Why Middle-Class Parents in New Jersey Should Be Concerned About Their Local Public Schools

Not As Good as You Think Why Middle-Class Parents in New Jersey Should be Concerned About Their Local Public Schools By Lance Izumi, J.D. with Alicia Chang Ph.D. 1 Not As Good as You Think Why Middle-Class Parents in New Jersey Should be Concerned About Their Local Public Schools By Lance Izumi, J.D. with Alicia Chang Ph.D. NOT AS GOOD AS YOU THINK Why Middle-Class Parents in New Jersey Should Be Concerned about Their Local Public Schools by Lance Izumi, J.D. with Alicia Chang, Ph.D. February 2016 ISBN: 978-1-934276-24-2 Pacific Research Institute 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1300 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: 415-989-0833 Fax: 415-989-2411 www.pacificresearch.org Download copies of this study at www.pacificresearch.org. Nothing contained in this report is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation. ©2016 Pacific Research Institute. All rights reserved. No part of this publi- cation may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or other- wise, without prior written consent of the publisher. Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary............................................................................................... 5 Introduction and Background on “Not As Good As You Think” Research ................ 8 Performance of New Jersey Students on the National Assessment of Educational Progress ......................................................................................... 9 New Jersey Standards and Tests .............................................................................11 Analysis of Individual New Jersey Public Schools ..................................................13 The SAT and New Jersey High Schools .................................................................15 Conclusions and Recommendations .....................................................................23 Endnotes .............................................................................................................29 How to Read the Tables ........................................................................................35 About the Authors..............................................................................................124 About PRI ........................................................................................................127 6 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Walton Family Foundation for its support of this project. We would like to thank James Lanich, Dave Johnston and the Educational Results Partnership for providing the data for the schools analysis. Also, we would like to thank Laura Waters for peer-reviewing the draft of this study. Any errors or omissions are the sole responsibility of the authors. The authors would like to thank PRI senior vice president Rowena Itchon for overseeing the copyediting and marketing of the study. In addition, the authors would like to thank graphics designer Dana Beigel for her excellent layout of this study. The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Sally Pipes, president and CEO of PRI, and the rest of the dedicated staff of PRI. Finally, the authors would like to acknowledge the efforts of Chrissie Dong, formerly a member of PRI’s development department, and Laura Dannerbeck, former marketing consultant for PRI and now director of events and marketing for PRI. The authors of this study have worked independently and their views and conclusions do not necessarily represent those of the board, supporters, or staff of PRI. 3 4 Executive Summary Are regular New Jersey public schools with predominantly non-low-income student populations performing well? Lots of middle-class parents think so and believe that education problems are limited to places such as inner-city Newark. Yet, based on a variety of indicators, many of these schools may not be as good as parents think they are. On the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP), often referred to as the nation’s report card, many non-low-income New Jersey students fail to perform at the targeted proficient level: • On the 2015 NAEP fourth-grade reading test, 43 percent of non-low-income New Jersey test-takers failed to score at proficient level. • On the NAEP fourth-grade math test, 38 percent of non-low-income New Jersey students failed to score at the proficient level. • On the 2015 NAEP eighth-grade reading exam, 49 percent of non-low-income New Jersey test-takers, roughly half, failed to score at the proficient level. • On the NAEP eighth-grade math exam, 42 percent of non-low-income New Jersey test-takers failed to score at the proficient level. NAEP 8th Grade Reading and Math Exams 2015 100 80 60 49 42 40 Failing to Achieve Proficiency 20 Perecentage of Non-Low-Income New Jersey Students 0 Reading Math Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress Non-low-income New Jersey students also have lower proficiency rates on the NAEP compared to similar students in top-performing states such as Massachusetts. 5 Prior to the new multi-state Common Core-aligned Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) exam, the state-administered exams in New Jersey in 2014 were the New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge (NJ ASK), which was used in grades 3-8, and the High School Pro- ficiency Assessment (HSPA), which was administered in grade 11. This study uses scores on the NJ ASK and HPSA to analyze school performance. In New Jersey, there are 1,170 regular public schools where 33 percent or fewer of their students were classified as low income, i.e. schools with predominantly non-low-income student populations. Among these schools, only 47, or 4 percent, had 50 percent or more of their students in at least one grade level failing to meet or exceed proficiency on the 2014 NJ ASK and HSPA. These numbers, however, are not necessarily indicative of high performance among this set of schools, since, as The New York Times has pointed out, the NJ ASK and HSPA were “easier tests.” Because the NJ ASK and HSPA are not rigorous exams, and therefore produce inflated proficiency rates not in line with state proficiency rates on rigorous tests such as NAEP, this study also reviewed SAT data for regular public high schools with predominantly non-low-income student populations. In 2014, there were 194 public high schools in New Jersey that had predominantly non-low-income student populations. Of these 194 schools, 114 met the state target of 80 percent or more of seniors taking the SAT. Out of these 114 schools, 32 schools -- 28 percent or nearly three out of 10 -- had half or more of their SAT takers fail to score at or above the college readiness benchmark score of 1550. Thus, according to the SAT data, a significant proportion of predominantly non-low-income New Jersey high schools were not preparing at least half or more of their students for likely success in higher education. OUT OF out 114 3 of 10 HAD 80%+ HAD 1/2 OR MORE 194 FAILED TO HIGH SCHOOLS STUDENTS non-low-income TAKING SAT SCORE 1550 (the college readiness benchmark) 6 Many schools with more than 50 percent of their SAT test takers failing to score at or above the college-readiness benchmark are in middle-class or more affluent neighborhoods across New Jersey. At Waldwick High School in Bergen County, only 1 percent of the school’s students were classified as eco- nomically disadvantaged in 2014. Ninety-three percent of seniors took the SAT in 2014, and 56 percent of these test takers failed to score at or above the college-readiness benchmark of 1550. Other predominantly middle-class regular public high schools with college-readiness problems include, but are not limited to: • Emerson High School in Bergen County • Hasbrouck Heights High School in Bergen County • Cedar Grove High School in Essex County • Shore Regional High School in Monmouth County • Jefferson Township High School in Morris County • Pompton Lakes High School in Passaic County • Arthur L. Johnson High School in Union County • Jonathan Dayton High School in Union County These results should cause middle-class New Jersey parents to re-think their views on the quality of their neighborhood public schools, and, consequently, to open their minds to other education options, choices and policy changes that would allow their children to escape underperforming schools and attend bet- ter-performing alternatives. Among these alternatives are a variety of types of school-choice programs that other states have enacted: • Illinois has enacted a universal tax-credit program that allows individuals to claim tax credits for educational expenses, such as private-school tuition. • Arizona gives a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to taxpayers who contribute to scholarship tuition or- ganizations that provide students with private-school scholarships. All Arizona K-12 students, regardless of income, are eligible to apply for the scholarships. • Nevada has enacted a groundbreaking law making education savings accounts (ESAs) available to all parents and their children. The state will deposit funding into ESAs that parents can use for private-school tuition, online education, tutoring or other education services. Increased choice for parents of all income levels should be the guiding principle for New Jersey policymak- ers. Choice is

Load more