<DOC> [109th Congress House Hearings] [From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access] [DOCID: f:21648.wais] THE ROLE OF NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN STATE AND LOCAL HIGH SCHOOL REFORM EFFORTS ======================================================================= HEARING before the SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM of the COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION __________ June 9, 2005 __________ Serial No. 109-21 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/ house or Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov ______ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 21-648 WASHINGTON : 2005 _____________________________________________________________________________ For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800 Fax: (202) 512ÿ092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001 COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE JOHN A. BOEHNER, Ohio, Chairman Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin, Vice George Miller, California Chairman Dale E. Kildee, Michigan Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon, Major R. Owens, New York California Donald M. Payne, New Jersey Michael N. Castle, Delaware Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey Sam Johnson, Texas Robert C. Scott, Virginia Mark E. Souder, Indiana Lynn C. Woolsey, California Charlie Norwood, Georgia Ruben Hinojosa, Texas Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan Carolyn McCarthy, New York Judy Biggert, Illinois John F. Tierney, Massachusetts Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania Ron Kind, Wisconsin Patrick J. Tiberi, Ohio Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Ric Keller, Florida David Wu, Oregon Tom Osborne, Nebraska Rush D. Holt, New Jersey Joe Wilson, South Carolina Susan A. Davis, California Jon C. Porter, Nevada Betty McCollum, Minnesota John Kline, Minnesota Danny K. Davis, Illinois Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona Bob Inglis, South Carolina Chris Van Hollen, Maryland Cathy McMorris, Washington Tim Ryan, Ohio Kenny Marchant, Texas Timothy H. Bishop, New York Tom Price, Georgia John Barrow, Georgia Luis G. Fortuno, Puerto Rico Bobby Jindal, Louisiana Charles W. Boustany, Jr., Louisiana Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Thelma D. Drake, Virginia John R. ``Randy'' Kuhl, Jr., New York Paula Nowakowski, Staff Director John Lawrence, Minority Staff Director ------ SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM MICHAEL N. CASTLE, Delaware, Chairman Tom Osborne, Nebraska, Vice Lynn C. Woolsey, California Chairman Danny K. Davis, Illinois Mark E. Souder, Indiana Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey Judy Biggert, Illinois Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania Virginia Ric Keller, Florida Ruben Hinojosa, Texas Joe Wilson, South Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Bobby Jindal, Louisiana Susan A. Davis, California John R. ``Randy'' Kuhl, Jr., New George Miller, California, ex York officio John A. Boehner, Ohio, ex officio ------ C O N T E N T S ---------- Page Hearing held on June 9, 2005..................................... 1 Statement of Members: Castle, Hon. Michael N., Chairman, Subcommittee on Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce........... 1 Prepared statement of.................................... 3 Miller, Hon. George, Ranking Member, Committee on Education and the Workforce.......................................... 4 Woolsey, Hon. Lynn C., Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce. 3 Statement of Witnesses: Henriquez, Andres, Program Officer, Education Division, Carnegie Corporation of New York, New York, NY............. 16 Prepared statement of.................................... 18 Howard, Deborah, Program Director, School Improvement, KnowledgeWorks Foundation, Cincinnati, OH.................. 10 Prepared statement of.................................... 12 Vander Ark, Tom, Executive Director, Education, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA...................... 5 Prepared statement of.................................... 8 THE ROLE OF NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN STATE AND LOCAL HIGH SCHOOL REFORM EFFORTS ---------- Thursday, June 9, 2005 U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Education Reform Committee on Education and the Workforce Washington, DC ---------- The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Michael N. Castle, [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. Present: Representatives Castle, Ehlers, Osborne, Kuhl, Woolsey, Scott, Hinojosa, and Davis of California. Ex officio present: Representative Miller. Also present: Representative Fattah. Staff Present: Amanda Farris, Professional Staff Member; Kevin Frank, Professional Staff Member; Lucy House, Legislative Assistant; Alexa Marrero, Press Secretary; Krisann Pearce, Deputy Director of Education and Human Resources Policy; Deborah L. Samantar, Committee Clerk/Intern Coordinator; Alice Cain, Minority Legislative Associate/Education; Lloyd Horwich, Minority Legislative Associate; Ricardo Martinez, Minority Legislative Associate; Joe Novotny, Minority Legislative Assistant. STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL N. CASTLE, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE Chairman Castle. The forum for the Committee on Education and the Workforce will come to order. We're meeting today to hear testimony on The Role of Non- Profit Organizations in State and Local High School Reform Efforts. I want to get to our witnesses today, so I am going to limit statements to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee. I would also like to welcome the distinguished Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Miller to the hearing and invite him to make a statement. Therefore, if other members have statements they will be included in the hearing record. With that I ask the unanimous consent for the hearing record to remain open for fourteen days to allow members' statements and other extraneous material referenced during the hearing to be submitted in the official hearing record. Without objection, so ordered. Today marks the second in a series of hearings our Committee will hold to examine the status of secondary education and what efforts are currently being made to strengthen high schools across the country. This Committee recently heard from Governors Romney and Vilsack about high school reform efforts in their states. Today, we will hear from three nonprofit organizations about the partnerships they have across the country, and the innovative ways in which they are driving change in our high schools. High school reform is surfacing as a necessity. This is, in large part, due to recent research that indicates: One quarter of America's high school students read below basic levels; America's 15-year-olds performed below the international average in mathematics, literacy and problem solving, placing 27th out of 39 countries; 30 percent of students do not graduate from high school; And 50 percent of African-American and Hispanic students do not graduate. These are unacceptable statistics, and resemble what we saw in our elementary schools leading to the enactment of No Child Left Behind. High school is no longer about simply moving students from ninth grade to graduation. We now must ensure all students are leaving their secondary education with the skills necessary to reach their next goal. Whether that goal is college, the military, or to enter the workforce does not matter. All students now need the basic skills to excel. A recent study by the Education Commission on the States suggest that most high school students expect to graduate from college. The study also shows, however, that only about half of the students take a rigorous academic program, and that few can perform anything but relatively simple tasks in mathematics and reading. The importance of having a post-secondary degree is resonating with our high school students. To me, this is good news, but we have to make sure we are getting it right in high school. For example, students need to realize that the senior year is still an academic year, and the schools should seek to eliminate student apathy once students have gain admittance into their next endeavor. I am sure that every person in this room has heard me say more than once that I am an advocate on behalf of No Child Left Behind. It is the right thing to do, and is making significant headway in closing the achievement gap. I commend the President, the National Governor's Association, local school districts, and nonprofit organizations for recognizing we now need to address our nation's high schools. I am not yet sure if there is a Federal role, or what that role should be, but I continue to be committed to learning more and doing whatever I can to make this part of the education reform dialog. I thank you all for being here and look forward to hearing from our witnesses. Chairman Castle. I now yield to the gentlelady from California, the Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee, Ms. Woolsey. [The prepared statement of Chairman Castle follows:] Statement of Hon. Michael N. Castle, Chairman, Subcommittee on Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce Today marks the second in a series of hearings our Committee will hold to examine the status of secondary education and what efforts are currently being made to strengthen high schools across the country. This Committee recently heard from Governors Romney and Vilsack about high school reform efforts in their states. Today, we will hear from three non-profit organizations about the partnerships they have across the country, and the innovative ways in which they are driving change in our high schools. High school reform is surfacing as a necessity. This is, in large part, due to recent research that indicates: One quarter of America's high school students read below basic levels; America's 15-year-olds performed below the international average in mathematics literacy and problem-solving, placing 27th out of 39 countries; 30% of students do not graduate from high school; and 50% of African-American and Hispanic students do not graduate. These are unacceptable statistics, and resemble what we saw in our elementary schools leading to the enactment of No Child Left Behind. High school is no longer about simply moving students from ninth grade to graduation. We now must ensure all students are leaving their secondary education with the skills necessary to reach their next goal. Whether that goal is college, the military, or to enter the workforce does not matter--all students now need the basic skills to excel. A recent study by the Education Commission on the States suggests that most high school students expect to graduate from college. The study also shows, however, that only about half of these students take a rigorous academic program, and that few can perform anything but relatively simple tasks in mathematics and reading. The importance of having a postsecondary degree is resonating with our high school students. To me, this is good news, but we have to make sure we are getting it right in high school. For example, students need to realize that the senior year is still an academic year, and schools should seek to eliminate student apathy once students have gained admittance into their next endeavor. I am sure that every person in this room has heard me say more than once that I am an advocate on behalf of No Child Left Behind. It is the right thing to do, and is making significant headway in closing the achievement gap. I commend the President, the National Governors Association, local school districts, and non-profit organizations for recognizing we now need to address our nation's high schools. I am not yet sure if there is a federal role, or what that role would be, but continue to be committed to learning more and doing whatever I can to make this part of the education reform dialogue. I thank you all for being here, and look forward to hearing from our witnesses. ______ STATEMENT OF HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for today's hearing, and thank you witnesses for being here. I am anxious to hear from you. High school reform has not been a really hot topic in Washington, but it's something that the Congress is looking at becoming more involved in, because of the future of these young people, and the future of our nation with this new economy-- knowledge economy that we have to be ready for. So while we're thinking about whether and how, and when, and why to get more involved, it's really important that we hear from people like yourselves that have been seriously considering these issues certainly before today. Last month the Full Committee heard from both Democratic and Republican Governors. Today we're going to hear from the foundations that have been in the front lines of high school reform. And as we move forward, I am hoping that we will have the opportunity to hear from school administrators, teachers, parents and certainly students about their experiences. There isn't any doubt in my mind, and certainly this Committee's, that this is a critical issue. And we'll hear today, of course, that of every 100 students who enter high school about 70 will graduate, and the numbers are so much lower for minority students. Of those 70, about 40 will go on to college, and many of them will require remedial help when they get to college. And only about 20 of the original hundred will complete college in 6 years or fewer. That may have been good enough during the industrial age when most workers needed only basic skills and a basic understanding of citizenship to get a good job and participate in the political process. But today, that is not good enough, because we have a knowledge economy, and we have to have our children and our students ready to participate in it. In a recent article, ``It's a Flat World After All'', a book authored by New York Times' Thomas Friedman, he explained that America's historical economic advantages have disappeared now that the world is flat, and anyone with smarts, access to Google, and a cheap wireless laptop can join the innovation fray. Mr. Friedman and others have remedies that they believe will attract more young women and men to science and engineering. But it will be impossible for our country to continue to lead the world in innovation if our high school system is not among the best in the world. That's why I'm looking forward to hearing from all of you. Oh, I should say that Mr. Hendricks--Henriquez. I'm really sorry. Mr. Henriquez. Henriquez. Ms. Woolsey. Henriquez, thank you--is here from Sir Francis Drake--what? Oh, he mentioned Sir Francis Drake High School in his remarks, which I really appreciate. That's a school that we all admire in my district. So thank you for being here. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. Thank you Ms. Woolsey. I will now yield to the distinguished Ranking Minority Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Miller, for the purpose of making an opening statement. STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE MILLER, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and thank you so much for this hearing, and Ms. Woolsey for this hearing. And I share all of the concerns that you have both echoed about the performance and the future purpose of high school. But I'm really here because I am very excited about the partnership between the Governors and the nonprofit sectors, in terms of developing true laboratories for consideration on how we might reshape the educational experience of our high school students. How we might make it better connected to the workplace, to their educational future, and the idea that we have this kind of public and private partnership really developing a roadmap for the Congress over the next couple of years, I think, is very, very valuable. I am working on and hope to be able, at some point, to convince the Congress that we should put in some matching money, that we should in fact encourage more of this effort. So that when we do make a decision about it, and I believe there will be a Federal role to play, that it will be an informed role, it will be based upon the best evidence available. We can shorten that timeframe in terms of our involvement in an effective way and the outcomes that we all desire, given the current status of high schools and achievements--the gaps that remain. So I look forward to the testimony. Thank you Mr. Chairman so much, for this hearing. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Miller. We have a very distinguished panel of witnesses before us today, and I thank each of you for coming today. I'll go across and introduce each of you and then we'll have your statements. Tom Vander Ark is the Executive Director for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's Education Initiatives. He is responsible for the development and administration of the foundation's education grant and scholarship programs. For 5 years prior to joining the Gates foundation, Mr. Vander Ark served as a public school superintendent, Fedaway Public Schools, one of Washington state's larger districts. He is one of the first superintendents in the Nation to be recruited from the private sector to lead a public school district. Mrs. Deborah Howard serves as a Program Director of School Improvement at the Knowledge Works Foundation. As program director she is a designer and day-to-day manager of the Foundation's $50 million-plus high school improvement efforts, the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the Early College High School Initiative. Prior to her current position, Mrs. Howard established an education consulting firm called Principal Results, Inc. in Independence, Ohio. Mr. Andres Henriquez serves as Program Officer of the Education Division of the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Mr. Henriquez works on a wide variety of education issues with a special emphasis on intermediate and adolescent literacy. He is also a certified teacher who taught for 5 years in a public elementary school in East Harlem. We thank all of you very much for being here. You probably know the sequence of events. You each have 5 minutes to make your presentation. If lights, I think it's green for four, and yellow for one, and thereafter red. And we will go through each of you, and then we will take turns in 5-minute exchanges coming from the various members up here. Mr. Vander Ark, you're the lead-off hitter. STATEMENT OF TOM VANDER ARK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, THE BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION, SEATTLE, WA Mr. Vander Ark. Chairman Castle and Ranking Member Woolsey, members of the Subcommittee, it's a pleasure to be with you. It's an honor to be here with my friends from the Carnegie Foundation and the Knowledge Works Foundation. I found the opening remarks quite remarkable. We wouldn't have been having this conversation 5 years ago. It was 5 years ago that I went to my high school--my daughter's high school graduation. She went to high school where I was a school superintendent. So it was the first time that I sat in the audience for graduation rather than sitting up front in one of those robes. As I watched her and her colleagues walk in, I thought there's not enough of them there. And I pulled out the program and I counted and there were only 400 kids. But I knew that the two junior highs in our district had 300 kids each in the ninth grade class. And for the hour and a half of my daughter's graduation I thought we are or the other 200 kids. What happened to those kids? Kids on my watch as superintendent, that dropped out. So what should have been one of the best days in my life was--was a painful reckoning with the fact that kids in my district, an inner ring suburb of both Seattle and Tacoma, we lose a third of our kids and almost half of the African- American and Hispanic kids. If you let that sink in, and you think about what that means for our future, for our economy, for our civil society, it's a scary statistic. What we didn't know until four or 5 years ago was that that is true nationwide. Our friends at the Manhattan Institute and the Urban Institute have both confirmed that the statistics that the Chairman and the ranking member pointed out at the beginning, it's an appalling problem that we simply haven't had the data. That's a positive way of putting it. The other way of putting it is that we've been lying to each other for decades about how many kids really leave school and under what conditions. So it's a difficult problem. But we're working on it because we think it's the most important problem in American education. This not to say that is more important than early literacy. We understand that there's nothing better than, nothing more important than early start. K-8 improvement in this country is vitally important, but it is not enough. We have to make sure that every student has access to really high-quality high schools that prepare them for college and work and citizenship. So it's difficult problem, but like Representative Miller, I'm really excited about several developments. I would like to mention a couple. One is that when I visit a school like Frederick Douglass Academy in Harlem, or the new College Board school in the projects in the South Bronx, or when I go to Wilson Prep, it's outside of Oakland, here's the statistic that I think about when I'm in those schools. Kids in those neighborhoods today have a five or 6 percent chance of finishing a college degree. You're from a low income family and you're a minority, there is a five or 6 percent chance that you're going to finish a college degree. When I walk into those schools and see the kids at each of those schools, they have a 60 or 70 percent chance of finishing a college degree. A powerful school can make a big difference in the lives of low income kids. And as many noted authors have pointed out, there are many challenges outside of school that we also need to deal with. But a powerful school can have an extremely--can make a big difference in a student's life. So I'm excited about the progress that we're making in new school development. We have helped to fund over 800 new schools and 42 states around the country. I am also, as Representative Miller put it, I am very excited about the progress that is being made at the state level. I think at least in part because of the National Governors Association Summit, and the parallel work done by Achieve over the last few years, that over half of the states will make significant progress in their policy and data sets toward helping more students graduate from high school, ready for college. I'm encouraged, but also challenged, by our work with existing high schools. The big lesson learned in 5 years and hundreds of millions of dollars, is that it is very, very difficult to turn around a large struggling urban high school. I am encouraged, however, by the public-private partnerships that are being created with the foundations represented here and with cities all over the country. I know that you would enjoy the testimony that you'll hear about those partnerships. I would like to conclude with five very specific pieces of advice about the Federal role toward helping more students in America graduate ready for college, work and citizenship. The first is to lend your support to the post-Summit activities that the National Governors Association is leading. NGA is pleased to receive over 30 grant applications this month. That's an exciting response, and indicative of the momentum and the opportunity that exists. I very much encourage you to support that effort. Second would be to provide continued support for the development of state and local data systems. The state of data systems in education today is still pathetic. It is very difficult to know very basic information about students. I am very encouraged by the Secretary and Assistant Secretary's attention to this issue, and know that there are very promising opportunities for public-private partnerships in this area. The third and related area would be would just to help us pick a graduation rate, a definition of a graduation rate. As simple as that sounds, it's a complicated calculation and many states use different rates that inhibit our ability to just track student performance, school performance, and then to compare state to state. And there is a Federal role in helping us just define the common rate. No. 4 is intervening in struggling schools. I think this will be the biggest issue that states would deal with in the next 5 years, as the growing number of identify struggling schools continues to mount. It's going to take big public- private partnerships to help turn around the struggling schools. And finally, I think there's a role for the Federal Government to create public-private partnerships to fund the development of exciting new school options. Math and science schools. The College Board is developing its exciting Advanced Placement Schools grades six through 12 where all students leave with some college credit. Early College High Schools, Debbie will mention, where students have the opportunity to leave high school with an associate degree. So there is exciting new school opportunities. And finally, I just want to say thank you to the Committee leadership. We appreciate the attention that Congress and the Secretary and the White House are paying to this important issue. We appreciate the opportunity to testify today. [The prepared statement of Mr. Vander Ark follows:] Statement of Tom Vander Ark, Executive Director, Education, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA I. Introduction Chairman Castle, Ranking Member Woolsey, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on this vital issue of redesigning the American high school. I am pleased to be here to brief you on the work of the Gates Foundation and other non- profit organizations, and to provide some thoughts on what further actions are needed at all levels of government. II. The Problem: The High Schools of Today are Obsolete As Bill Gates recently said to our nation's governors and business leaders, America's high schools are obsolete. They were designed for the 20th century's industrial-age economy, when relatively few students needed the kind of higher-order knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in college. Of 100 ninth graders entering high school today, fewer than 70 will graduate, approximately 40 will go directly to college, with only just over 30 prepared for college, and fewer than 20 will graduate from college within six years. These numbers are even lower for poor and minority students. And this underperformance is reflected in international comparisons. One recent study, for example, places the United States 24th out of 29 of the most developed (OECD) nations in terms of math literacy among (15-year old) high school students. III. The Vision--Redesigning the American High School with a Range of Options and College-Ready Expectations If the United States is going to continue to lead the world economically, and if every child is going to have the opportunity to rise to his or her potential, then we must fundamentally redesign our high schools to prepare all students for the 21st century. The high school of tomorrow must be build around the new three Rs of rigor, relevance, and relationships to focus on the needs of each individual student--using data and providing a range of options to ensure that every student graduates with the knowledge and skills necessary for college, work, and citizenship. IV. The Role of the Gates Foundation The Gates Foundation was conceived out of a desire to advance equity around the world--to help make sure that, no matter where a person is born, he or she has the chance to live a healthy, productive life. With the belief that our support should spur innovation to find solutions that will continue working long after our grant making has ended, we look for places where every dollar invested and each hour expended can make the biggest impact. This approach has led us to work in two main areas: Around the world, we invest in health, because millions of people in developing countries die every year from diseases that have been virtually eliminated in the rich world. And here in the United States, we believe we can do the most to promote equity through education. The Gates Foundation believes in the importance of improving education at all levels--from early childhood education to college and beyond. But our focus is on strengthening the American high schools because evidence shows that performance in early grades is often not sustained in later grades, because high schools represent a vital link between primary education and the demands and opportunities of the 21st century, and because high schools are often the weakest link in our education pipeline rather than a seamless link between K-12 and higher education. To date, the Gates Foundation has invested approximately $1 billion over the last five years to help spur innovation and focus our nation on the goal of ensuring that all students graduate from high school ready for college, work, and citizenship. The foundation has supported over 1500 schools in 41 states. Most of our school-level grantmaking has focused on new school creation and improvement of existing schools. New school creation can provide quality options for underserved communities, replace failing schools, or build on community assets. While many foundation-sponsored new schools are still young, the results are promising. Students have demonstrated high levels of engagement (high attendance and retention rates), teachers and leaders have built a school-based culture that supports high expectations (emphasis on college preparatory curriculum for all students), and schools have achieved good results (relatively strong test scores and graduation rates). A handful of these schools have also been able to scale effectively--that is, grow a single high performing school into a network of consistently high performing schools. From them we have learned that any new school strategy designed to increase the supply of quality options must include a clearly articulated school model and strong support systems. Schools that have posted the largest gains in both attainment and achievement have benefited from a well-structured reform model paired with strong technical assistance. IV. Key National Activities and Elements of High School and System Redesign I am pleased to say that, over the last year in particular, a strong national consensus has emerged regarding the need to transform America's high schools. For example, the National Governors Association has made high school reform a top priority, and at the federal level President Bush has made high school reform the centerpiece of his second term education agenda. The Gates Foundation was proud to sponsor the NGA-Achieve 2005 National Education Summit on High School earlier this year, at which many of our nation's governors along with national leaders from business, education, philanthropy, and more came together to discuss and commit to the vital issue of high school redesign. Among other things, the Summit included publication of an Action Agenda that outlines many of the broad policy areas that should be the focus of high school redesign efforts, including: <bullet> Aligning high school standards, curriculum, and assessments with college and work expectations; <bullet> Providing a range of high school options and interventions that can support the needs of individual students; <bullet> Preparing teachers and professionals to achieve college- ready expectations; <bullet> Promoting meaningful use of data along with valid and reliable models for high school accountability; and <bullet> Streamlining education governance to create a more seamless education pipeline. Following the Summit, NGA has announced a new grant program for states, funded by the Gates Foundation and others, that is designed to help states move strategically through the long-term process of high school redesign. Over the last two months, a vast majority of states have brought together multidisciplinary teams of leaders, committed to the goal of all students graduating from high school ready for college and work, worked through a comprehensive blueprint for developing their high school redesign plans, and applied for the NGA grants. And we expect that NGA will announce ten or more states as grant recipients next month. V. Lessons Learned from High School Redesign Though much work remains to be done, there is a lot we have learned from our research, evaluation, and experiences regarding what it takes to transform the American high school and ensure that all students graduate ready for college, work, and citizenship. And we have promising examples of real world results in high schools that have undergone fundamental change. Among the core lessons we have learned are the following related points: <bullet> Successful high school redesign requires systemic changes at both the policy level and in practice. This requires a careful balance between a consistent, across-the-board commitment to college- ready standards, curriculum, and expectations (for example) along with a flexible range of options to focus on what is most effective for each student and in different contexts. <bullet> Successful high school redesign promotes a focus on individual students, based on the new three Rs of rigor, relevance, and relationships. And this kind of effort is often most efficient and effective in the context of new high schools that are built from the start with a focus on this purpose and structure. <bullet> Successful high school redesign depends on a coordinated, long-term approach to fundamentally restructure the high school; add-on programs are not likely to be enough. The NGA post-Summit grants, for example, ask states to take immediate action as part of a ten-year plan. V. The Federal Role in Promoting Effective High School Redesign The moral, economic, and democratic imperative that has called us to action in support of high schools and high school students is driven by a groundswell of support among both governmental and non- governmental organizations across the country. And the federal government has become an important partner in education reform, promoting accountability, providing resources, offering technical assistance, and more. I applaud Congress and this Subcommittee for taking the time to examine this issue that is vital to the individual futures of so many children and to the future security and prosperity of our nation. And I urge you to consider how the federal government can support the efforts that are hopefully approaching a tipping point across the country. In that regard, let me make three suggestions: First, the federal government should support promising state and local efforts with regard to high school redesign, such as those being undertaken by states as part of the NGA post-Summit grants and the American Diploma Project. Second, there are some immediate efforts that Congress should consider in light of its pending reauthorizations and as part of implementation of current federal law. These include: <bullet> providing continued support for the development of state and local data systems that can mark student progress P-16 and foster data-driven decision-making; <bullet> promoting more valid and reliable accountability for high schools, including more accurate definitions of graduation rates; <bullet> providing assistance to states to build the capacity necessary to improve struggling districts and schools; and <bullet> providing increased support for the creation of high school choices that will ensure all students have access to high quality options, including schools of choice, charter schools, and new schools, with a particular focus on math and science high schools. Third, Congress should give ample consideration to the President's proposed high school reform initiatives as part of its examination of this issue, such as the proposed support for individual student learning plans and for the establishment of a teacher incentive fund. VI. Conclusion In conclusion, the Gates Foundation believes there is a unique window of opportunity to redesign the American high school for the 21st century, and it is imperative--for both individual students and our nation--that we seize this opportunity and spur change at the local, state, and federal levels. We--national non-profit organizations, concerned community members, policy makers at all levels, parents, educators, and others--cannot afford to let this window of opportunity close without drawing upon our common visions, best experiences, and lessons learned to ensure that all students have access to high quality high schools. ______ Chairman Castle. Thank you Mr. Vander Ark. Ms. Howard. STATEMENT OF DEBORAH HOWARD, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT, KNOWLEDGEWORKS FOUNDATION, CINCINNATI, OH Ms. Howard. Chairman Castle and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you very much for the opportunity. I'm here today on behalf of our president, Chad P. Wick, who wanted to be with you, but at this moment is receiving an honorary doctorate and needed to be there. Knowledge Works Foundation is Ohio's largest education philanthropy. And I wanted to talk to you today about the scope of our work and then how we achieve that work. We act as a convener, a funder, a facilitator and a technical assistance provider. Our focus often offers cover for innovators and reformers on the ground to give them time to really achieve their goals. Acting in these roles, Knowledge Works strengthens the independent, credible voice for education in Ohio. Knowledge Works, as Tom mentioned, has one of the largest and most aggressive high school reform efforts in the country. We have partnership with the Knowledge Works Foundations, the Gates Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, the Ohio Department of Education, the Kellogg Foundation and the Ford Foundation. Together all of these partners are investing more than 50 million dollars in Ohio's high schools over 5 years. Our work touches 25,000 students in some of the state's most economically challenged urban and rural districts. We have two major initiatives. The Ohio High School Transformation Initiative, in which we help local communities take existing high school facilities and use them in new and more effective ways. In fall of 2004, 58 new, separate small high schools opened their doors on what used to be 17 large low performing urban campuses. Eleven more new small schools will open this August. The second initiative is Ohio Early College High School Initiative. We are actually forming 10 new Early College High Schools, which as Tom pointed out help students earn up to 2 years of college credit or an associate's degree while they are earning their high school diploma. Together we believe these 79 new small schools will really help create a tipping point for high school reform in Ohio. Because our schools are in their first or second year of development we don't yet have a long track record of student achievement data. However, the early results are promising. The Dayton Early College Academy is located in the state's lowest performing urban district. Right before I got on the plane to come here yesterday, I learned that 90 percent of the first of its classes to take the Ohio graduation test this spring passed that test on the first try. That's the lowest performing urban district in the state. Seventy percent of the students at that school, and 100 percent of the students at the Lorain Early College High School and the Youngstown Early College High School are taking and passing college courses in their ninth and 10th grade years. These are not cream of the crop, these are students that are believed not to be college-going in the traditional setting. Initial data covered from the first few months of operation in our conversion schools in the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative shows some promising evidence. There is some improvements in attendance and discipline, and there's growing evidence that teachers are making real changes in teaching and learning. All of the schools are focused on rigorous standards-based curriculum that really connects what's learned in the classroom to what happens in the community. Here's how we work to achieve results. We just don't give grants and walk away. We began by building a coalition of state-level leaders that can move policy and resources to achieve the goal. We include the Governor's office, the Ohio Department of Education, and the heads of the largest education associations in the state, for the teacher's unions, the administrators and the school boards. Together this group allows us to align and integrate multiple funding streams and waive administrative policies that get the way of real change. We have leadership development for principals. We fund for workshops and embedded coaches on the school sites. We have separate grants to community organizations and train them and grassroots advocacy to sustain the schools. We provide leadership development for students so that their voices are heard not only in their local schools, but in the statehouse. Finally we have a strong system of evaluation and knowledge management that points to what is working on the ground, shows us the gaps in the design and resources, and then shows the value added impact of our work. Finally, we also have tough non-negotiable attributes and detailed contract that hold the systems with which we work accountable for achieving a tough set of benchmarks. Either they achieve the benchmarks or they risk losing funding. At Knowledge Works Foundation we take very seriously our role as the state's largest education philanthropy. As such we seek to be a trusted resource and a partner. We help move the work further faster. We provide honest, tough, feedback to schools and we work with them in literacy, with their ninth graders and throughout their high school career. We expect results and we are committed to delivering the same. Thank you for your attention. I will be happy to provide stories and examples from the ground, or to answer any questions that you may have. [The prepared statement of Ms. Howard follows:] Statement of Deborah Howard, Program Director, School Improvement, KnowledgeWorks Foundation, Cincinnati, OH Thank you, Chairman Castle and members of the Subcommittee, for this opportunity to share KnowledgeWorks Foundation's experiences in support of local and statewide high school improvement efforts in Ohio. Overview of the Foundation KnowledgeWorks Foundation is Ohio's largest education philanthropy. Created in 1998, KnowledgeWorks is classified as an ``operating foundation.'' That means we both award grants and receive funding that furthers our work. Our Board and staff believe that education is the key to the success of individuals and society. We are dedicated to removing barriers to education for all individuals. To achieve that goal, we work to create partnerships that will produce measurably better educational results throughout the state. The Foundation carefully focuses its limited human and financial resources on systemic initiatives in where there is a convergence of statewide attention to the problem and the will to effect real, lasting change. We believe that educational barriers can be eliminated by collaborating with those public and private entities across the state and the nation who share that goal. KnowledgeWorks Foundation acts as a convenor, a facilitator, a funder, and a technical assistance provider. Often, our focus on accountability offers ``cover'' for the innovators and reformers to give them time and space to achieve their goals. Acting in these roles, the Foundation strengthens the independent, credible voice for education in Ohio; convenes education leaders around their priorities; facilitates stakeholder discussions with interests similar to ours; and defines and communicates the problem in a way that also advances reasonable solutions. Scope of Our High School Improvement Work KnowledgeWorks Foundation's statewide high school initiatives are grounded in the belief that learning is ultimately about relationships--about making connections between people, places, resources and ideas. Through two primary initiatives, the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the Ohio Early College Network, KnowledgeWorks is focused on creating a tipping point for high school reform statewide. Over a five-year period, KnowledgeWorks Foundation and its partners, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, the Ohio Department of Education, and the Ford Foundation, will invest more than $50 million in Ohio's high schools with a three- pronged goal: 1. To change forever the way in which our high schools are designed and operated, moving them from the assembly line, factory model to the information age; 2. Dramatically improve student achievement at the high school level, preparing them to enter college without remediation; and 3. Ignite a firestorm of community involvement in the daily lives of the schools that both supports them and holds them accountable for achieving results. In total, the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the Ohio Early College Network impact more than 25,000 students in some of the state's most economically challenged urban and rural areas. Schools and districts involved in the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative are using existing high school facilities in new and more effective ways. In fall 2004, 58 separate, small high schools opened their doors on what used to be 17 large, low-performing urban high school campuses. Eleven more new small schools will open in August of this year, adding an 18th urban high school community to the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative. The Ohio Early College Network is helping to break the artificial barriers between high school and higher education by developing 10 new early college high schools in urban and rural sites across the state Our work involves nearly 3,000 educators annually in more than 20 professional development forums. Skills and information learned at these statewide events is then followed by intensive, research-based support from 40 seasoned educational and leadership coaches embedded at the school sites. We've created and support a statewide Small School Leaders Network that is helping train some 100 administrators and teachers to be effective leaders of these newly-designed schools. We award separate grants to support 15 local community organizations and train them in strategies for community engagement and grassroots advocacy. KnowledgeWorks provides leadership training for some 150 students statewide to ensure their voices are heard in the design and delivery of their education, both at home and in the halls of the statehouse. Finally, KnowledgeWorks Foundation invests significant resources in evaluation and knowledge management systems that continuously provide information on what's working in the field, points to gaps in design or support, and assesses the value-added impact of our work. Early Indicators of Success Because our schools are in their first or second year of development, we do not yet have trends in student achievement data, however, early results are promising. The first Early College High School, the Dayton Early College Academy, is located in the state's lowest-performing urban district. We just learned that 90% of its first class of students to take the Ohio Graduation Test this spring passed that test on the first try. Nearly 70% of the students in the Dayton Early College Academy and up to 100% of the students in the Youngstown and Lorain Early College High Schools are taking and passing college courses at their partner universities in the 9th and 10th grades. These are not the ``cream of the Ohio crop'' of students. These are students who traditionally don't view themselves as college-bound. Initial data from the first few months of operation for the new small schools formed through the conversion of existing facilities in the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative shows improvements in attendance and discipline. Students tell us they believe these changes are happening because the small school settings allow teachers to know them well, to expect more from them, and to build an individualized learning instructional plan that meets their targeted needs. In new small schools across the state, students tell us stories of how teachers have called their mothers, their fathers, their friends and others to track them down when they don't attend school. Teachers and principals, they say, expect you to attend school and they do what it takes to make that happen. There is growing evidence that teaching and learning are improving in these high schools. Through a multitude of partnerships and community-based service learning experiences, students and teachers are beginning to make connections between what happens in the classroom and life after high school. Just talk to the Cleveland students whose social studies investigation of the neighborhood around their school caught the attention of the History Channel and will soon show up as a documentary with connections to archaeology, genealogy, science and mathematics. Or the students in East Cleveland whose civics class gets a firsthand knowledge of our justice system by working with local attorneys and judges. Or the students in Dayton and Lorain who, with the blessing of their principals, are jointly researching effective instructional strategies with a goal of totally redesigning their high school curriculum. We believe these types of relationships set the stage for high levels of student achievement in systems that are focused on a rigorous, standards-based curriculum that connects what is learned in the classroom with relevant experiences in the community. The Role of the Foundation I spoke earlier of the Foundation as a convenor, a facilitator, a funder, and a technical assistance provider. Because we are an agile organization, we are able to respond quickly to needs and challenges. Our track record engenders trust and respect among our partners. The following examples demonstrate how we use those partnerships and resources to move innovations further, faster. We begin by building a coalition of state-level leaders that can move policy and resources to achieve the goal--the Governor's office, the Ohio Department of Education, the heads of the major statewide education associations of teachers, administrators and boards. Together, this group allows us to align and integrate multiple funding streams and waive administrative policies that get in the way of progress. For example, many of the barriers to change identified in our statewide initiatives formed the basis for state high school task force recommendations to improve achievement. In a matter of months--not years--these changes were reflected in the state budget appropriations approved just last week. In another area, working with the Ohio Department of Education, we were able to leverage Comprehensive School Reform dollars for eligible participants in the OHSTI, using common grant application, portfolio development and reporting processes. Potential grantees were not required to go through two different and competing sets of ``red tape'' to achieve a single set of goals. For both the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the Ohio Early College Network, schools and districts respond to a request for proposals. They choose to work with us to fundamentally redesign the high school experience in their communities. When they choose to be involved with KnowledgeWorks Foundation, they also agree to meet our Non-Negotiable terms and high performance standards, or risk losing support. And it's not just a single person choosing to be involved. Detailed contracts, with benchmarks and deliverables are established for each initiative. These contracts must be signed, not only by the school superintendent, but also by the Board President, the university president, if applicable, and the President of the teachers union at the district and/or union level. And union presidents generally call for a literal vote of support of the membership before signing on to these initiatives. So from the beginning labor and management must both agree to remain at the table, stay committed to the change process and work out the details to achieve targeted goals. On many occasions, state association presidents sat down side-by-side with KnowledgeWorks staff , local union presidents and superintendents to work through problems that would have caused a halt to other improvement efforts. Our direct grants to community-based organizations ensure they have a place at the table when key decisions are made. In addition, these grants allow the organization to focus on recruiting community members to stay involved in the daily life of the schools, serving on school- based governance teams, connecting students with internships and mentorships, working with teachers to connect the curriculum to real world applications, and taking part in performance-based assessment of students. When data showed that the majority of students in the schools we're targeting are entering the 9th grade with reading abilities at least 3- 4 years below grade level, we were able to leverage Foundation funding to contract with Kent State University and the Ohio High School Alliance to conduct baseline diagnostic testing of more than 3,000 incoming 9th graders. This data was used to develop statewide training for teachers targeted at increasing literacy support in the content areas. KnowledgeWorks kicked off the training and assisted ODE in the development and piloting of a statewide high school literacy development initiative. Conclusion At KnowledgeWorks Foundation we take seriously our role as the state's largest education philanthropy. As such, we seek to be a trusted source and partner. We help move the reform work further faster. We provide honest, tough feedback. We expect results. And we are committed to delivering the same. Thank you for your attention. I will be happy to answer any questions or provide additional information. Foundation Overview Founded in 1998, KnowledgeWorks Foundation is Ohio's largest public education philanthropy. Dedicated to removing barriers to higher education for all individuals, the Foundation provides funding, technical assistance, and other resources to initiatives that improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Ohio's public and higher education systems. To support this goal, we've committed 85 million dollars in grants to research-based, education reform initiatives since our inception. We strongly believe the reforms we fund show great promise for supporting Ohio's education, and ultimately supporting the children and adults who are the economic future of Ohio. Topic Overview Our work is grounded in four main areas: High Schools and School Improvement; Adult Learning; College Access & Success; and Communities & Schools. These areas currently support the following initiatives: High Schools and School Improvement Initiatives within the High Schools and School Improvement area address the challenges and shortcomings of Ohio's public schools, where only 7 in 10 students graduate every year. Most of our financial and human resources are invested in high schools, although our work also supports pre-kindergarten through post-secondary education. Initiatives include: The Ohio High School Transformation Initiative (OHSTI); Project GRAD Ohio; and Early College. Adult Learning Initiatives within the Adult Learning area support Ohio's low-wage workers, estimated at over 1 million, who have limited opportunities for increasing their skills and incomes. These initiatives support accessible postsecondary education for all low-wage workers, so they can escape poverty through higher-paying jobs. Initiatives include: The Ohio Bridges to Opportunity Initiative and Career Pathways. College Access & Success Initiatives within the College Access & Success area work to ensure that every Ohioan has the option of postsecondary education at all levels-apprenticeship, certificate, associate's degree, and bachelor's degree. Our goal is to grant every Ohioan access to learning beyond high school and throughout their lives. Initiatives in this area include: Early College; The Ohio Bridges to Opportunity Initiative; Ohio College Access Network (OCAN); Achieving the Dream; and Project GRAD Ohio. Communities & Schools The Communities & Schools area is encouraging school districts and communities to utilize state and national funding for school construction to make school facilities more conducive to learning, and more accessible to the entire community. We facilitate partnerships between communities and schools, so they can redesign school facilities that reflect the community's needs and values. Initiatives in this area include: School as Centers of Community and School Facilities. Our Approach Community Engagement--The Key to Healthier Schools All of our Foundation program areas support powerful community engagement that encourages community members to influence official decisions, and share ownership of their public schools. Community Engagement Public Policy--The Key to Long-term Change Our Foundation only supports education reform initiatives that will lead to long-term change in the education system. An important part of ensuring that change lasts is for the state, federal, and local governments to enact legislation that supports and nurtures the change. To that end, we identify and advance policy changes that support the initiatives we fund. Learn more about our role in public policy within High Schools, Adult Learning, College Access & Success, and Communities & Schools. The KnowledgeWorks Way We are unique in our approach to education philanthropy. We describe our method in three simple words: ``Fund, Facilitate, and Do.'' <bullet> By funding initiatives, we are strategically investing resources, including time, money, and people, into priority areas. <bullet> By facilitating initiatives, we are bringing together people who might not traditionally work collaboratively to discuss issues and uncover new solutions. <bullet> By doing some of the work ourselves, we are able to fill temporary gaps where there may not be an individual, team or community to take on a particular challenge. Mission KnowledgeWorks Foundation will increase the number and diversity of people who value and access education, by creating and improving educational opportunity at pre-kindergarten through high school and post-high school institutions, and through community organizations. History KnowledgeWorks Foundation was created in 1998 as a charitable foundation through the reorganization of the Student Loan Funding Corporation. Statistics Number of employees: 65 Endowment: $200 million Total grant commitments since inception: $85 million ______ Chairman Castle. Thank you very much, Ms. Howard. We appreciate your testimony. We will be back to you shortly. Mr. Henriquez. STATEMENT OF ANDRES HENRIQUEZ, PROGRAM OFFICER, EDUCATION DIVISION, CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, NY Mr. Henriquez. Thank you, Mr. Castle. It's good to be here in the People's Court, People's House, excuse me. I'm going to discuss a little bit about the Carnegie Corporation's work in high schools, and some of the work that we noticed that we found as we started this high school reform work. In 2001, Carnegie Corporation of New York in partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation launched Schools for a New Society, a 5-year $60 million urban high school reform effort, matched with local funds, aimed at promoting systemic and district-wide reform in seven cities. The reform efforts encourage partnerships and collaborations with community including school officials and teachers, parents and students, and community stakeholders such as teacher organizations, business leaders, elected officials, and higher education leaders. Initially the corporation invited 20 schools to submit high school reform plans, and after an in-depth review by leading educators and scholars, the school districts chosen to participate in the Schools for a New Society were Boston, Chattanooga, Houston, Providence, Sacramento, San Diego, and Worcester. The key objective is to reform policies and practices that help shape teaching and learning in the high schools. And through its grant making the Corporation provides resources to community organizations with a substantial history of working to improve student achievement and workforce preparedness, and enabling these organizations to lead and to manage a school and district renewal process. Critical components to the reform included first holding all schools accountable to help every student to meet high standards and to prepare for higher education, as well as the workforce, and to confront the challenges and opportunities for 21st-century society. Second was to raise graduation requirements to ensure that all students take and succeed in rigorous courses. The third was to transform these large, impersonal high schools into small schools, or really these small learning communities and personalize the student learning experience. And fourth was to improve teaching through intensive professional development, while enabling teachers time to work in teams. And again this is to help all students succeed. One of the most valuable findings in the very first year of Schools for a New Society was the fact that almost half of the students entering the ninth grade were reading several years below grade level. It became clear to us that no matter what kinds outcomes we wanted to achieve from this initiative, whether it was higher graduation rates, more students going on to college, more students taking advanced placement courses, success would be difficult because of these students' low literacy skills. When we looked at data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, our NAEP data, otherwise known as the nation's report card, it became clear to us that adolescent literacy was indeed a national problem. It turns out that 70 percent of our entering ninth graders in the United States can be considered as reading below grade level. And these young people can neither understand nor engage with text, and they represent a substantial proportion of students who are dropping out of high schools. According to the Alliance for Excellent Education, 3000 youngsters disappear from our high schools and classrooms every day. At the end of this month, at the end of this school year, over 540,000 students will have dropped out of our high schools, many because of poor literacy skills. Of those who do manage to get a diploma, half will be unprepared for the demands of higher education in the workforce. And according to national data, 53 percent of the freshmen in college are receiving remediation to improve their reading and writing. In a related finding, employers were recently asked whether high schools were giving young people appropriate job related skills, 41 percent responded somewhat to very dissatisfied, with how young people ``read and understood complicated material.'' In view of this dire data, the Carnegie Corporation of New York established a program called the Advancing Literacy Program. This is an initiative that focuses intensively on improving the literacy of students in grades 4 through 12. Over the last 2 years, we've come to realize that educators have pretty well figured out how young people learn to read, which has resulted in a very strong K through 3 early reading policy in our country. On the other end of the spectrum, there has been a focus on adult literacy programs. And in between these two extremes of learning to read as children or developing reading skills as adults, is what we call the forgotten middle. And that's the chasm that includes an estimated 8 million students in grades four through 12 who have learned to read, but cannot yet read to learn. Now it's important to note that these problems are exacerbated by poverty, and they are particularly prevalent in our poorer urban districts. However the comprehension problem is also common in middle-class suburbs, ex-burbs and rural areas throughout our country. For example, the fourth grade and eighth grades proficiency rates on the 2003 NAEP data, only range from 10 to 43 percent across states, and the overall proficiency rate for eighth graders was only 32 percent. And clearly there are struggling readers at every level of our socioeconomic strata. The course of work that the Carnegie Corporation has been able to draw on a number of recommendations from experts on literacy for older children. And although everyone recognizes that we have much more to learn, we are convinced that we know enough to make a real difference for students in elementary grades, middle schools and our high schools. For instance, a report that was written to the Carnegie Corporation of New York, ``Reading Next--A Vision For Action Research in Middle and High School Literacy'' lays out 15 elements of effective adolescent literacy programs that practitioners can and indeed are using to improve student achievement in schools across the nation. And there has been some Federal response to this crisis. The $25 million appropriated by Congress for the Striving Readers Initiative for this fiscal year was an important first step in helping to make effective literacy and prevention programs available to the children who are most in need of them. Teachers and parents and reading researchers are eagerly awaiting the results of these demonstrations. Given the Corporation's long history of advancing educational opportunities, we are committed to revitalizing America's high schools by focusing on district reform. And we believe that in order to prepare all of today's high school students to succeed in our complex knowledge-based economy, we can't provide them with one or two good high schools but must have in place an entire system of excellent high schools. I would like to conclude with a quote from Dr. Gregorian, our President at Carnegie Corporation, who says: ``We will do what it takes to ensure that the spectacle of American students shutting down and dropping out of high schools at the appalling rate of 3000 a day, quickly becomes one of those shameful memories in American history that we are all eager to forget.'' I thank you for your attention. [The prepared statement of Mr. Henriquez follows:] Statement of Andres Henriquez, Program Officer, Education Division, Carnegie Corporation of New York, New York, NY ``Creating high schools for the 21st century is a challenge for education reformers as momentous as building the Panama Canal.'' Vartan Gregorian, President Carnegie Corporation of New York Overview Carnegie Corporation was one of the first foundations concerned with early childhood development, care and education from prenatal development and care systems through preschool health and education and has continued concentrating funding in these areas for over 30 years. That history resonates throughout our current work in education, though we have tried to sharpen our focus in light of two fundamental questions that always bear asking: What are we doing? Why are we doing it? Today, the Corporation is making fewer grants and larger commitments than in earlier years, and ambitious professional evaluation efforts are built into our larger initiatives from the start. Therefore, this overview seeks to provide a context for understanding how we have arrived at the program strategies we will be focusing on in the next few years and which we would like to share with the subcommittee. It was Carnegie Corporation of New York that helped to create some of the nation's most innovative preschool care, education and parenting support programs, efforts that included funding for the development and initial production of the PBS television series, Sesame Street. The foundation also supported projects aimed at demonstrating the effectiveness of early education and care and that assisted in the training of professionals for the early childhood work force. The Corporation encouraged a broader look at social policies that affect families with young children, created and sustained the Carnegie Council on Children and provided initial support for the Children's Defense Fund. The Corporation's work in early childhood education and care has been summarized in What Kids Need: Today's Best Ideas for Nurturing, Teaching, and Protecting Young Children A Carnegie Corporation Initiative: A Decade of Progress in Early Education (Rima Shore, Beacon Press: 2002), which describes best the successful early childhood programs and implemented practice. The Corporation's work in middle school reform was also influential in setting an agenda for restructuring schools with greater attention to students' developmental needs. The focus of the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development was adolescent health issues and their social- emotional development, but the Council also concluded that ``the years from ten through fourteen are a crucial turning point'' for adolescents and that ``this period represents an optimal time for interventions to foster education . . .'' The Corporation began its work in middle school reform with the Middle Grades Schools State Policy Initiative, and, in 1989, published the widely influential report, Turning Points: Preparing American Youth for the 21st Century. Since our first foray into this work, tens of millions of dollars have been invested by a number of other foundations including the Lilly Endowment, Inc. and the Edna McConnell Clark and W.K. Kellogg Foundations. In summing up Carnegie Corporation's work, middle-school reformer M. Hayes Mizell reported, ``We helped to create a consciousness and understanding of the need for greater attention to the academic dimension of the middle grades.'' Assisted by the collaborative efforts of other foundations and by evolving state and local public policy, the Corporation's focus on the middle grades moved them front and center into the reform agenda, and the number of middle schools soared. Middle school reformers are now beginning to focus heavily on issues of literacy. Throughout the history of Carnegie Corporation, its presidents have been engaged with literacy. Andrew Carnegie's legacy includes over 2000 free public libraries that he saw as a link ``bridging ignorance and education.'' Access to books and the explicit teaching of reading are two ways in which literacy is fostered. From the 1930's to the 1960's reading was increasingly taught through methods that concentrated on ``whole words'' (or whole language), using sentences and stories that were closely geared to children's interests. Surprisingly, the teaching of reading became an intensely debated national issue in 1955, when Rudolf Flesch's Why Johnny Can't Read And What You Can Do about It (Harper) moved onto a national best-seller list. Flesch charged that the neglect of phonics instruction had caused a national crisis in literacy and that ``whole language'' was based on a flawed theory that required children to memorize words and guess how to pronounce a word they did not know, instead of sounding out the word. The ``look-say'' or whole-word method had swept the textbook market, despite the fact, Flesch alleged, that it had no support in research. Carnegie Corporation President John Gardner (1955-1967) saw the debate about reading as central to the foundation's interests, writing in a 1959 Annual Report, ``The question of whether Johnny can or cannot read if so why, if not why not has probably given rise to more hue and cry throughout the land than any other single educational issue. There are those who claim that today's youngsters cannot read as well as their parents did at their age; others state that the situation is actually reversed. Proponents of one or another method of reading argue vociferously for their method and heap scorn upon other methods. Wherever the truth lies, it's not yet obvious, and any research which may shed light on this complicated problem will be to the good.'' Following this logic, the Corporation soon funded a key grantee, Jeanne Chall of the City College of New York, to help ``settle'' the reading debate. Chall spent three years visiting classrooms, analyzing research studies, examining textbooks and interviewing authors, reading specialists and teachers. She found substantial and consistent advantages for programs that included systematic phonics, finding that this approach was particularly advantageous for children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. In 1967, Chall collected her Corporation- supported research and published Learning to Read: the Great Debate (McGraw Hill), which became a classic. Later, after moving to Harvard University, Chall developed a conceptual framework for developmental reading stages that extended from the pre-reading stage of very young children to the highly sophisticated interpretations of educated adults. Chall's reading stages clearly distinguished ``learning to read'' from ``reading to learn;'' she also identified and named the ``fourth grade slump.'' Advancing Literacy: Reading to Learn. The Corporation's distinguished history in support of literacy-- some of which is described above--has recently extended from pivotal initial support for the Emmy award-winning PBS series Between the Lions, to the work of the International Development Division in strengthening libraries in sub-Saharan countries in Africa. As always, our work in this area includes a concern with access to books, the search for better methods of teaching reading, and building a body of knowledge about the developmental issues associated with early childhood and adolescence. Taking all these factors into account, Carnegie Corporation comes to its current focus on literacy with enormous comparative advantage. Indeed, to many people, the name Carnegie Corporation is associated with the very foundations of literacy going all the way back to the philanthropy of Andrew Carnegie himself and of the Corporation in its early years; both were instrumental in helping to create the nation's network of free public libraries. Building on this work our current program focus, Advancing Literacy: Reading to Learn, was developed after an extensive two-year review that included consultations with the nation's leading practitioners and researchers. We learned that the teaching of reading in K-3 is well supported with research, practice and policy, but that these are lacking for grades beyond this point. Therefore, we have chosen to focus our efforts on intermediate and adolescent literacy, to build research, practice and policy for literacy in students in grades 4 through 12, with a particular interest in grades 4 through 8. Our decision is informed by our grantmaking, which as helped us and the nation learn a great deal about children in their early, middle and adolescent years of development, as well as about teaching and learning and the complexity of school reform. What has become evident is that good school reform and knowledge of adolescent development are not mutually exclusive: they go together. Urban School Reform. During its tenure, the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development issued three major reports, each of which informed the development of the Corporation's urban school reform efforts. In 1989, Turning Points proposed making middle schools both more developmentally appropriate and intellectually challenging and recommended creation of ``communities of learning'' (now echoed in small learning communities), providing opportunities for all students to succeed. In 1992, the Council's report, A Matter of Time: Risk and Opportunity in the NonSchool Hours, introduced the concept of positive youth development, highlighted the need for opportunities for young people to have challenging and rewarding experiences in their nonschool hours and emphasized the importance of partnerships between schools and community organizations. Building on the Turning Points work, in 1995, Great Transitions, the final report of the Council, set forth recommendations of what an appropriate middle grades education should include; those recommendations form the premise that shaped the Schools for a New Society vision of an excellent high school education. Recognizing the comparative advantage provided by the Corporation's history of study and analysis, Vartan Gregorian, the Corporation's current president, challenged the foundation to address the nation's lack of success in achieving widespread and sustainable educational reform. In response, we worked closely with leading researchers and practitioners and conducted a meticulous review of relevant literature. This led to the concept of a program in Urban School Reform, emphasizing the troubled urban high school. We repeatedly encountered three intersecting discussions that shaped what became the Corporation's major high school reform initiatives, Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for New York City. The first concern centers on deeply entrenched political interests and bureaucratic procedures of school districts and how these two factors impede and undermine effective educational reforms. The second concern is the extent to which the lack of broad-based community engagement in education leaves schools vulnerable to both entrenched political interests and the frequent changes in leadership that commonly occur in urban school districts. The third concern, already growing as part of the national debate around standards and accountability, is the need to challenge the underlying assumption that not all students could or even should ``succeed'' in high school. We were especially influenced by It Takes A City: Getting Serious about Urban School Reform (Paul T. Hill, et al., Brookings Institution Press: 2000), an important book that addressed all three of our concerns. Our focus on high schools was strengthened by an analysis of where the most strategic opportunity for change exists and a recognition that the inequities of the current system are most pronounced in high schools. School districts often make gains at the elementary and middle school level that are eroded at the high school level. Given the press of state accountability mechanisms and the growth of high school exit exams, we concluded that there would be a positive response to an initiative that calls upon cities to take on the challenge of creating a system of good high schools--schools in which all students could be successfully prepared for postsecondary education, employment and democratic citizenship. Thus, building on the knowledge base created by Carnegie Corporation grants, especially during the past two decades, we began our reform work by inviting twenty urban school districts to submit plans for reform. After an in-depth review that involved some the nation's most respected scholars and leaders in high school reform, we selected seven school districts to participate in Schools for A New Society: Boston, Chattanooga, Houston, Providence, Sacramento, San Diego, and Worcester. The school systems were not awarded the grants directly. Nonprofit, community-based institutions working with the school systems received the grants. Advancing Literacy: Reading to Learn Effective reading and writing skills are essential to gaining and making use of education. At present, large numbers of young adults are deficient in these skills, as seen through enrollment in remedial writing courses in postsecondary education and massive deficits in performance in reading comprehension among high school students. Poor reading skills in high school have roots in a system that provides little systemic support for readers beyond the age of eight. In general, the nation successfully teaches literacy to children in kindergarten through third grade. There is no consensus, however, on how to develop reading strategies in the fourth grade and beyond. The Corporation is addressing this problem by helping to build the nation's capacity to teach and strengthen reading comprehension skills, with a special focus on grades 4 through 12, i.e., ages 9 through 17. Therefore, we refer to this effort as intermediate and adolescent literacy. The Corporation begins from a position of comparative advantage, having established a knowledge base of theory and effective practice in early learning and education systems reform. As we begin the 21st century the educational community faces a difficult challenge. What is expected in academic achievement for middle and high school students has substantially increased, yet the way in which students are taught to read, comprehend and write about subject matter has not kept pace with the demands of schooling. According to a recent international study by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (Programme for International Student Assessment), American 15-year-olds barely attain the standards of international literacy for youngsters their age. During the past decade the average reading score of fourth graders has changed little. Readers who struggle during the intermediate elementary years face increasing difficulty throughout middle school and beyond. Poor or limited achievement in literacy negatively affects every aspect of a student's education. Conversely, effective reading to learn is a prerequisite for successful participation in most areas of adult life. In order to become lifelong learners, students must learn to engage competently the variety of textual information they will encounter throughout their lives. The marketplace for employment is governed by a new knowledge-based economy, requiring better educated, highly literate and technologically fluent high school graduates. The causes of the weakness in intermediate and adolescent literacy are poorly understood, but current research and practice suggest several promising avenues for interventions that include: <bullet> A shortage of qualified literacy experts who can coach and teach literacy for students and teachers in the middle grades. <bullet> A lack of capacity, time and will for middle and high school teachers to teach literacy within their content areas. <bullet> A lack of reinforcement of comprehension of ``informational text'' in early reading. <bullet> A lack of strategies at the end of the third grade for pupils to deal with a rapid shift from narrative text to expository text. <bullet> A lack of systemic thinking in schools about literacy beyond age eight. <bullet> Decrease in student motivation to read as children progress from fourth grade through twelfth grade. <bullet> Little awareness by parents and community groups that literacy instruction needs to continue after children have learned the basic skills of decoding words and following a simple narrative. We believe there is strong evidence that schools with a focus on literacy (reading and writing) are associated with improved academic performance and successful academic outcomes for students. At the Corporation, we are making grants aimed at having a profound influence on adolescent literacy by directing national attention to the issue, bringing together the best talent in the field to address the issue, and supporting needed research and innovative practices. Urban School Reform After the investment of millions of dollars and the talents of the best and brightest reformers over decades of educational reform, it is now clear that urban schools cannot be successfully reformed without substantially changing the way school districts operate. The Corporation considers the redesigning of urban high schools to be a daunting challenge but also a promising target of opportunity for accelerating the pace of school district reform. This requires treating urban schools as a complex system rather than an aggregation of individual schools. School districts are embedded within communities that strongly influence their mode of operation. Therefore, school districts cannot succeed in addressing the problems of educating all students to high standards in isolation and must also employ community and organizational resources external to the district. In the 21st century economy all students can and should be educated to high standards. Wages paid to workers with only a high school education have declined steeply, and there has been a correspondingly dramatic increase in the added value of a college education. Therefore, our nation can no longer view a high school diploma as a satisfactory terminal degree for a substantial number of citizens. Every high school graduate needs to leave high school ready for college or the kind of productive gainful employment providing security, benefits and advancement opportunity. Even well paid employment not requiring postsecondary degrees now depends on advanced levels of literacy that are not common among urban high school graduates. Furthermore, given the escalating costs of public higher education and the lack of a proportional increase in financial aid, many urban students will need to work and continue their education at the same time. In addition to high literacy, quantitative skills, an understanding of science and comfortable mastery of technology, an excellent high school education must reflect our modern multicultural democracy. Students need help in making sense of a world in which modern media engulf the citizen with competing sources of information and complex global issues influence domestic policy and vice versa. High school graduates should be well prepared to assume roles as engaged and informed citizens in a diverse and vibrant democracy. Urban high schools face formidable challenges in educating all students to high standards. The students in these schools are more likely than their suburban and rural counterparts to come from low- income families and from homes where English is not the first language and also to move from school to school as their parents' economic circumstances change. These urban students are more frequently educated by teachers who do not stay very long in any one teaching situation and in schools burdened by overcrowding, inadequate fiscal and human resources, bureaucratic rigidity and political interference. Many urban school systems have succeeded in improving student achievement in the elementary and middle school setting, but these gains are not sustained and, sometimes, are even offset by losses at the high school level. In most urban high schools, as many as half the students drop out before completing their studies. Even many graduates do not show adequate levels of academic achievement, with up to one- third of high school graduates requiring remedial coursework at the post-secondary level. These problems are compounded by the fact that groups of students with varying family incomes and different ethnic backgrounds are separated by wide gaps in academic achievement. Fortunately, the knowledge base exists in both theory and practice to permit the creation of successful high schools, and almost every urban system of education has at least one or two successful high schools. Through the creativity of exemplary practitioners, these high schools have been established in urban districts, raising standards and expectations and challenging students to levels appropriate to today's economy and democracy. These schools are the existence proofs that urban high schools can work. Yet, throughout the country, these high schools stand as exceptions to the dominant, large, comprehensive high school, and no urban district has created an entire system of successful high schools. Most urban high schools suffer from the twin problems of inequality of expectation and a misplaced emphasis on economies of scale. The American high school, as we now know it, was created when it was acceptable to expect that, at most, about one-third of the students would go on to postsecondary education. Accordingly, the high schools reserved the smallest classes and most experienced teachers for the brightest students. Less experienced teachers taught less able students, usually in larger classes, and both schools and society then blamed the students for their inferior performance. The large size of most urban high schools can be a barrier to student achievement, making it difficult for teachers to know their students well enough to understand their individual learning capacities and needs. Large urban high schools also increase the isolation of teachers and undermine the development of a collective sense of internal accountability for student success. The typical operation of school districts exacerbates the problems facing high schools, since the procedures of school districts are built around assumptions of unequal outcomes and large size. School resources are distributed in ways that provide the best teachers and more congenial learning settings to the students who are the most able. Effective political pressure from affluent parents tends to reinforce these dysfunctional practices. The shortcomings of urban high schools are a current problem and at the same time a likely generator of future inequality. The Corporation is addressing this challenge by stimulating improvement in the administration of school districts to rearrange the allocation of resources on behalf of instruction and by treating the problems of urban schools in their complexity as a system, inclusive of community and organizational resources external to the district. The particular focus of the Corporation in effecting these changes is the urban high school, which are a target of opportunity because they are far more difficult to reform on an individual basis than elementary and middle schools and thus provide an entry point into the reform of urban education as a whole. To prepare students for their adult lives in the 21st century, urban high schools need to become learning communities with cultures that support high expectations, inquiry, effort, persistence and achievement by all--teachers, students and staff. In short, these schools must become communities of teaching, learning, purpose and contribution, a process that involves far more than incremental change in the high school as we know it. The current model for the American high school, which is obsolete, was not designed to educate all students to high levels of achievement, but rather to manage students by sifting and sorting them, with only a minority of students prepared for higher education. Urban high schools also need new leadership. Federal and state accountability requirements and greater autonomy and flexibility in personnel, budgetary and curricular decision making have made the job of school leadership far more demanding than in the past. Most current preparation for principals is weak and does not reflect recent research findings about effective educational leadership. Candidates who aspire to become principals follow an individual course of study, selecting a mix of required and elective courses to qualify for state certification. The focus of the curriculum is on management rather than instruction. Internships are rarely required and poorly supervised. High school principals and elementary school principals are prepared in basically the same way, even though the differences in their school environments are dramatic. There is a need to rethink seriously how we prepare principals if we expect to have them succeed, and we should encourage the district to play a constructive role in shaping that preparation. Building communities of effective high schools from schools that are islands of innovation and excellence requires reforming urban districts. Our vision for a system of high schools in which there is room for every student to thrive will be difficult to achieve without strategically aligning all the diverse resources of the district and community into a coherent plan for action. This involves changing the cultures of districts, challenging political interests and financial inequities and finding solutions to professional and technical problems of curriculum, teaching and learning, recruitment and supervision, school design and management and assessment and accountability practices. Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for New York City both incorporate the strategic assumptions of redesigning urban high schools, reforming urban districts and building effective leadership for districts and schools. Both initiatives seek to build existence proofs about the viability of wide-scale urban high school reform and knowledge about strategies, tools, challenges and resources that can be applied in other settings. The Corporation is joined in its pursuit of reinventing the urban high school by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and, in New York City, by the Open Society Institute. Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for New York City are not models, but broad strategies for reform. The overarching goal of the program in Urban School Reform is to increase significantly student achievement in targeted urban centers while reducing gaps in achievement among groups of students. Conclusion Staying focused while reaching new heights is long tradition for Carnegie Corporation of New York. It has its roots in Andrew Carnegie's belief that, ``Only in popular education can man erect the structure of an enduring civilization.'' This belief has guided the Corporation as it has moved from helping to establish public libraries, to laying the groundwork for what we know as Head Start, to its groundbreaking efforts to improve middle schools. And, now, the challenge is improving high schools and the districts that serve them through Schools for a New Society and New Century High Schools for New York City. This is perhaps the hardest challenge of all along the lines of ``building the Panama Canal,'' in the words of Vartan Gregorian. The Corporation is realistic that there may be setbacks along the way that may ultimately lead to greater understanding of the obstacles. But the results to date higher test scores, increasing attendance rates, and a stronger sense that students are engaging in true, meaningful learning--show that, just as the Canal broke new ground at the beginning of the 20th century, Schools for A New Society and New Century High Schools for New York City can do the same in this new era. [An attachment to Mr. Henriquez's statement ``2001 Carnegie Challenge Paper: Creating a New Vision of the Urban High School'' is available at http://www.carnegie.org/pdf/ urbschl.pdf.] ------ Chairman Castle. Well, thank you, Mr. Henriquez. And let me thank each of you. I will yield to myself to start the discussion process. We rarely have these hearings where I agree with everything that everybody is saying. I agree with what you're saying. That doesn't solve our problem necessarily, but you've helped identify the problem, you've helped identify the start to solutions to some of the problems. I think that we all understand we have to do a lot more. The things we are not going to get into today, I worry about the cultural side of this, the whole societal issues of how people value education out there and various issues like that, but we're more focused right on the high schools. And let me just say right up front, Mr. Vander Ark, I couldn't agree with you more with your statement about the graduation rates. That is something that I have wrestled with for years. And I am told that we're dealing with that a little bit in our regulations on No Child Left Behind, but at some point there should be an absolute measurable device so that everybody can use it. And I think it is absurd that it does not exist today. My question, though, goes along a different line. You represent three magnificent, nonprofit entities that are doing some very positive things. I don't know--I have no criticisms of anything you're doing. But when we have--in spite of your substantial assets in some cases, there is no way you can reach out to every single high school in the country, it just can't be done. I mean, you're dealing in Ohio in one case, and a variety of schools around the country in other cases. And with all due respect to Mr. Gates and the Gates Foundation, even they can't go touch every school. And I worry about how all of this translates into our other schools. In other words, I think that it is great that the National Governor's Association had their summit. I think that helps because that gets them engaged and they truly are or should be at least, engaged with their schools and their high schools. I think it's great that you're looking at various devices to try to help in these various schools. But my problem is that getting that to every single high school in America. I worry about the Federal role in this. I worry about the state role in that, even with the Governors engaged, I still worry about it. And how we actually make that connection. Because frankly just holding out exemplary programs doesn't necessarily mean that somebody who's been doing it the same way for 20 years or 30 years and not a particularly successful way, is not going to necessarily buy in to that. So I would be interested, and I know this is a very general statement, but I would be interested, briefly, because I like to have all three of you comment on this, any of your thoughts concerning how we can engage high schools holistically in America. And what I think we all, at least up here probably and there, agree are reform efforts which are needed. In any particular order. Does anybody want to start? Mr. Vander Ark. I'll make two comments. It's an insightful question that we struggle with frequently. We will soon have spent $1 billion just on this problem, and we will soon touch about 10 percent of the high schools in America. So it does look to me like just the high school problem is probably a $20 billion issue. So we're--the family's contributions though substantial, are the small portion of what it will actually take to create the high schools that we need in this country. So my first comment is that our efforts and at least how I think about our efforts with these foundations are to create proof points, school and city-wide proof points of what's possible, what to do, how to do it, how much money it takes, what kind of outside assistance you need, what order to do things in. So we're trying to focus as much of our work as we can and work deeply in a set of cities where we are trying to lift achievement levels and graduation rates citywide. And frankly, we have a lot more to learn about how to do that well. So strategy No. 1 is to try and create proof points. No. 2, as Debbie alluded to at the end when she talked about knowledge management, it's culling out of that work while it's ongoing, lessons learned and trying to share those. An example of that, Debbie can talk about some of their publications, they do a great job. But an example would be that the National Association of Secondary School Principals, they wrote ``Breaking Ranks'' 10 years ago and they just updated it, and we helped ship that to every high school principal in America. So it's a pretty good guide to improving your high school. So there are some efforts underway and we have more to learn. But there's no question that every state needs to play a stronger role in creating a vision. First of all for its graduates, and second of all for its secondary schools, and then third for creating the intervention capacity to improve struggling schools. Chairman Castle. Thank you. Ms. Howard. Ms. Howard. As Tom talked about, part of our strategy is really to have a very deep knowledge management system that collects the information, and then helps us move that information out, and to share it with our counterparts across the country. And I think as we talk to each other, just in this room this morning, there are several organizations in here who talk to each other all the time, who work together across the country, we share ideas, we share information and we're using similar strategies nationwide. Chairman Castle. Before you go on, how about sharing with the schools, the ones who are not your counterparts. Ms. Howard. Right. Chairman Castle. I assume your counterparts are other organizations like yours. Ms. Howard. Yes. Chairman Castle. But my concern is, of course, is getting it to the other schools that are not involved with those counterparts. Ms. Howard. That's the whole strategy behind our design for Ohio. We chose specifically districts that are throughout the state, that are the most troubled districts, knowing that if we can move them far enough fast enough, we can impact other districts. And that is already showing to be true. We're already having other districts in suburban and rural areas ask us for the information. I said we have coaches embedded on the ground. Those coaches come from across the country. They have actually helped design work now in schools across Ohio and several other states. Chairman Castle. Yes. Mr. Henriquez. Mr. Henriquez. Yes, I would just like to add and dovetail to many of the comments that have already been made. I think that foundations can best be incubators of ideas, and we see the Schools for a New Society and the work that we're doing in the urban schools as truly proof of concept. And we hope that these could become sort of effective models that provide a roadmap for replication, much like the work that Carnegie has done in early childhood education, where we worked for 30 years, and provided at least a lot of valuable tools. And through dissemination of knowledge and information that we hope that those schools that are not getting those resources are at least getting the kinds of information that will help them at the ground level at various levels. Chairman Castle. Let me thank you for all of your answers and I think you do wonderful work. But I have this horrible vision in my mind, and it is this: That I see Carnegie doing this wonderful glossy brochure that lays it out, lays out the facts, the data and everything else. I'm just using that as an example, whatever, and it is distributed. But there are those who simply don't want necessarily the change. They have sort of been doing it their own way, they are 3 years from retirement, and they aren't really ready for new challenges or whatever it may be. And that could be administrators, it can be teachers, it can even be parents. It's a lot of people. I just worry that they don't have the same enthusiasm for the change and the improvements that we need that you all have. So I would just encourage all of you to always be thinking that way. How can we reach beyond what we are doing to make sure that we're touching on everybody else. Because frankly, it's the ones that you're not touching on who probably need the most help. Probably when you go forward and try to find schools, you know, it's the ones who raise their hands. So it's like kids in class, the ones who raise their hand to say we want to be involved with you, you're most likely, you know to choose. And it's those others who just don't want to be called on, who sort of stay away. So I just think it's a continuous problem in education. Not to be overly harsh about education, but I think it's something with which we have to deal. But let me turn to Ms. Woolsey for comment. Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to welcome Representative Chaka Fattah from Philadelphia, who is just up here listening and learning with us. Thank you, thank you for being here. OK, that is the answer. You know--you asked the question and then the answer is why isn't the government, our government, Federal and state, ensuring that all of our children have the education they need for the future of our country. Not just their future but our nation's future. I'm so thankful that you exist. Thank you, thank you, thank you. But I am so embarrassed that in a country when public education is supposed to be the very core and center of who we are and why we are such a good, productive nation, is going down, while the demands are coming up. So I see you as models, as examples. The school, Sir Francis Drake, that Mr. Henriquez talked about is in one of the best school districts in the country, and one of the most affluent districts in the country, one of the most progressive districts in the country. They know how to get help, they know how to look forward. We need to talk about schools--not that I don't want my schools to get what they're after, but I want all schools to have these same privileges. If it means we have to do more to help them get interested then that's our job, to help them do that. It's not totally private foundations. But what you're doing, I admire so much. OK, I'm going to go. Just a couple of things. Ms. Howard, both of the gentlemen on each side of you talked about school size and teacher quality. Would you talk about that too, about how important it is, both of those issues are, to providing a good education for our high school kids. Ms. Howard. Yes. Thank you very much. Definitely. All of our schools are formed with 400 students or less. We believe that that's the size in which teachers and students can really form relationships, and in which teachers can take students deep into the work, not just touch the surface of the work. Ms. Woolsey. How about class size? Ms. Howard. Class sizes range anywhere from 15 to 25. We're still working on finding new ways to impact class size by changing the schedules of the day, using teachers differently, using time differently to try to get down to smaller class sizes. Ms. Woolsey. Teacher quality? Ms. Howard. We've worked a great deal in teacher professional development. We think that's critical. The districts in which we work sometimes have some of the least experienced teachers, and so we provide a lot of training at the state level. We then follow that up with deep embedded coaches in the schools and in the classroom to help. We also have had strong experiences working with the teachers' unions. And the teachers' unions in the districts in which we work have become real champions for change, and they're the ones who are encouraging all of their teachers, not just their first year teachers and second-year teachers, but their seasoned teachers to change and to take advantage of the opportunities that are offered. The unions are a main force behind the change in our schools. Ms. Woolsey. Which is very important. Mr. Vander Ark, of course, with the Gates Foundation and Microsoft, you know being hooked together, there is, I am sure, the express need for high-quality, high-tech kids coming out of school and their education. How are you supporting the idea in your programs for girls becoming more proficient in science, math and technology with the idea that they are over 50 percent of our workforce. Mr. Vander Ark. Let me give you two answers to that interesting question. First of all, in math and science we have helped to sponsor three exciting networks of schools in California. High-Tech High, and New Tech High, and Envision in the Bay Area, three really high-quality examples of math science and technology schools. We believe there are similar opportunities in other states. We're in conversation in Texas right now about an opportunity to expand the number of math science and technology schools. And in New York City we have funded a number of math science and technology schools. So that's one opportunity. Ms. Woolsey. Are you finding some women interested in them. Mr. Vander Ark. Absolutely. In all of those schools are about 50-50. Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm. Mr. Vander Ark. Let me give you the flip side of the issue though. We have a boy problem in America, especially a minority boy problem. Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm. Mr. Vander Ark. The families also funded a scholarship program called the Gates Millennium Scholars, which provides 1000 scholarships a year to high achieving, low-income students of color. It is now over 60 percent girls. And if you go to institutions of higher education, you will find that many of them are now 55 to 65 percent female. So we need to pay a lot of attention to this emerging problem. It's one that I don't admit to fully understand. It is a cultural as well as an educational issue that we need to pay attention to. Ms. Woolsey. But before high school. Mr. Vander Ark. Absolutely. Mr. Woolsey. Thank you. My time is up. Chairman Castle. Let me just personally thank you, Mr. Vander Ark. Ms. Woolsey is always telling me about girl power here, so I'm glad to hear someone defend the boys for a change. Mr. Osborne, the Vice Chairman of the Committee is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Osborne. Thank you and I would like to thank those of you on the panel for being here this morning. Just a couple of thoughts. We talked about some of the problems with young men just now, and in my previous profession I think I sometimes I ran into--maybe a part of the problem is that with some young men in certain areas it's not the thing to do to be a good student, and matter of fact that's sort of social taboo, particularly early on. I wondered if any of you have done anything to address some of the social issues, because certainly poverty is a difficult thing. But if you're from an area where there is a lot of violence, drugs and alcohol enters into the thing. And I wondered if, you know it's very easy to maybe have a school that's fairly select, people want to come there, but you're also maybe dealing with a little bit of a select population. So I wondered if in your endeavors, you have in any way attempted to address some of the social problems and cultural problems that we see affecting kids today that maybe weren't quite as prevalent 30, 40 years ago. And that's a question for any of you, if you'd like to. And then let me just throw one other question at you, if you don't want to answer that one, and that is it seems that most of your efforts are focused at the urban level. But you know we have a lot of poverty in rural areas, and we have a lot of kids who are struggling because of a lack of IT, you know their course offerings are pretty limited, and I wondered if you have done anything at the rural level. So those two questions, anybody answer any way you want. Thank you. Mr. Henriquez. I just wanted to say, thank you for raising the question, Mr. Osborne. I think that the--as Tom pointed out, the boy issue is a very severe issue, and we are beginning to look at that. In fact, this summer we just had a conference recently at the foundations around lost boys. And if we think that 70 percent of incoming ninth graders are bad, if we just disaggregated that data and we disaggregated the data on drop outs, what we see is mostly black and Latino males. One of the first schools that was taken over in New York City to be a small school was Julia Richman High School, the school that I graduated from in 1978. And I don't see many of my friends on the Delta shuttle. I don't see many of my friends here at the Rayburn House that I graduated with. I was one of the fortunate ones. But with that said, I think that one of the issues that we're trying to get at, certainly through literacy, is both the issue of how do we address the number of boys that are continually failing. And if you see that population also in incarceration figures, sir, you will see that not only are there high numbers of those students who are dropping out and going sometimes directly into jail, but the literacy rates for those students are also a very sad figure. The rural area as I mentioned in my testimony are also areas that are not without their problems. And even though these problems are exacerbated in the urban areas, they are just as likely to exist in rural areas as they are in suburban areas. And so it is something that we are trying to focus on, sir. Ms. Howard. Mr. Osborne, I would like to talk very briefly to build on what Andres has said about the literacy and the reading issues. What we have found as we have worked in high school is that predominantly with--even with males in the ninth grade, there is an acceptable academic structure. It is OK for them to not pass science and it's OK for them not to pass mathematics. It is not OK, even among their peer group, for them to not pass the state reading test, so even among themselves they know that that's the gatekeeper. That's one of the reasons why we work so hard in the area of literacy, because literacy opens the doors. The work that we've done on the ground in literacy, actually if you can get young men excited about reading, they will carry paperbacks in their back pocket, they will talk to each other at lunchtime, they'll choose authors that they like to read. We've even had some inner-city young men get so excited about mysteries that they'll read a Nancy Drew if there is no other mystery available on the shelf. That really does seem to be the gatekeeper. And it is the same in rural areas. I grew up in rural Nebraska and so I understand very much what you're talking about. What we're trying to do now with our early college initiative is to try to find a way for those rural schools to come together to be able to share services and offer those things that are more readily available in the suburban and the urban areas. Mr. Vander Ark. I'll add a couple of quick thoughts. We have grants to 2000 schools, and 15 or 16 percent of them are rural. One exciting story about a little town in eastern Washington called Mapton, had a terrible high school. And after the last 4 years of work just had a hundred percent graduation rate and a hundred percent college attendance rate. So it is possible, when a community rallies around its high school and dramatically changes its expectations, that great things can happen. Now that's a school of almost a hundred percent kids in or near poverty, and over 70 percent Latino. But you point to a cultural problem that's a big and complicated issue. We've made, we've stumbled forward on a couple of different fronts. We recently created a partnership with MTV to try to use the media to, as Debbie said, to make it cool to be smart. We see, as Debbie pointed out, especially in new schools that you can quickly change the culture where it's cool to be smart in a new school. It's a more difficult challenge to get it--to uproot and change the culture in a large struggling school. We've just begun some work in Los Angeles enlisting student voice, student leaders in their school to be on campus encouraging other kids to participate in college preparatory curriculum. So I think there's a lot of opportunity there to engage kids in helping to turn this around. I was encouraged by Hugh Price's leadership at The National Urban League. This was really an area of focus for him when he launched the Achievement Counts campaign. So I think that there's work that we all need to do to turn this culture around. Here's the bottom line. We need American kids to work harder. That's really what it comes down to, we need most of them to work harder. There's 10 percent that are working pretty hard today, but most of them are just flat. They need to work harder. So part of that is schools that are more challenging, interesting and supportive. But it's also the adult expectations for them and for their future. Mr. Osborne. Thank you. And I yield back. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Osborne. Mr. Miller is recognized for 5 minutes. He yields to Mr. Scott, who is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Vander Ark, you mentioned proof points, and I assume that means you've just shown that it can be done. You mentioned a terrible school going to a hundred percent. We have at least one school in my district that they focused on that has eliminated the traditional racial gap. How long have you been working at the Gates Foundation? Ms. Howard. Actually I am working with Knowledge Works Foundation. We've had our partnership with Gates since the fall of 2002. And we've actually spent 3 years working to prepare the teachers for the change, and letting teachers help design their schools. Now there have been really 1 year of operation in our conversion high schools, and 1 year for most of our early college high schools. Mr. Scott. OK. Mr. Vander Ark mentioned a powerful school where everybody is graduating, and other schools where few students are graduating. And I like the calculation where you look at how many people are in middle school and compare it to the high school, because whatever happens in the summer and all of that you just lose them. But that is a calculation that I think you ought to be using. But there is a difference. You can see the difference between one school and another. Now, we've talked about class size, is that an element of a powerful school, the lower class sizes? Ms. Howard. Class size is definitely an element. But so is instructional strategies, the way in which teachers help bring students to the information and the way in which students will learn. We're finding that the traditional stand and deliver way in which curriculum was delivered back when I went to high school is not the most effective way for today's kids. Mr. Scott. Well, how do we make sure that they use the up- to-date methods? Is up-to-date methods common, is that an element in the better schools? Ms. Howard. It is definitely an element in the better schools. Mr. Scott. OK. We're talking about teachers. We have a Head Start bill that we're considering, and there's an amendment that we're going to consider that will allow discrimination based on religion and hiring. Would that help? I mean some of us think that's an outrage, just to say that we don't hire people of different religions. Would that be helpful to education, to teach kids that you can be selected based on religion. Would that be a good head start or a bad head start to subject people, kids to that kind of--their parents being discriminated against can't participate in the Head Start Program. Is that something, in terms of improving schools, is it something that you're proposing that we allow discrimination? Ms. Howard. No sir, we're not. That is not an area in which we've worked. We've really worked on instructional strategies and because we do not--we don't actually hire the teachers. We work with---- Mr. Scott. But do you think that you're going to improve the schools without the schools starting to discriminate for the first time in decades? Ms. Howard. We're hoping that we can. Mr. Scott. OK. If kids fall behind a little bit, remedial education, is that an element making sure you catch them when they fall behind a little bit before they fall behind a lot? Ms. Howard. Remedial work is definitely a piece of it. What we like to do though, and an area where we've been focusing resources is on actually using diagnostic tests for students when they come in, so that every teacher knows where those students' strengths and weaknesses are the minute that they get in their classroom. Then they design an individual instructional plan for that student. Mr. Scott. For each student? Ms. Howard. Yes sir. We believe that's critical. Mr. Scott. I guess, what about parental involvement? Ms. Howard. Parental involvement is important. In our early college high schools, parents must sign a contract that they will allow their student to stay late for remediation, to come on Saturdays, to really be involved, and the parents and students together are involved in teacher-parent contracts and in conferences. Mr. Scott. Now funding all of this, sometimes it costs more to educate the lower income students, because they come with deficits, and we have the expert on school funding here, who has joined us. Is the funding mechanism based on real estate counterproductive, because the lower income areas end up with less resources? Ms. Howard. Sir, I'm not a school funding expert. I will turn it over to one of my colleagues who might know more. I'm a curriculum and instruction person. Mr. Scott. Well, you have to pay for it. Ms. Howard. Yes. Mr. Scott. Is that counterproductive? Is funding things based on a local real estate taxes, where the lowest income areas get the lowest resources, is that a good idea or a bad idea? I mean, you've got two other people. Well, some of us think that it is a bad idea. Mr. Chairman. Ms. Howard. I would say sir, that part of the research that we are doing in our publications like Dollars and Cents that we're partnering with the Gates Foundation, is we're trying to look at schools to say how can you use the resources that you have differently and more effectively. We know that our money is only like a vitamin B shot, it can only jumpstart the change. The schools are going to have to sustain that over time, and so we want to help them figure out the best way to make the best use of what they do have. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Mr. Miller is recognized. Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to just sort of follow on with what Chairman Castle talked about. And that is, you know, we are always looking for the manner--I guess today the term is tipping point, but at what point do we get to where replication is really feasible. And we know that you're working with institutions that are highly personal. I've been involved in schools that look like they were soaring and the principal had a heart attack and the programs fell apart. I looked at other schools where in another case the principal was mugged and decided that they were leaving just as we were starting to see turnaround in very difficult schools and very difficult environments. I just want to, what is the interplay here between some of the, you know exciting environments that you're creating and successful environments that you're creating, and we get to the idea that this is fundamental change. In your paper, Mr. Henriquez, you point out that many of these schools need new leadership. You know, too often what we've seen is that--the idea of change has been adopting a different reading program and then just sort of laying that down on top of all the teachers and saying, OK now this is the way we're going to teach literacy or this is the way that we're going to teach reading, and that somehow is equated with--, and it appears that it doesn't work because 4 years later they're buying another program because that one didn't work. How do we build the capacity so that we can then extend beyond those successful environments that you've created in these partnerships, and we can really seriously think at the Federal--you know, if we are going to invest what may be $20, $30 or $40 billion, if Mr. Vander Ark's numbers are right, and we really want to do this in a first-class fashion, how do you know that you have a business plan out there for that kind of success? Because I think you have created some very exciting environments, that again are also successful environments. I think excitement and success kind of go together with young people and change the manner in which they are asked to learn and engaged to learn. Let me stop there and just ask you this question of replication and building that internal capacity for expansion. Mr. Henriquez. I'll just say a couple of words about the issue of--we understand that the very fragile infrastructure of school leadership is indeed exactly that, fragile. And one of the things that we've seen especially around literacy is that we want to build distributive leadership so that the responsibility and onus of leadership is not built on one individual, but a team of people within a school building, that if for some reason if something happens to that principal, that there is an infrastructure that he or she can depend on that will then know the knowledge and the necessary information and strategies that are going to be useful to implementing the work in terms of the vision that individual and team have laid out. One of the things that we're working with is the National Association for Secondary School Principals, along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to really figure out exactly how do you build this distributive leadership, particularly when it comes to issues around literacy. So that you're not doing this issue of changing formats and reading programs every four or 5 years, but that you have a vision, a long-term vision, for how this is going to be implemented over the long term. I'm sure Tom has other words of advice. Mr. Vander Ark. You've addressed two big, related issues. I'm going to try to make comments on each one. One is on the tipping point issue and the other is the capacity to create and sustain the change. My great hope is that a generation from now that more than 80 percent of American kids graduate, and that a generation from now African-American and Hispanic kids graduate at rates that are comparable to their white counterparts. The change that I think about that needs to take place in the next 10 years to make that possible is at three levels. One is, I think we need several thousand great schools spread all over the United States that show what's possible, newly created schools and dramatically improved schools, but thousands of proof points of what's possible and what good secondary schools look like. Second, I think we need several dozen, probably three dozen districts that have made dramatic improvement in the percentage of students that graduate from high school ready for college. And third, we need at least half a dozen states, preferably big ones, that have really moved the needle, that have both created a good policy set and an intervention capacity and have seen significant increase in the number of kids graduating and the percentage of those children ready for college work and citizenship. So that's my theory of action. Those are three things that I hope to help this country accomplish 10 years from now. As I think about the capacity necessary to reach that, we've begun to understand that school developers and school model providers need to have--need to be very prescriptive about what the school model looks like and they need to provide a high level of support. My early grants didn't reflect that. They were pretty loosey-goosey and we now make grants that are quite prescriptive in terms of school design and support. Second, the states are going to have to build much more capacity. We are going to need much stronger state education associations than we have today, or education administrations that have clear standards and really strong data systems, and intervention capacity to help improve struggling schools and districts. Ms. Howard. I would like to build on that for just a minute. One of the things that we have begun doing this past year to really build the statewide capacity is to start training the school improvement coaches that employ by the Ohio Department of Education right alongside our coaches. So they're learning all of our strategies, they're learning the design of these schools, and then those school improvement coaches go out to districts far beyond the ones that we're working with and they help design that work. The other thing that we've really focused on since day one is building the knowledge of what education has to look like in the communities in which we work. And we're now focusing pretty heavily on building--on helping communities learn how to advocate for what they want and what should be in their schools. And parents talk to parents. I don't care if you're in an inner-city, or a suburb, or a rural area, parents are our greatest advocates for what should happen. And if we can get them to understand the new design of schools and if we can get them to stand up and fight for that, then schools will change rapidly. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Miller. Mr. Ehlers is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all for being here. I apologize for being late, but I was in another Committee meeting trying to improve the security of this place. It's terrible that we have to spend so much time worrying about terrorism, but it has to be done. Mr. Vander Ark, it is good to see you again. I enjoyed visiting you some years ago at your foundation. It's good to see you're still there doing good work. As some of you know, and as my colleagues know because I've bombarded them ad infinitum on this, I'm very strongly in favor of improving our math and science education throughout our nation. And high schools are not doing well, I am sure you're aware of the Thames study, the more recent pieces of study and so forth. We're not even doing well in the K-8 system. But at least we're near the average of the developed countries. But it seems to drop steadily after the fourth grade, and by eighth grade, we're well below average. High schools, we're very near the bottom. I have really been pressing this issue for some time and we've done some things. As you know the Federal Government can't solve all of the problems, but we have developed math science partnerships which will train teachers, and I think that is one of the keys. It becomes increasingly important--30 years ago when I was teaching at Berkeley, they did a survey and discovered that if you did not take advanced math in high school, it is impossible for you to complete, in 4 years, 95 percent of the majors at Berkeley. Now, Berkeley is Berkeley. But I think that's probably true of most higher education institutions at this point. And so kids, by their decisions whether or not to take math and science in high school are directly affecting their academic careers in college and their professional careers after that. I would like your ideas on what we can do. Part of the problem, much of the problem may be schools where students are underperforming, maybe the school is underperforming. But even in high-quality schools that would meet the standards that Mr. Vander Ark outlined for these exceptional schools you need, we have some of those in this country, most of them in the suburbs. Rural schools have problems, urban schools have problems. But I'm interested in your suggestions, and in particular a reaction to something that has been floating around here, and I see it in the literature too, that we should do the same thing we did after Sputnik, that is have another national defense education act or something like that. Do you think that is a good approach? What other ideas do you have of things that the Congress can do which will really spur this? I would appreciate any comments from anyone of you. Mr. Vander Ark. We have lots of school choice in America. There's lots of choices in high school, it is just all the wrong kinds of choices. We let 15 year-old kids with no adult guidance stitch together a curriculum of their own creation. And we give them a phone book-sized catalog of courses that vary by degree of difficulty, and we actually provide the subtle encouragement to low-income and minority kids to take easier courses. And then we wonder why two thirds of our American kids don't get what they need or deserve from the school system. It's time for us to lead. We have to stand up, and the adults in educational systems need to prescribe a curriculum that will prepare students for college and work in citizenship. That's what good schools do they make choices about the curriculum. They don't let kids who don't know any better decide what courses to take. So as the American Diploma Project of Achieve, Incorporated is encouraging, and as the State Scholars Program, the Federal Government has helped to support, both of those programs are advocating, kids ought to be in a course of study that prepares them for college work and citizenship. And it clearly should include 4 years of math and science. So there's an opportunity here for the Federal Government to continue to lead. States need to do more. There are only two states in the country now that require Algebra II, which is required to pass a community college placement exam in just about every state in the country. There are only two states that require that for graduation. So there is clearly an opportunity to lead on this front. What I mentioned earlier, what I'm quite excited about is the development of networks of math and science high schools. An opportunity for us to work together would be to make a commitment that every city in America have at least one great math science technology secondary school. We can do that together and we could get it done in 5 years, and make sure that every city in this country had a great secondary school six through 12, or 6 through 14, where kids left with at least a year of college credit. There is no reason we couldn't do that in very short order, and then use that as a lever to help inform the improvement in all high schools in America. Mr. Ehlers. Let me just react to that a moment, because I don't disagree with you. But the point is, that solves a shortage of engineers, scientists and so forth. But the jobs of the future at every level are going to demand good skills in math and science. And I am not talking about going into science or engineering. Perhaps technical jobs, but almost every job in the future is going to require a fairly substantial skill set in math and science. So how do we reach the masses? Mr. Vander Ark. We reach the masses by lifting our expectations. My home state requires 2 years of math, and they don't tell you what it is, so most kids take consumer math instead of Algebra II. So, this is one of the important things that is coming out of the National Governor's Association summit. I think half the states in this country are going to take serious steps toward lifting their standards, setting a default curriculum, lifting their graduation requirements, so that at least over the next 5 years we move toward higher expectations in math and science. I think that's the way that you reach all high schools in this country, and then we create examples of what is possible and how that can be done well, in an exciting and applied learning environment. Ms. Howard. I think, in addition to narrowing the curriculum--and I think that that's a really good start--one of the high schools with whom we are working, started out with 193 courses in their course catalog. And that just doesn't work. So I think narrowing the curriculum is a good start. But the other thing that is really important is making that link between what they are learning in the classroom and what they are going to need it for later in life. And we need to find a really effective way to connect what students learn in the classroom. I go in to schools every day, and there are kids who say, ``why do I have to learn math, or why do I have to learn science? How am I ever going to use that in the future''. We have to show them how they're going to use that in the future, and that's going to require a strong partnership among not just the schools, but government and corporations as well to bring that relevance to the classroom learning. It also means that we have to think differently about how we award credit in high schools. You know right now, it is--you have to get a waiver for a student to earn credit for having an internship in a hospital where they are actually helping the medical professionals in that hospital. And it's learning math and science skills at the same time. So it's narrowing the curriculum, it is making relevant what they're learning and it is also looking at the ways in which we use time and award credit. Mr. Ehlers. Thank you. Mr. Henriquez. I agree with my colleagues. I think one of the things that we've seen through our research is as soon as our youngsters enter science and mathematics classrooms, that it's not that they don't think the content is fun; students love math and students love science. It's particular-- particularly when it's innovative and it's hands-on. But we see them disengage because they don't really understand the content of the text. The ways in which the text or the ways in which the content is instructed, and the ways in which teachers design that curriculum is absolutely important in the children really understanding and engaging with that content. We're seeing that students, particularly with science and even history textbooks, just can't engage at that level. One of the ways in which we engage students, and more importantly how do we balance both the need to help the students improve their literacy rates and also balance the fact that they also need science and mathematics daily. How do we do that? Because I don't think it's an either/or. Mr. Ehlers. Thank you very much. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Ehlers. Mrs. Davis is recognized for 5 minutes. Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to all of you. As a former school board member from San Diego, I've been sitting here listening to you and high-tech high obviously is a very good example there. But what I'm struggling with in many ways is what our role is. You know, what can we do here on the Committee, in Congress nationally, that makes a difference in how teachers teach, how young people come to school, how communities respond to students. And you said a number of things, and I think there are some wonderful examples that have been cited. Part of the difficulty that I see is often, you know, it's that conundrum in a way from having something that comes top- down versus bottom-up. You talked about being more prescriptive with the support that's there in communities and I appreciate that, that's important. And yet I sometimes see a lot of resistance as a result of that. And again, I am struggling between having on a school board hat, which is more, you know--it's all local versus our role here and what we can do. I've wondered as well, you know do we need a major initiative, No Child Left Behind obviously has its pluses, but it's got some negatives as well, because it makes people shift gears, you know, even if they're doing something that's positive. I'm struggling with it a little bit. You've obviously seen some of the resistance, I'm sure in the schools. What would you consider to be the key elements that, from our point of view, from where we sit here today, we can promote that makes a difference in terms of that interaction between a teacher and a student, because I think that's where it's at. When you look at European programs, there is a lot more going on in the classroom. I'm going to lose my time here, but just anecdotally, I know as a school board member I used to go around to classes, and I don't think this has changed that much, and I used to sit with the teacher throughout the course of the day and observe that same teacher teaching gifted students and non-gifted students, which we would call non-gifted classrooms, and there is a difference. There's a difference in body language, a lot of things that are happening, because discipline becomes a bigger issue than what kids are getting in the classroom sometimes. I suspect that's still probably a little bit true. So can you help me, what from our point of view, really promotes that special interaction between a student and the teacher. I'm very familiar with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. I don't think we do much with that. I think we could and we should. I think businesses could support teachers as they go through that process. Is there anything else that you can add to that? I apologize Mr. Chairman, I have a question, but I'm really more interested in what is it that we can do? Mr. Henriquez. Well, certainly I think the building of public will is absolutely critical to this effort. And what we're seeing in terms of the work that we are doing in schools for a new society is that teachers are spending a lot more time collaborating with students and getting to know individual students. This is probably something that couldn't have happened before this initiative started. And we're seeing that growth. We're also looking at the ways in which professionals--how do we train teachers as well as leaders who are coming into the system to ensure that they know how to work within these small school environments? Mrs. Davis. I think---- Mr. Henriquez. So it is not just the teachers who were there. Mrs. Davis. I think you would probably include instructional leaders, principals as well as--that really have---- Mr. Henriquez. Absolutely. How do we include that pipeline of people who are coming into the workforce and turns of education to insure that they know how to engage with the students within this context of small schools? Mrs. Davis. Mm-hmm. Ms. Howard. Having clearly anything that you can do to encourage the type of instruction that is prevalent and those who are National Board Certified Teachers, anything that you can do to encourage that would be very very helpful. If you look at the way in which most of our teachers learn to teach in today's higher education, they don't learn to teach in a way that National Board Certified Teachers do. They are more taught to deliver information and to have students come and tell them back what they have already given them. And that's not the way. So anything that you can do to promote that. Also I think that it's very important for us to look at ways to break the barriers between high school and higher education. There are some artificial walls that have been built between those systems. And as was alluded to earlier sometimes in the last couple of years of high school, students really could be doing more and pushing further. But there are some barriers to that built into the system, so it would be helpful. Mrs. Davis. Thank you. Mr. Vander Ark. I'll reiterate, four recommendations--to help sponsor new schools, and help provide aid to failing schools, and support the National Governors Association policy efforts, and support data systems. I think it's critical that we provide teachers with good data about their kids, and that that data be able to follow the kids. Mrs. Davis. Yes. Mr. Vander Ark. So that the next group of teachers knows about the needs and gifts of each student. Mrs. Davis. I appreciate that. And also your comments earlier about knowing what it really takes to educate a student today. It's very important, and often we don't take all the considerations that we have to. We may not be able to do all of that, but we should know what it takes. Thank you. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mrs. Davis. Mr. Hinojosa is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Hinojosa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the participants on this important hearing that we are having. I think it's been very interesting and surely educational for me. I, too, have served on the local school board and on the Texas State Board of Education, and now here on this Education Committee for 8 years. So I agree with you that it's no secret that we are losing our competitive edge in producing experts in math, science and engineering. If we do not engage and provide both quality and challenging educational opportunities for African American and for Hispanic American children I think are just going to permanently cede the leadership in this area. So listening to some of the ideas that each of the foundations you represent have used to create what has in some cases resulted in some of the 100 best high schools in our nation--I know I've seen the list in 2004, and I saw the latest one in 2005--I am pleased to tell you that I come from South Texas, a very small area compared to San Antonio, Houston, Dallas and Fort Worth, but it is very rural. And we have one of those top 100 high schools. It was eighth best in the country last year, and is in the top 40 now. Forty percent of the children in this math and science Academy in South Texas Independent School District are on the free lunch program. There is a lot of difference in that school versus the one in Highland Park in Dallas where there are no children on a free lunch program. And if you take a look at differences, the makeup of the children--of those schools, ours has 80 percent Hispanic children, Highlands may have one or 2 percent Hispanics, mostly non-Hispanics. So there are big differences, but there's definitely some similarity, and that is they have a lot of teachers with Master's degrees who are able to really get involved with the children, with the students, and turn them around from the idea that you can only take the very minimal courses. Instead they're going one and a half hours longer than the normal programs that we have. And these are public schools that I am referring to in Mercedes, Texas, South Texas ISD, Math and Science Academy. They are bused from as far as Brownsville to Mercedes, and as far as San Isidro and Edinburg to Mercedes. It seems to me that those programs have some other components that each of the three of you have mentioned. Very good teachers, challenging programs, longer hours than the normal, and higher expectations. So look at the model I know in Mercedes, and look at who was feeding into that program, into the math and science colleges, and it's the students in the Gear-Up program. Gear-Up is working for both the African American and for the Hispanic children. It's funded at about, a little--slightly over $300 million and has a lots of success stories. Why couldn't each of your foundations and others match the government and give us more of the programs that take a whole cohort of students, a whole classroom, rich, middle income and poor, and do what that program is doing. Look at creating these regional schools. I call them regional because the one in South Texas ISD is considered to be regional because there are 28 school districts feeding into it, and do a six state--or as many states as you want to. But you see, it's not just for the urban, it's also for the rural like we have. And it puts to bed the myth that children of United Farm workers and migrants cannot learn. It's that they're given the tools, the computers, the teachers, the challenging, and they learn about team learning that we use. It seems to me that there is hope, and we need to look at what's making those top 100 high schools work, and put it to use here in Washington. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Castle. Representative Hinojosa, I was just at South Texans a couple of weeks ago, not two, a quick story about it. A school in Donna, called Idea, it's a K-12 international baccalaureate school. And like school that you mentioned, it is proving that with a rigorous curriculum that is well taught, and a supportive environment, that low income kids can and should be doing serious intellectual work when they're 17 and 18. We hope to help create a dozen more of schools like Idea, and its sister school, Uplift, in Dallas. We've committed over $50 million creating great high schools in Texas and plan to make additional investments. We look forward to working with you, this Committee and others in that work. Mr. Hinojosa. Thank you. Mr. Vander Ark. Let me make a comment about Gear-Up. Gear- Up provides great services to kids, but it is a set of services that ought to be central, not ancillary to high schools. It's an add-on, when in fact those college preparatory, guidance and academic services ought to be the core, the mission core of high schools that we design around, not add-on for some kids. So we would be happy to match an effort to try to take those services and to help schools implement them. I mean, that's really the essence of our Texas State Project with the community foundation of Texas, to help schools take that college ready goal and rigorous curriculum, and a set of guidance services that provide individualized support for kids, and to make those services and activities central to the high school mission and not an add-on. Mr. Hinojosa. But Tom, what's important though in the Gear- Up programs is that it's not for the middle and upper income children. Mr. Vander Ark. We only work with low income kids and low income schools. So I share---- Mr. Hinojosa. Well, I just feel that Gear Up has a way of including a lot of African Americans and Hispanic children, and that's what I like about that. And second, I like the fact that they have been successfully putting them on to the path of math, science and engineering. And the schools that have Gear-Up in Texas that I am familiar with. So that answers the problem that we are all concerned about, that we don't have the students feeding into that pipeline to go to the community college or to the university and study engineering, math and science and information technology. I wish we could talk more. Chairman Castle. You can certainly talk more, perhaps after this hearing is over. Maybe you want to offer to take them to lunch or something of that nature. At this time, we would like to welcome Mr. Fattah back to the Committee. He was previously on the Committee, he just can't seem to stay away. And I offer him the opportunity to have a discussion with the witnesses for 5 minutes. Mr. Fattah. Thank you. This is actually a pleasure for me, because my fondest days here in the Congress were as a Member of this Committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the ranking member. And to follow onto this whole dialog about Gear-Up, which is what I guess--as the architect for the Gear-Up program, and I remember the day we passed it in this Committee--there was support on both sides of the aisle. I am happy to report this morning that my new Committee, the Appropriations Committee, has just marked up the education bill, and notwithstanding other recommendations, they have decided to fully fund Gear-Up. And this Committee has moved out legislation to re-authorize it. And I want to use that as the basis for my comment, which is that one of the things that I'm suggesting in re- authorization of Gear-Up is that we allow for early college opportunities, which is you know something is happening now with many of the Gear-Up programs, but I think that we can do even more. I know, Tom, that you have been interested in this whole issue for a while, and there's important research on it. We've done a lot in Philadelphia in this regard. I think it is critically important that we in the Gear-Up reauthorization look at early college in a way in which it is built on to some of the other things that we're doing. I do want to ask a question, because I know that you've looked at a lot of this around the country, and as I look at it, I just want to make sure that I am not missing something. Have you found states where in low-achieving schools versus high-achieving schools, that children are given the same quality teachers, the same access to computers, or similar class sizes? Or is it true that in every instance that we see a very significant difference between the resource allocations between high-achievement and low-achievement schools? And if that is so, I guess my point Tom is, is it as important as creating--moving through your kind of work schedule that you have laid out, which is ambitious, but to also point out to the country that part of the difficulty is that states seem to have some selective amnesia when it comes to how to make schools work. They seem to figure out how to make them work in wealthy suburban areas, and somehow can't seem to provide the same level of resources in rural and urban areas in terms of the quality of teachers, the access to educational material, and this has been a matter that has been litigated across the country, and some 49 states. I know that the foundations are doing great work, but I mean if you want to get the systematic change across the board, at some level we have to deal with the structure of how public education deals low income children in rural and urban areas comment by some behind the eight-ball. Mr. Vander Ark. It's a difficult issue. It's a great question. Our sense is that there are four big policy levers, and that we advocate for college-ready standards, for strong accountability, for equitable school choice, and for adequate and flexible funding. That means funding that represents or recognizes the need of the children that attend a particular school. And you're right, there are big differences within states of the distribution of human resources. There are even bigger differences within districts. Mr. Fattah. Right. Mr. Vander Ark. Paul Hill and Marguerite Rosa's recent work illustrated that while there are big differences between districts within states, it is even more significant within districts when you look at high poverty and low poverty schools, and the total staff budget that is allocated to those places. Mr. Fattah. Either in district or in states, shouldn't we be talking about a more fair level? Mr. Vander Ark. Absolutely. Mr. Fattah. This is my point, one the things that may be useful for either Carnegie or Gates or someone who's got some national scope and some credibility, is maybe do a costing out study to say what it would cost---- Mr. Vander Ark. Right. Mr. Fattah [continuing]. To provide an adequate education for a child in Philadelphia, Mississippi, or Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, or New York City. I mean to kind of get past the rhetorical discussion, and to really think about how to lay out so that state policymakers or Federal policymakers, or even as these matters are being litigated---- Mr. Vander Ark. Right. Mr. Fattah [continuing]. There will be some bases to think about what the actual costs might be, because in Texas you can go from districts where they spend $4000 per pupil to where they are spending $24,000 per pupil. I don't know how you're going to end up with a comparable result with that wide a disparity. Mr. Vander Ark. We launched what I think is the largest school finance project ever assembled. It is called the School Finance Redesign Project. It's centered at the University of Washington. It's a series of 10 linked studies that we hope will develop our understanding of how education finance can work more efficiently and effectively, and I hope it will begin to address this issue of adequate and effective distribution. Mr. Fattah. Well, I think it is critically important. You've been doing great work and this teacher quality is at the top of the list. That's the very essence of it. If you are a poor kid in this country, and Carnegie, you financed the research that showed that if you get effective teachers, then all other things to the contrary--I mean, nothing else matters. I mean, the kid will do well. The least likely kid to see a qualified teacher in our country is an African American or Latino youngster. They can go to high school in any of our states, and go through their whole high school year and never have a math or science teacher who majored or minored in the subject that they're teaching. Mr. Vander Ark. Let me go back to your issue of distribution of human resources, which is closely tied to quality. Mr. Fattah. It is also tied to money. Mr. Vander Ark. It is. Mr. Fattah. Yes. Mr. Vander Ark. So this weekend I will be with the Aspen urban superintendents and that group of 10 of the leading superintendents will have at the top of their list the distribution of all of the human resources. So what you pointed out is at the top of the list for urban superintendents. I just want to point out that it's a difficult, complicated problem that is a function of state budgets, of local budgets, of state policy and of local employment agreements. It's going to take tough work, state-by-state, to help untangle this so that we can actually get, for the least advantaged kids in our society, access to the highest quality teachers in great schools. Mr. Fattah. Well, I'm a guest here of the Committee. So I won't belabor the point. I do thank you for your work that you're doing, and I encourage you as you as you go forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Mr. Fattah, you're a welcomed guest. We're not going to have a formal second round of questions, but Ms. Woolsey did have a couple of things that she wanted to state, maybe a question or two, and I want to provide her that time. Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you Chaka for coming, and if you loved us here so much, why did you leave us? [Laughter.] Ms. Woolsey. But thank you for what you're doing on the Appropriations Committee. I mean we authorize and if the appropriators don't deliver, we're in trouble. And you deliver. Thank you very much. You know, I have to tell you, when we talk about adult expectations and parental involvement--I raised four kids. My baby's 38 and she has three older brothers, so you know I'm through raising them in that way. But I have one son that I am always using as an example, and someday he's going to realize that and tell me to cool it because I talk about him up here a lot. First of all, when he was in high school, he was an All- American--well no, he was a really good football player. When he was in college, he was an All-American in his junior and senior year. So he's a big, good kid. He was always the captain of the team. He's a leader. All right. He graduated in 1985. A couple of years before that, I think he was a junior and we were downtown trying to find clothes for him. He's a big man, so it's hard to find clothes for them. And I found a shirt and I said, ``Honey''--because I always call my kids those things--``Honey, look at this, look at this.'' ``Oh. mother, are you kidding? That looks like a smart kid's shirt.'' But I said, ``But you're smart.'' ``I don't want it--no, no, I'm sorry.'' So now he's a college graduate, and he's a very successful young man, a father and he provides very well for his children. That was my kid, when it wasn't cool to be smart. We have such a job ahead of us to make being smart what it is supposed to be. Believe me, I get it. But it's parents that have to get it. And when we talk about Gear-Up, and we talk about--when I talk about girls in science and math, I've got legislation called Go-Girl, and what it is about is getting parents involved at the very early ages, instead of thinking that isn't where their kid should go, and being part of the program. That's what Gear-Up does. So how do you--because you're doing it right. Are your programs set up so that these parents are already engaged so that the child can't be part of it? Or are you bringing the parents along with the student? Could you help us with that? How about you? Mr. Henriquez. Yes. I think, as you know from your experience with your children that as soon as they are old enough to outgrow sitting on your lap, there is a huge disconnect between how engaged you can be. Ms. Woolsey. And you can imagine how quickly that big guy-- -- Mr. Henriquez. Especially if you have big kids. Ms. Woolsey. But he still sits on my lap, right---- Mr. Henriquez. This is a problem that we have been looking at. I mean, one of the core principles was in the schools and society to really try and engage parents into, and to engage communities at large but to ensure that their parents are a critical piece of the reform effort. Ms. Woolsey. Then, how do you do it with parents who aren't already educated, I mean? Mr. Henriquez. That's exactly right. Ms. Woolsey. I was wondering that. Mr. Henriquez. One of the things they were working with is groups like the National Urban League, who have a number of affiliates around the country, and who have tentacles out to parent communities to help them understand the work they need to do with their older students, that it's not just enough to ensure that you're being a good early childhood parent, but that you need to be a parent over and over and over again, right through 12th grade, and right through college. And even when you go out shopping for shirts. Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm. Mr. Henriquez. And even when you go out shopping for shirts. But it's something that we're trying to figure out in terms of what are the key critical ways in which you can have conversations with your students around academic work. One of the ways in which--and I have a 15-year-old daughter, and I barely see her work. It is not because I'm not interested, it's because it's just that age in which students really want to be very independent and independent learners. And so one of the strategies that we can use as parents and how can we use them with students, we're looking at the work at Johns Hopkins that Joyce Epstein has done for a number of years in terms of looking at how parents and students work together and ways that we can support that, not just in early grades, but how do we build on that and how do we build on this continuum? So we hope to have some critical strategies very soon. Ms. Woolsey. Thank you. Anybody else? Actually, I believe it's because your 15 year-old is a teenager. And I swear that I became humble enough to become a Member of Congress after raising four teenagers. Mr. Vander Ark. All of the new schools that we fund that have advisories, it's a system of distributed counseling where there is one adult at school that takes responsibility for a group of students, usually between 15 and 20 of them. They know how they're doing in every class. Ms. Woolsey. Mm-hmm. Mr. Vander Ark. They help to provide some of the counseling at the school. They inform students when it's time to start thinking about taking the PSAT and then the SAT. And they do some of the college awareness. It works a little bit different at every school, but it does provide an important conduit for parents so that they are--like in elementary school, there's one person you can call that knows your son or daughter well, and is up-to-date on how they're doing in every subject. Ms. Woolsey. One adult? Ms. Howard. Another thing that we have found is that we are working with parents who may not have been successful in high school themselves. And a lot of them don't have a picture of what it takes for their student to be successful. So we've tried to start in the areas of literacy and we've found that if you can sit down with a parent and a student and change the way the conversations happen at schools, rather than the parent- teacher meeting by the teacher sitting in the front of the room and 40 parents come in and they say hello, and then you walk out and go to the next room. We actually, as part of the advisory system, started building with these students and parents a clear plan, so that we can sit down and the student can say to the parent, ``Mom, this is how I am doing in reading now. I am at this reading level.'' And the teacher says, ``And this is where the student needs to be, and this is our plan for getting them there.'' Then we have something specific to talk to those parents about. Not a nebulous high school experience, but a very specific roadmap for getting from point A to point B. Ms. Woolsey. And it could possibly mean that that parent would put less pressure on the child for doing extracurricular things so that they can study. Ms. Howard. Right. Ms. Woolsey. OK. I've taken up way more than my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Castle. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. We'll bring the hearing to a close. I would just like to thank each of you for your perspective on what I would consider to be a significant problem, for your own personal involvement and engagement, and also for the organizations that you represent, which have been very generous in terms of what they have done to try to help with this problem. I, like you, really feel that we're coming to grips with this, and I appreciate what NGA has done, I appreciate what you're doing, and I feel that we are beginning to make moves in the right direction. Hearings like this are important. Just so that you know, we are having a series of these hearings to try to get our arms around the subject. We don't have any legislation prepared. We may never prepare legislation on this. But we are vitally interested in what we can do to try to push the envelope, as they say. So we thank you so much for taking the time to be here and for your insight into the problems, and helping all of us understanding it better as well. And with that, we stand adjourned. [Whereupon, at 12 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] <all>