JUST THE FACTS The Institute for a Competitive Workforce (ICW) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. ICW promotes the rigorous educational standards and effective job training systems needed to preserve the strength of America’s greatest economic resource, its workforce.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations.

The National Chamber Foundation, a nonprofit affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is dedicated to identifying and fostering public debate on emerging critical issues. We provide business and government leaders with insight and resources to address tomorrow’s challenges.

© Institute for a Competitive Workforce, Feburary 2013 “U.S. CHAMBER” and “U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE” are registered trademarks of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America. © National Chamber Foundation, Feburary 2013 Missouri 1

Are ALL children receiving a high-quality education in Missouri? Not yet.

Missouri is not ensuring that all of its students are graduating ready for college and the workforce—yet. If current trends continue, only 15% of current high school freshman in the state will have a college diploma when they are in their mid-twenties. This means that the vast majority of graduates from Missouri schools will not be employable in jobs that require high skills.1 Missouri has taken steps to increase expectations for students through its Top 10 by 20 Plan. The plan sets ambitious achievement targets and strategies to ensure that by 2020 Missouri ranks in the top ten states on key indicators such as graduation rates, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and remediation rates. The state’s overall goal is to see all students proficient and ready for college and the workforce by the time they graduate. While these goals are central to the transformation of education for students in Missouri, more needs to be done. Parents need transparent information about their schools and districts and parents with children in failing schools need the capacity to choose something better for their children. In order for Missouri to achieve its goals and transform education by 2020, it must ensure that these critical issues are addressed.

Missouri at a Glance2 Total enrollment 886,402 Number of schools 2,291 Number of school districts 520 Number of charter schools-Kansas City and St. Louis 58 Students who receive free or reduced lunch 50% White 74.3% Black 16.8% Hispanic 4.8% Asian 1.9% Native American/Pacific Islander 0.5% Has the state received a No Child Left Behind waiver? YES Is the state or district a Race to the Top Grant recipient? NO Missouri 2

How are Missouri schools Not enough Missouri students graduate failing the state’s business from high school prepared for college community? or the workforce. Missouri needs more educated workers • While the state has a relatively high graduation to fill high-skill jobs. rate of 86%, only 60% of students graduate in the urban Kansas City Missouri School District.7 • Sixty percent of jobs in Missouri will require a • Only 27% of the class of 2012 achieved a score career certificate or degree by 2020, but only on the ACT that indicated they were ready for 37% of adults in the state currently have these college-level courses.8 qualifications.3 • Fifty-two percent of students attending two-year • Of students who enroll in two- or four-year public colleges and 14.1% of students entering four-year colleges or universities, only 19% graduate on colleges need remediation. 9 time.4 • More than 40% of minority students require • On average, a high school graduate in Missouri remediation.10 earns $8,109 more each year than a high school • Missouri ranks 49th among states in the percent dropout. In 2011, approximately 18,000 students of high school graduates taking AP exams. Only did not graduate from high school, equaling lost 8.2% of high school graduates score a three or lifetime earnings of $2.3 billion.5 higher on a five point scale.11 • If Missouri cut the number of high school dropouts in half, the additional spending and Missouri High School Graduation Rates, investments by these new graduates would Class of 2012 be enough to support as many as 1,000 new jobs and increase the gross state product by as Four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate much as $33 million by the time they reach their career midpoints.6 100 90% 89% 90 86% 87% 79% 79% 80 73% 70 All Students Asian 60 White Native American 50 Latino Low-income 40 Black 30 20 10 0 Class of 2012

Source: Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, http://dese.mo.gov/top10by20/comparison.html#graduation Missouri 3

Not enough students attend What is Missouri doing to high-quality schools and meet standards improve schools and prepare for proficiency in reading and math. students to meet college- and • As Missouri prepares to complete the career-ready standards? implementation of college- and career-ready standards and aligned assessments, the Implementing state standards and National Assessment of Educational Progress assessments aligned to college- and (NAEP) shows that most students in the state career-ready standards are not proficient in reading and math, despite comparatively high scores on the state’s test..12 Missouri adopted the Common Core State Standards • According to the Children’s Education Alliance (CCSS) in English language arts and math in June of Missouri, achievement on the Missouri 2010.15 After adopting CCSS, the Missouri Department Assessment Program (MAP) shows a lack of of Elementary and Secondary Education (MDESE) significant progress in most districts, a decline initiated a process to revise its standards in other in some of the lowest performing districts, and a subject areas to ensure that all standards are equally widening of the achievement gap.13 rigorous and reflective of college- and career-ready • Missouri faces significant socioeconomic expectations. Although historically curriculum achievement gaps on the NAEP assessment: development has been left to districts, MDESE is 80% of low-income fourth-grade students are developing model curriculum to ensure that all not proficient in reading, and 72% of low-income districts, regardless of resources, will have access eighth-grade students are not proficient in math.14 to a curriculum that will enable them to teach their students content aligned to the new standards.

Missouri 2011 NAEP and MAP Scores 3 Common Core Standards in reading and Percentage of Students Who are Not Proficient math. Missouri is committed to implementing standards in reading and math aligned to the 100 CCSS no later than the 2013–14 school year. 90 3 Assessments aligned to CCSS. Missouri 80 is a governing state in the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and will pilot 70 66% 68% 65% and field-test the assessment system during the 59% NAEP Reading 60 NAEP Math 2013−14 school year. 49% MAP Reading 50 47% 46% 47% MAP Math 3 Academic pathways of learning to meet 40 labor market demands. Missouri is one of six states selected for a national education initiative 30 designed to build career pathway systems for 20 high school-aged students. The Pathways to 10 Prosperity Network is a joint effort between the 0 Pathways to Prosperity Project at the Harvard Grade 4 Grade 8 Graduate School of Education and Jobs for the Future. The project is focused on increasing high school graduation rates and the attainment of postsecondary credentials with value in the labor market. Pathways to Prosperity Missouri will initially focus on the St. Louis region with the Missouri 4

longer-term goal of creating a system of career 3 High-achievement goals. Missouri has pathways that can serve students throughout the established a set of annual measurable objectives state. Initial industry areas include those with high (AMOs) for all traditional subgroups, as well as for workforce demand, including healthcare, biotech, a Student Gap Group (a group composed of black agriculture, finance, and information technology.16 students, Latino students, low-income students, students with disabilities, and English language learners). The state has set a goal of increasing What to Watch: the percent of students who are proficient by 25% by 2020 (74% proficient in Math, 69.8% for • Staying the course. Will Missouri maintain its reading). The goal for the Student Gap Group is commitment to the timeline for implementing to reduce the achievement gap by half by 2020 CCSS standards and the SBAC assessments? (67.8% proficient in math, 63.5% for reading). It • Will increased standards and assessments will reset these goals when it implements the lead to improved college and career SBAC assessment system.17 readiness? As a result of increased 3 Accountability for all students. Missouri will expectations, will more students graduate ready report student assessment results for traditional to attain postsecondary credentials and meet the subgroups and include Student Gap Group test demands of the labor market? scores in accountability determinations. 6 Consequences for low-performing schools and districts. Missouri requires interventions Holding all schools accountable for in low-performing schools, but only the lowest meeting state standards 15% of schools. In addition, MDESE is not using its MPI and AMOs to determine the lowest achieving Under its approved NCLB waiver, Missouri is using a schools. Districts are no longer required to offer modified version of its Missouri School Improvement supplemental educational services or choice to Program (MSIP 5), which has been in place since students attending these schools. 1992. The MAP Performance Index (MPI) will generate 6 Transparent school grading reports. MDESE a single score based on a set of performance goals. has established the Missouri Comprehensive Each school will receive a “core score” based on Data System to provide data to the public student achievement, progress, and reducing about its schools. However, instead of a user achievement gaps. friendly A−F grading system, parents must sift through detailed data reports for schools. In addition to the core score, schools are evaluated District accountability reports designate them as on a range of accountability measures. This data is accredited, provisional, or unaccredited, which then reported in the Annual Performance Report and fails to provide clear, objective information about is used to identify low performing schools. However, how schools are performing.18 unlike other states, Missouri has not established a parent-friendly A–F grading system for its schools to translate this data into practical information. Missouri 5

The principles of Missouri’s system are promising, What to Watch but general. Missouri’s model evaluation process is voluntary and potentially far less ambitious than • Will the state improve the transparency many other states. of its accountability system? Will proposed legislation to create an A−F grading 6 Annual evaluations based on student system become law? achievement. Missouri does not require that all • State authority to intervene in failing teachers receive annual performance evaluations school districts. Will the legislature pass that are significantly informed by student Senate Bill 7, which streamlines the process achievement and student growth measures. New of turning around failing school districts? teachers in Missouri must be formally evaluated • The lowest-achieving schools need once a year but tenured teachers are required to get better! Too many students are in to be evaluated only once every five years and poorly-performing schools, particularly the state is not specific about how student in Kansas City and St. Louis (Normandy achievement is incorporated.20 School District). Both districts are now 6 Tenure and dismissal tied to performance. “unaccredited” due to poor performance. Will Missouri’s evaluation principles recommend that the interventions for struggling schools and districts use teacher evaluation ratings to inform districts help? Will the new accountability employment decisions, but the state does not system identify the right schools? have any specific requirements ensuring that teacher tenure decisions are informed by teacher effectiveness in the classroom. Missouri also has Improving teacher effectiveness no policies articulating that teachers who are deemed ineffective in the classroom are eligible In June 2012, the Missouri State Board of Education for dismissal. approved a one-year pilot project of a new teacher 3 Pay for performance or differential pay evaluation system—the Missouri Education for working in high-need schools or Evaluation System. The system is based on seven subjects. Missouri neither supports differential principles: 1) measuring performance based on pay by which a teacher can earn additional research-based and proven practices; 2) using compensation by teaching certain subjects nor differentiated levels of performance; 3) highlighting offers incentives to teach in high-needs schools. the probationary period as a significant time of However, districts in Missouri have a good deal intensive support; 4) including measures of growth of discretion on teacher salaries and the state in student learning as evidence of performance; 5) doesn’t have regulatory language that would providing regular, timely, and meaningful feedback directly block districts from providing differential on performance; 6) training evaluators; and 7) using pay or pay for performance results. evaluation results to inform employment decisions. 3 Performance-based layoff policies. In The evaluation system is Missouri’s effort to support Missouri, the factors used by districts to districts across the state, which are each required by determine which teachers are laid off during Bill 291 to set teaching standards. a reduction in force consider a teacher’s More than 100 districts are participating in the pilot. tenure status as well as teacher performance. Under the state’s approved NCLB waiver from the Nontenured teachers are “placed on leave of U.S. Department of Education, all districts must align absence” first, but tenured teachers “are retained their local teacher evaluation systems to the seven on the basis of performance-based evaluations principles and have an effective evaluation process in and seniority (however, seniority shall not be place by the 2014−2015 school year.19 controlling) within the field of specialization.”21 Missouri 6

3 Mentoring. Missouri requires that all new 3 Charter school law. In 2012, new legislation teachers receive mentoring. The state mandates authorized the expansion of charter schools that new teachers participate in a mentoring in the state beyond Kansas City and St. Louis. program approved and provided by the local Charters may now open in any “unaccredited” district for two years. State guidelines for district and in “provisionally accredited” districts developing a successful mentoring program under certain conditions. They can open in any establish the following criteria for mentors: 1) accredited school district if they are sponsored having a minimum of three years of experience by local school boards. The law also increased and 2) holding a same or similar position of reporting and accountability requirements for grade/subject area.22 charter schools.23 6 Open Enrollment and inter-district school choice. Missouri law allows students to transfer What to Watch: out of unaccredited school districts tuition-free. However, since Kansas City lost its accreditation • Implementation of Missouri’s teacher in January 2012, a circuit court judge has ruled effectiveness principles. There is much to be that three neighboring school districts would determined in Missouri’s efforts to implement suffer financial harm if students from Kansas City high quality teacher evaluations statewide. To are allowed to transfer into the smaller districts.24 what extent will districts in Missouri embrace The state does not require districts to offer school the principles and how will the state monitor choice with transportation for students in their the quality and rigor of district evaluations? lowest-achieving schools. According to the state’s own data, currently 6 Parent trigger. Missouri does not have a law only about 20% of districts in the state are using that enables parents to initiate school turnaround student growth data, in any form, as part of their efforts or charter school conversions. teacher evaluation process.1 Will Missouri meet 6 Private school vouchers. Missouri does not its promised statewide implementation goal for have a private school voucher program. teacher effectiveness policies? 3 Online Learning. The Missouri Virtual Instruction Program (MoVIP) offers online classes to Missouri public, private, and homeschooled students in What options are available for grades K–12.25 parents who want something better for their child? What to Watch: School choice, charter schools, and online learning • Will charter schools expand throughout the state? Under the new law, will students have Missouri has recently expanded options for creating access to more educational options? new charter schools throughout the state. However, • Will students in Kansas City be able to options for public school choice for students in transfer to other districts? Will the courts Kansas City were recently curtailed by the courts. prevent inter-district school choice for students in This leaves parents with few options to initiate school the state’s lowest-performing school district? turnaround efforts in their schools.

1 Missouri’s ESEA waiver application at: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/ elsec/guid/esea-flexibility/map/mo.html Missouri 7

How are state education How to get involved: leaders selected? Contact the Missouri Chamber of State governance in Missouri Commerce:

The State Board consists of eight citizens appointed http://www.mochamber.com/mx/hm.asp?id=home by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. Members serve staggered, eight-year terms so that one term expires each year. No more than four members of the Board may belong to the same political party. No more than one member of the Board may reside in the same county or Congressional district. When terms expire, members continue to serve until being replaced or reappointed. The Board elects its own officers each year.

For information about the members of the Missouri State Board of Education see: http://dese.mo.gov/ stateboard/stateboard.html

The current Commissioner of Education is Dr. Chris Nicastro, who was appointed by the State Board in July 2009. Missouri 8

Endnotes

1 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary 14 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Edu- Education (MDESE). (March 2011). 10x20 Education Reform cation (MDESE). (n.d.) Top 10 by 20 Monitoring Dashboard. Plan Summary. Retrieved January 23, 2013 from http:// Retrieved January 21, 2013 from http://dese.mo.gov/ dese.mo.gov/top10by20/documents/10x20-education- top10by20/comparison.html. reform-plan-summary.pdf. 15 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary 2 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Edu- Education. (2012). ESEA Flexibility Request. Retrieved Janu- cation (MDESE). (n.d.) Top 10 by 20 Monitoring Dashboard. ary 22, 2013 from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/eseaflex/ Retrieved January 21, 2013 from http://dese.mo.gov/top- approved-requests/mo.pdf. 10by20/comparison.html; MDESE (2012). 2012-13 Statistics of Missouri Public Schools. Retrieved January 20, 2013 16 MDESE (n.d.). Pathways to Prosperity Missouri. Retrieved from http://mcds.dese.mo.gov/quickfacts/District%20 January 23, 2013 from http://dese.mo.gov/ccr/pathways- and%20School%20Information/Missouri%20School%20 missouri.htm. Statistics.pdf. 17 Ibid; George W. Bush Institute. (2012). Advancing Account- ability: Missouri. Retrieved January 23, 2013 from http:// 3 Complete College America. (2011). Missouri 2011. Com- pleteCollege.org. Retrieved January 21, 2013, from http:// www.bushcenter.com/state-data/Missouri-Waiver-Review. www.completecollege.org/docs/Missouri.pdf. pdf. 18 ESEA Flexibility Request; MDESE (n.d.) MSIP: What Hap- 4 Ibid. pens when a school district becomes unaccredited? 5 Alliance for Excellent Education. (2012). Missouri High Retrieved January 23, 2013 from http://dese.mo.gov/divim- Schools. Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://www. prove/sia/msip/unaccredited.html. all4ed.org/files/MIssouri_hs.pdf. 19 Missouri Department of Education. (n.d.) Missouri’s Educa- 6 Alliance for Excellent Education. (2011). Education and the tor Evaluation System. Retrieved January 25, 2013 from Economy: Boosting Missouri’s Economy by Improving High http://dese.mo.gov/eq/ees.htm. School Graduation Rates. Retrieved December 21, 2012, from http://www.all4ed.org/files/Missouri_seb.pdf. 20 National Council on Teacher Quality. (2011) State Teacher Policy Yearbook 2011. Retrieved January 25, 2013 from 7 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary http://www.nctq.org/stpy11/. Education. (n.d.). Missouri Comprehensive Data System. Retrieved January 24, 2013 from http://mcds.dese.mo.gov/ 21 Ibid. Pages/default.aspx. 22 Ibid. 8 ACT. (2012). The Condition of College & Career Readiness 23 Education Week (June 29, 2012). Mo. Governor Signs 2012: Missouri. Retrieved January 24, 2013 from http://act. Charter-Expansions Law, but Says they Must Do Better. org/newsroom/data/2012/states/pdf/Missouri.pdf. Retrieved January 23, 2013 from http://blogs.edweek.org/ edweek/charterschoice/2012/06/missouri_governor_ 9 Complete College America. (2011). Missouri Remediation 2011. CompleteCollege.org. Retrieved January 21, 2013, signs_law_but_says_charters_must_do_better.html?qs=m from http://www.completecollege.org/docs/Missouri_re- issouri+charter+schools mediation.pdf. 24 Education Week (August 17, 2012). Judge Rules Kansas City Student Transfers Violate State Law. Retrieved January 10 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation (MDESE). (n.d.) Top 10 by 20 Monitoring Dashboard. 23, 2013 from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Dis- Retrieved January 21, 2013 from http://dese.mo.gov/ trict_Dossier/2012/08/judge_rules_kansas_city_studen. top10by20/comparison.html. html?qs=missouri. 25 MDESE. (n.d.). Missouri Virtual Instruction Program. Re- 11 Ibid. trieved January 24, 2013 from http://www.movip.org. 12 National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). 2011 NAEP Scores. Retrieved December 6, 2012, from http://nces. ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/stt2011/2012454IN4.pdf. 13 Children’s Education Alliance of Missouri. (n.d.). Why Education Reform. Retrieved January 24, 2013 from http:// www.childrenseducationalliance-mo.org/get-educated/ why-ed-reform. Institute for a Competitive Workforce U.S. Chamber of Commerce National Chamber Foundation 1615 H Street NW , DC 20062 Phone: 202-463-5525 www.uschamber.com/icw