified as low performing, and the problem requires substantial, systemic action from the state. The policy focus in Massachusetts has shifted from developing an assessment system that identifies low performers to recognizing the need for the state to increase its capacity to provide assistance. The goal of providing state assistance to schools and districts is to build their capacity for improving student achievement.
This brief is designed to inform policymakers about the current context surrounding state intervention into low performing schools and districts and to outline the steps the state can take to further develop its intervention services. Rather than identifying the state system that has had the greatest impact on student achievement, this report is intended to offer ideas based on other states' different approaches and to highlight the need for further research.
This policy brief is broken into five sections that:
- Clarify current state and national imperatives which require expanded support to low performing schools and districts;
- Describe the state intervention system that presently operates in Massachusetts and analyze it in the context of other state's efforts;
- Identify key decision areas in the design and expansion of intervention systems;
- Profile innovative district intervention models from other states that could provide lessons on implementation and structure for Massachusetts; and
- Present a series of recommendations for Massachusetts to consider in strengthening its system of intervention, especially at the district level.