Investments in M Innesota ’ S S Tudents

Smart INVESTMENTS IN M INNESOTA ’ S S TUDENTS

NOVEMBER 12, 2007 Smart INVESTMENTS IN M INNESOTA ’ S S TUDENTS A GEND A

8:30 a.m. Coffee and registration.

9:00 – 9:20 a.m. Welcome and Overview of Day and Project Outcomes • Dane Smith, President, Growth & Justice • Angela M. Eilers, Ph.D., Research & Policy Director, Growth & Justice 9:20 – 10:30 a.m. Presentation of Findings • Dr. Arthur Rolnick, Senior Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, (co-authored with Rob Grunewald, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis), will speak on early childhood investments (birth to age 5). • Dr. Arthur Reynolds, University of Minnesota, and Co-Director of Early Childhood Research Collaborative, will address early childhood investments (age 3 to 3rd grade). • Dr. Henry M. Levin, Co-Director of Center for Benefit-Cost Studies in Education, Columbia University (co-authored with Clive Belfield, Queens College, Co-Director of Center for Benefit-Cost Studies in Education, Columbia University) will present on K-12 investments. 10:30 - 10:45 a.m. Break 10:45 - 11:30 • Dr. Megan Beckett, RAND Corporation, will address out-of-school time investments. • Dr. Laura Perna, University of Pennsylvania, will provide a synthesis on effective interventions transitioning from secondary to post-secondary education. 11:30-12:00 p.m. Remarks by Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller and Senate Minority Leader David Senjem 12:00 - 1:00 p.m. Lunch provided 1:15 - 2:45 p.m. Break out sessions with Minnesota’s legislative education committee chairs and guest economists.

3:00 - 3:30 p.m. Remarks by House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher and Education Commissioner Alice Seagren

Dear Friend of Education,

Welcome to Growth & Justice’s “Smart Investments in Minnesota’s Students” summit. This will be the first in a series of “Smart Investments” conversations in which we will combine fact-based research and civic engagement to give clarity on where Minnesota should best invest for shared prosperity.

Minnesota’s great tradition of investing amply and wisely in education has paid off well, producing higher-than-average income growth and top marks on a wide range of quality-of-life indicators. However, we now see signs that we may no longer be in the vanguard among the states.

A national survey published in 2006 by Jobs for the Future indicates that 23 states have set a numerical target for improving college success. Minnesota was not one of those states. A paper to be issued at this conference shows Minnesota no longer ranks among top performing states in higher education enrollment and persistence, and not even on a list of the top ten “New Economy States.’’ Growth & Justice wants to change that.

Today, 35 percent of Minnesotans between the ages of 25 and 34 have a bachelor’s degree or higher; 17% in that same age range have a two-year degree (though 40% enroll each year). While the percentage of those attaining a certificate or one-year diploma is unclear, we know that the difference between a living wage and a non-living wage in Minnesota is attainment of a degree beyond the high school diploma. At the same time, Minnesota’s minority populations are not doing even half as well in enrollment and completion rates as their peers, and yet they represent the fastest growing population in the state.

To those interested in both growth and justice, we think we have set an aspirational but feasible goal: Increase by half the number of Minnesota students who obtain a professional credential, an associate’s degree or a bachelor’s degree by the year 2020.

What is it going to take to increase by half the number of new degree-holders? And how are we going to afford this growth? How do we know that our limited dollars invested in education are going to make a difference? Growth & Justice has been working on this question for more than a year now.

We began by mapping backward from our final desired outcome based on what we know:

o We know that we need to increase graduation rates, so what are the most effective interventions to increase higher education enrollment, retention and graduation? o We know that rigorous high school coursework correlates with the likelihood of a student enrolling in and succeeding in post-secondary education, so what are the most effective ways to get students to take and succeed in rigorous coursework? o We know that keeping students at or above proficiency level on basic skills in the elementary and middle grade years correlates with their likelihood of staying in and graduating from high school. What are the most effective interventions on the basic skills? o We know that kindergarten readiness is highly correlated with success in early skill acquisition that correlates with success in basic skill competencies. What are the most effective interventions for kindergarten readiness? o We know that quality early childhood experiences ready a child for kindergarten. What are the most effective interventions in the early childhood years?

Given an economic climate of limited resources, what will our priorities be?

Researchers know more and more about what it takes to get kids on track and to keep them moving forward. Economists have better and better ideas of what it costs. This summit is an effort to put these together and get closer to answering the question: How do we get the best bang for our education buck?

We have posed this challenge to stakeholders, state leaders and to some of the nation’s preeminent scholars and education economists, who are present here today. Working together, we think we can begin to get closer to answering these questions.

Thank you for joining us in this important work.

Dane Smith Angela Eilers, PhD President Research and Policy Director Growth & Justice Growth & Justice

Table of Contents

Statewide Steering Committee 4

Advisory Committee 5

Achieving a High Return on Early Childhood Investment: Evidence, Proposal, and the Minnesota Pilot 7 Arthur J. Rolnick & Rob Grunewald

Cost-Effectiveness of Early Childhood Development Programs from Preschool to Third Grade 9 Arthur J. Reynolds

Investments in K-12 Education for Minnesota: What Works? 29 Henry M. Levin, Clive R. Belfield

Current-Generation Youth Programs: What Works, What Doesn’t Work, 39 and at What Cost? Megan K. Beckett

Improving the Transition from High School to College in Minnesota: 57 Recommendations Based on a Review of Effective Programs Laura W. Perna

Education Scholar Biographies 73

State Policymaker Biographies 77

Smart Investments in Minnesota’s Students Background Paper 81

Participant list 85

Statewide Steering Committee Teachers 1. Pam Willard, MNBEL award winning preschool teacher, Golden Heart Childcare 2. Lee Ann Stephens, Ed MN Teacher of the year, St Louis Park Spanish Immersion Elementary School 3. Dr. Robert Johnson, MMEP award winning professor, St Cloud State University

Administrators 4. Dr. Greg Vandal, Superindendent, Sauk Rapids-Rice School District 5. Dr. Meria Carstarphen, Superintendent, St Paul Public Schools 6. Dr. Darlyne Bailey, Dean, University of Minnesota’s College of Education 7. Dr. Linda Baer, Sr. Vice Chancellor for Academic & Student Affairs, MnSCU 8. Dr. Jerry Halverson, Senior Faculty, Capella University

Advocates 9. Todd Otis, President, Ready 4 K 10. Rene Lara, Legislative Action Specialist, Education Minnesota 11. Vernae Hasbargen, Senior Legislative Analyst, MN Rural Education Association 12. Jennifer Godinez, Director, MN College Access Network 13. Don Schuld, Assistant Superintendent, Stillwater Area Schools 14. Eugene Piccolo, Executive Director, MN Association of Charter Schools 15. Lynn Haglin, Vice President/KID PLUS Director, Northland Foundation

Former Legislators 16. David Jennings, Superintendent, Independent School District # 112 (Chaska) 17. Steve Kelley, Senior Fellow, Humphrey Institute, University of Minnesota

Business 18. Jim Southwick, Medtronic, Inc. 19. Peter Sadowski, Antares Pharma, Inc.

Parents and students 20. Mary Cecconi, Executive Director, Parents United for Public Schools 21. Maureen Cisneros, University student, Board of Regents

Education finance, economics 22. Prof. Nicola Alexander, College of Education, University of Minnesota 23. Prof. Judy Temple, Humphrey Institute, University of Minnesota

Family, community, health/social services 24. Jim Meffert-Nelson, Chair, Children’s Coalition Platform 25. Neal Thao, Facutly, Metro State University 26. Laura LaCroix-Dalluhn, Youth Community Connections

Page 4 Growth & Justice

Advisory Council

Paul Anton, Chief Economist, Wilder Research

John Brandl, Professor, Humphrey Institute, University of Minnesota

Sandy Christensen, Professor, Dept. of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota

Deborah Dillon, Professor of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Minnesota

David Heistad, Director of Research, Evaluation and Assessment, Minneapolis Public Schools

Cathy Jordan, Executive Director, Children, Youth and Family Consortium

Dan Mueller, Associate Director, Wilder Research

Van Mueller, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Educational Policy and Administration, University of Minnesota

Arthur Reynolds, Professor, University of Minnesota Institute of Child Development

Art Rolnick, Senior Vice President and Director of Research, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

Karen Seashore, Professor, Dept. of Educational Policy and Administration, University of Minnesota

Mark Van Ryzin, Ph.D. Student, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

Stuart Yeh, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Educational Policy and Administration, University of Minnesota

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 5 Smart Investments in Minnesota Students: Where Should We Invest Our Next Dollar? Goal: Increase by 50% the number of students who finish post-secondary education

Start Finish Post-Sec th K 8 Students who enter Students who are qualified post-secondary school to enroll in post-secondary All students pass Algebra I by finish with a degree Every child enters school schools begin within 3 the end of 8th grade ready to learn years of H.S. graduation

All 3rd graders read at or All high schoolers graduate prepared for above grade level post-secondary school through rigorous courses (Algebra II, Chemistry/ Physics) Pre-K rd 13-16 3 Prep -Where are we currently in Minnesota on each of these outcomes? -What are effective interventions that achieve these outcomes, and at what cost? -Which investments get the greatest return for the dollar? -Where could we best direct state funds in achieving educational outcomes?

Rigorous math, science, high-level comprehension

Post-secondary Enrollment Basic skills grade-level 9-12 & Completion progression 4-8

Reading, writing, math K-3 proficiency

Increase by 50% the number of students who finish a post- Pre-K Early care secondary degree by 2020

Page 6 Growth & Justice

Achieving a High Return on Early Childhood Investment: Evidence, Proposal, and the Minnesota Pilot

Arthur J. Rolnick & Rob Grunewald Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

Abstract series of longitudinal studies show that For well over 20 years, government leaders well-focused and funded investments in at the state and local levels have invested in early childhood development programs economic development schemes with public produce substantial returns for children dollars that are at best a zero-sum game. In from disadvantaged environments. the name of economic development and The findings from early childhood creating new jobs, virtually every state in the research, promising though they are, pose a union has tried to lure companies with public challenge: How can we reproduce the subsidies. Previous studies have shown that success of model early childhood the case for these so-called bidding wars is development programs on a large scale? We shortsighted and fundamentally flawed. believe that large-scale efforts can succeed From a national perspective, jobs are not if they are market based and incorporate the created—they are only relocated. The public following key attributes: start early, involve return is at most zero. parents, focus on at-risk children, provide We don’t pretend to have all the incentives for quality programs, and make a answers to economic development, but we’re long-term commitment. quite certain that investing in early childhood In this paper, we first review the education is more likely to create a vibrant evidence on the potentially high return to economy than using public funds to lure a early childhood investment. Second, we sports team by building a new stadium or present our market-based proposal for attracting an automaker by providing tax achieving these returns on a large scale. breaks. First, a child’s first few years are a Finally, we examine the Minnesota pilot sensitive period for brain development and that is designed to test the market-based set a trajectory for his or her success in approach. school and later in life as an adult. Second, a

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 7 Page 8 Growth & Justice

Cost-Effectiveness of Early Childhood Development Programs from Preschool to Third Grade

Arthur J. Reynolds University of Minnesota

Executive Summary least $2 per dollar invested for targeted Although the positive effects of early programs and at least $2 per dollar invested childhood development programs have been for universal access programs. widely disseminated, less attention has been Relative to half-day kindergarten, given to the accumulated evidence for the positive effects of full-day kindergarten programs across the entire period of early have been found to be relatively small and childhood. This review summarizes evidence generally do not last for more than a year. on the effects and cost-effectiveness of While no formal economic analyses have programs and services from ages 3 to 9. The been conducted, the economic return per major focus is preschool programs for 3- and dollar invested would be expected to be 4-year olds, full-day kindergarten, school- close to zero, especially if benefits are age programs including reduced class sizes, limited to achievement. and preschool-to-third grade interventions. Among school-age programs, There is wide variation across states in preschool plus school-age interventions expenditures for early childhood (PK-3) for children at risk are linked to development programs. Although 38 states higher levels of school performance into fund prekindergarten programs for 4-year- adolescence. The Child-Parent Center PK-3 olds, for example, participation rates range Program shows a return of 6 to 9 dollars per from about 2% (Minnesota) to 70% dollar invested. Class size reductions show (Oklahoma). evidence of positive effects with economic Participation in preschool programs returns of roughly 3 dollars per dollar was found to have relatively large and invested. School-based social skills training enduring effects on school achievement and can yield returns of over 3 dollars per dollar child well-being. High-quality programs for invested while the treatment-focused children at risk produce strong economic program Reading Recovery shows only returns ranging from about $4 per dollar short-term positive effects. invested to over $10 per dollar invested. Key principles of effectiveness Recent evaluations of state-funded include the establishment of a coordinated prekindergarten programs show positive and system of services beginning at age 3 and educationally meaningful effects on school continuing to the early school grades, readiness skills for both at-risk and not-at- teaching staff that are well trained and risk children. Policy analyses from state and compensated, preferably with earned national perspectives estimate returns of at bachelor’s degrees and appropriate

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 9 certification, comprehensive family services, in evidence-based school transition emphasis on the direct acquisition of school programs and practices in the early grades, readiness skills and performance, and (3) Use results of cost-benefit analysis to commitment to on-going evaluation and prioritize child investment options, (4) assessment. Develop funding mechanisms to support the Five policy recommendations are implementation of programs in a more discussed: (1) Establish a state-funded timely manner, and (5) Increase investments Minnesota prekindergarten program for 4- in research and development for evaluating year-olds following key principles of programs. effectiveness, (2) Increase state investment

Page 10 Growth & Justice Cost-Effective Early Childhood Development Programs from Preschool to Third Grade

Arthur J. Reynolds University of Minnesota

November 12, 2007

Key Points 1. The State of Minnesota greatly underinvests in early education. 2. High-quality preschool shows high cost-effectiveness. 3. Evidence is strong that state-funded prekindergarten programs improve school readiness. 4. Full-day kindergarten has small effects that do not endure.

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 11 Key Points 5. PK-3 Interventions strengthen learning gains and have long-term effects. 6. School-age programs can make a difference, including small classes, and social skills training. Cost-effectiveness will occur only for high quality programs following key principles of effectiveness. 8. Establish a State PreK program following key principles.

1. The State of Minnesota greatly underinvests in early childhood programs.

Page 12 Growth & Justice Minnesota Ranked 36th out of 38 States in Pre-K Access for 4-Year-Olds in 2005 % in State Rank State Pre-K (1-38)

Minnesota 1.9 36

Wisconsin 28.9 9

Illinois 26.1 11

Michigan 18.9 14

Iowa 4.4 31 Oklahoma 68.5 1 Georgia 54.6 2

Minnesota Ranked 37th out of 38 States in Pre-K Access for 4-Year-Olds in 2006 % in State Rank State Pre-K (1-38)

Minnesota 1.8 37

Wisconsin 32.1 7

Illinois 23.0 13

Michigan 16.2 16

Iowa 4.5 32 Oklahoma 70.2 1 Georgia 51.5 2

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 13 Pre-K Funding for Minnesota and Other States, FY 2005 State Average State program Expenditure Expenditure ($Million) per Child ($) MN School Readiness 9.0 $283 MN First Grade Preparedness 7.3 $1,674 MN ECFE (State funds+levy) 34.0 $270 Michigan School Readiness 83.7 $3,366 Wisconsin 4-year-old Kindergarten 61.2 $3,065

Illinois State Prekindergarten 216.5 $2,980

Oklahoma State Prekindergarten 79.8 $2,517

Georgia Prekindergarten 276.0 $3,899

Minnesota Kindergartners “Not Yet” Ready in Language/Literacy

All Children in Sample 13% Par. Ed < HS 31% Income < 35K 21% Children of color 21% Caucasian children 9% Parent a college grad 6% Income > 75K 5%

Page 14 Growth & Justice Kindergartners who Attended Center- Based Preschool: ECLS-K Study

100 90 80 65 70 60 52 50 42 40 31 Percentage 30 20 20 10 0 Low SES Low Middle Middle High Middle High SES

2. High quality preschool programs show high cost- effectiveness

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 15 Common Paths from Early Childhood to Adult Well-Being

Adolescence to Early Childhood Adulthood Ages 3-9 Ages 5-12

Motivation Exogenous Self-efficacy Conditions Perceived competence Gender Persistence in learning Socio-Environmental MA MA Risk Neighborhood Developed Abilities Competence Behaviors Attributes Cognitive development CA Literacy skills School Achievement CA Pre-reading/numeracy skills and Performance School Remediation Delinquency and Crime Program Social Adjustment SA Child Maltreatment Participation SA Classroom adjustment Participation in Social Timing Peer relations Services Duration Self-regulating skills Health & Mental Health Intensity FS Educational Attainment FS Family Support Economic Well-Being Parent-child interactions Family Circumstances Home support for learning SS Participation in school MA= Motivational Advantage SS Parenting skills CA = Cognitive Advantage SA = Social Adjustment School Support FS = Family Support Quality of school environment SS = School Support Classroom environment School-level performance

High-Quality Preschool Programs

Benefits Costs Ratio Perry 138,486 15,844 8.74

Child-Parent 67,595 7,384 10.15

Abecedarian 135,546 67,225 2.02

Page 16 Growth & Justice Early Education Findings

Gain in Language/ Program Cognitive Skills

Intensive Preschool 6-7 months State-Run Programs 3 months High Quality Child Care 3 months

Economic Returns from 3 Policy Simulations

Benefit- Focus Cost Ratio RAND, 2005 Universal 2.62

Aos, 2004 58 studies 2.36 Targeted

Lynch, 2007 Targeted 12.10 Universal 8.20

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 17 3. Evidence is strong that state-funded prekindergarten improves school readiness.

Evidence for State PreK Programs

Effect size In Months New Mexico .37 3-4 Arkansas .30 3 New Jersey .32 3-4 Oklahoma .26 3 Tulsa, OK .58 6 Synthesis of .36 3-4 7 states/cities

Page 18 Growth & Justice 4. Full-Day Kindergarten has small effects that do not endure.

Full-Day Kindergarten Effects

Synthesis of 23 studies Effect size Months Kindergarten .18 2 Grade 1 .01 0 Grade 2-3 .05 0 Grade 4 .00 0

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 19 Example from CPC Program --Reading achievement

End of K Grade 1 PK + FDK 65 74 PK + HDK 62 75 No PK + FDK 60 70

5. PK-3 Interventions strengthen learning gains and have long-term effects.

Page 20 Growth & Justice Rationale for PK-3

Help sustain learning gains from preschool education

Promote better early transitions

Greater “dosage” will help children at risk

Reading Achievement over Time by Extended Program Groups

120

110

100

70 P+K P+K+SA Test Scores Test 60 Nat. Norm

30 5678910 Ages

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 21 CPC PK-3 Cost-Effectiveness

Benefits Costs Ratio Original 27,154 4,447 6.11

Add intangible 40,245 4,447 9.05 crime savings

6. Early school-age programs can make a difference.

Page 22 Growth & Justice Class Size Reductions in Early Schooling

Benefits Costs Ratio Tenn. STAR 23,913 8,454 2.83

CPC school-age 6,928 3,268 2.12

Social Skills Training, Grades 1-6

Benefits Costs Ratio

Skills, Opport. 14,810 4,712 3.14 and recognition

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 23 Reading Recovery

Relatively large short-term effects on reading achievement.

Small effects by third or fourth grade

Impacts may return about a third of program costs

7. Cost-effectiveness will occur only for high-quality programs.

Page 24 Growth & Justice Common Elements of Programs Showing High Economic Returns

1. Opportunity for More than 1 Year of Participation. 2. Well-trained and Compensated Teachers. 3. Class Sizes under 18 and Child to Staff Ratios less than 9 to 1. 4. Instruction that is Diverse & Literacy Rich. 5. Comprehensive Family Services Tailored to Children’s Needs. 6. Average Yearly Cost per Child no Less than $5,000 (2004 dollars).

Key Elements of Effectiveness Timing-Earlier is generally better Duration-More is better Comprehensive services Intensity of instruction, services Small class sizes and child/staff ratios Transition-to-school services

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 25 Key Elements of Effectiveness Well-trained, compensated staff Compensatory focus Strong accountability system Target children at risk

Elements of Programs with High Returns High/Scope Chicago Abecedarian Program element Perry Child-Parent Project Preschool Centers Risk Status High High High Earliest age at entry 3 years 3 years 3 months Length of preschool 78% 2 yrs 60% 2 yrs 5 years 22% 1 yr 40% 1 yr Intensity (hrs/days 2.5 hours, 5 3 hours, 5 8 hours, 5 week) days/week days/week days/week Class size and no. of 24 to 4 17 to 2 Pre: 12 to 2 staff Inf: 5 to 1

Page 26 Growth & Justice Elements of Programs with High Returns High/Scope Chicago Abecedarian Program element Perry Child-Parent Project Preschool Centers Comprehensiveness Home visits Family Health services services Transition services K-8 school K to Third K to Second Grade Grade Professional M.A., B.A., Competitive training/ certified, certified, with public Compensation Public sch Public sch sch wages wages Accountability Systematic On-going On-going

Compensatory Home visits, Lang/comm Language approach structure unication

Recommendations 1. Establish a State Prekindergarten Program for 4-year-olds based on Key Principles of Effectiveness.

2. Increase state investment in evidence- based school transition programs and services.

3. Use results of cost-benefit analysis to better prioritize funding.

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 27 Recommendations

4. Develop funding mechanisms to support timely implementation of programs.

5. Increase R & D investment for assessing early childhood programs.

Chicago Longitudinal Study

Web site: www.cehd.umn.edu/icd/cls/

Arthur Reynolds, Institute of Child Development ([email protected])

Judy Temple, Humphrey Institute and Dept. of Applied Economics ([email protected])

Suh-Ruu Ou, Institute of Child Development ([email protected])

Funding support provided by: NICHD Foundation for Child Development Doris Duke Charitable Foundation

Page 28 Growth & Justice

Investments in K-12 Education for Minnesota: What Works?*

Henry M. Levin [email protected] Teachers College, Columbia University

Clive R. Belfield [email protected] Queens College, City University of New York

* The authors are grateful for guidance from Angie Eilers and support from the Growth & Justice Education Project. Research assistance was provided by Stephanie Mischner.

Summary childhood but are magnified through the K- Annually, 10,000 students leave 12 years. Many of the graduates then go on Minnesota’s schools without a high school to college, leaving the high school dropouts diploma. When measured over the lifetime further behind. Although Minnesota spends the economic consequences if a dropout more on public education for disadvantaged becomes a graduate are significant. We can students, the difference is not substantial. express these consequences as the The search for effective educational equivalent of a certificate of deposit in terms interventions in K-12 schooling should of their values at age 20. The individual therefore be intensive. The quest should be graduate gains the equivalent of a CD worth primarily for interventions to raise the $475,900 in extra earnings. The taxpayer graduation rate. But there is a strong gains the equivalent of a CD worth $251,900 correlation between achievement and in increases in tax revenues and in lower graduation: our review estimates that an expenditures on health, crime, and welfare. increase in 8th grade achievement of one The state of Minnesota gains the equivalent standard deviation is associated with a 48% of a CD worth $1,059,500 from the lower probability of dropping out of high individual and taxpayer benefits plus lower school. So, the search should also consider crime victimization and faster economic reforms that increase achievement. growth. The economic case for raising the However, the challenges to finding high school graduation rate is therefore and selecting reforms are significant. Cost- strong. effectiveness studies require that the The moral case for raising the high alternatives have similar educational goals school graduation rate is also powerful. and comparable measurement of outcomes. High school graduation rates in Minnesota Many studies claim to be educationally are stratified by race, sex, and family effective, but they are often based upon background. The disparities begin in early different measures of outcomes. Even when

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 29 based upon test scores, the results may be our review to include interventions that raise for different subjects, different grade levels, achievement. different populations, and different test After an extensive review, we found domains. Few studies that make claims for only a few K-12 education reforms that have positive results meet even the minimal demonstrated effectiveness in raising the standards for rigor in evaluation design and graduation rate and whose costs can be implementation. And, almost none provide calculated with reasonable confidence. useful information for measuring costs. These reforms are: These conclusions hold even if we expand

Unit costs per Extra high Costs per student school additional graduates per graduate 100 students Increasing teacher salaries $2,850 5 $56,850 Reducing class sizes in $12,840 11 $116,720 elementary school across all students Reducing class sizes in $12,840 18 $71,330 elementary school for free lunch eligible students only Success for All $3,842 4 $96,050 Elementary school reform First Things First $5,440 16 $33,680 High school reform Talent Development $2,790 8 $34,850 High school reform with career academy model

When we compare the costs of these reforms to the economic benefits that flow from high school graduation, we find that the benefits to the taxpayer easily exceed the costs:

Benefits to the taxpayer divided by the costs of the intervention Increasing teacher salaries 4.01 Reducing class sizes across all students 1.96 Reducing class sizes for free lunch students 3.21 Success for All 2.38 First Things First 6.72 Talent Development 6.56

There are many other interventions with Effective programs that may pass a potential benefits, but either their cost-benefit test, but presently lack rigorous effectiveness is not fully demonstrated or evaluation data and cost information: there is inadequate information on costs.

Page 30 Growth & Justice ♦ Mentoring programs (Check & information on resource requirements that is Connect, ALAS) needed to estimate costs is as sparse as ♦ College readiness programs (CAP, rigorous evaluations on effectiveness. A TEACH, Talent Search) major challenge will be to fill these crucial ♦ Employment readiness programs gaps in order to provide a more (Career Academies) comprehensive listing of educational ♦ Extended hours programs (After- interventions by their cost-effectiveness and school, summer school) cost-benefit results. One method that we have used in this paper to expand the Other areas of reform where more numbers of programs that predict increases knowledge is critically needed: in high school graduation is to provide a ♦ Specific programs (AVID, framework for converting test score Project GRAD, KIPPS increases at 8th grade or above into impacts academies, ISA model) on high school completion. This technique ♦ Teacher quality will enable us to embrace a wide range of ♦ Family interventions high school reforms that show Overall, the evidence on what works improvements in student achievement, but – and what interventions pass a benefit-cost do not follow up students to graduation to test – for raising high school graduation show the impact on high school completion. rates is very limited. Accurate and detailed

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 31 Investments in K-12 Education for Minnesota: What Works?

Henry M. Levin Teachers College, Columbia University

Clive R. Belfield Queens College, City University of New York

K-12 education in Minnesota

One of the highest graduation rates in U.S., but 9,960 students do not graduate on time each year Graduation rate by race/ethnicity: White >90% Black 59% Hispanic 50% American Indian 57% Disparities in school readiness accumulate over K-12 High rate of college enrollment conditional on high school graduation; college-ready get further ahead K-12 school funding is close to the median in U.S. State aid for high poverty districts 1.35 times average

Page 32 Growth & Justice Benefits of high school graduation

Lump sum certificate of deposit at age 20 for a graduate over a dropout (Minnesota prices): Extra income $476,000 Taxpayer savings $252,000 (Income tax revenues, lower spending on health, crime, welfare) Savings to the state of Minnesota $1,060,000 (Income + taxpayer benefits + victim savings + economic growth)

Economic case for raising the high school graduation rate These amounts could be spent to break even

Identifying interventions

Search for interventions with demonstrated impact on high school graduation and with costs of implementation

Alternative search for interventions that raise test scores: – 1 standard deviation increase in test scores in 8th grade is associated with ~50% fall in the dropout rate – Impact of test score gains on graduation varies significantly: by race/ethnicity, by sex, by prior achievement, and by subject of test

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 33 Test scores and graduation

For white/Hispanic males, 8th grade math (but not reading) performance raises graduation probability For black males, 8th grade reading (but not math) performance raises graduation probability For females, both math and reading count

Generally, a 1 standard deviation increase in math scores has a stronger impact than a 1 standard deviation increase in reading scores

There is no impact of test scores on graduation probabilities for those whose test scores are above the median

Dropout probability

Male Female White Black Hispanic White Black Hispanic

Socio- -0.343 -0.406 -0.127 -0.277 -0.424 -0.313 economic status (0.045)* (0.108)* (0.093) (0.044)* (0.101)* (0.090)*

Reading -0.004 -0.051 -0.015 -0.004 -0.032 -0.027 (8th Grade) -0.004 (0.014)* (0.011) (0.004) (0.012)* (0.010)*

Math score -0.033 -0.014 -0.043 -0.037 -0.036 -0.028 (8th(8th Grade)Grade) (0.003)* (0.011) (0.009)* (0.004)* (0.011)* (0.008)*

N 4945 631 820 5194 748 925

Page 34 Growth & Justice Dropout probability II

By 8th grade reading achievement quartiles Q1 (low) Q2 Q3 Q4 (high)

Socio -0.301 -0.273 -0.356 -0.299 Economic status (0.043)*** (0.049)*** (0.059)*** (0.073)***

Reading -0.024 0.035 -0.017 0.013 (8th Grade) (0.011)** (0.015)** (0.016) (0.014)

Math -0.049 -0.035 -0.029 -0.025 (8th Grade) (0.005)*** (0.004)*** (0.004)*** (0.005)***

Dropout rate 26.4% 15.7% 8.7% 4.2% N 3326 3305 3315 3305

Selected interventions

TSI Increasing K-12 teacher salaries by 10% CSR Reducing class sizes in elementary school (For all students or for free-lunch eligible) SFA Success for All Elementary school reform FTF First Things First (small learning communities) TD Talent Development (new 9th grade curriculum; career academy) C&C Check & Connect (Monitoring and mentoring program) ALAS Achievement for Latinos thr. Academic Success (Mentoring and achievement program)

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 35 Costing exercise

Find ingredients / inputs Calculate cost Transform into Minnesota prices Adjust values to be comparable to the economic benefits (expressed at age 20) Very few interventions report costs

Key data on interventions

Extra high school graduates Unit costs per 100 students (present values receiving the intervention at age 20)

CSR-free lunch 18 $12,840 C&C 17 $8,150 FTF 16 $5,440 CSR-all 11 $12,840 TD 8 $2,790 TSI 5 $2,850 ALAS 5 $3,940 SFA 4 $3,840

Page 36 Growth & Justice Cost-benefit ratios per new high school graduate for Minnesota

Benefits Costs per new B/C to taxpayers graduate

FTF $228,630 $33,680 6.72 TD $228,630 $34,850 6.56 C&C $228,630 $47,930 4.77 TSI $228,630 $56,850 4.01 CSR-free lunch $228,630 $71,330 3.21 ALAS $228,630 $78,860 2.90 SFA $228,630 $96,050 2.38 CSR-all $228,630 $116,720 1.96

Other possible interventions

Check & Connect Career Academies ALAS AVID Family engagement programs Neighborhood interventions Teacher re-allocation / quality

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 37 Policy issues

Scale of challenge: US behind many industrial countries in graduation rates Private, taxpayer, and state economic benefits of graduation are very large High proportions of dropouts are minorities Critically short of interventions with demonstrated effects and cost ingredients Targeting interventions is critical

Page 38 Growth & Justice

Current-Generation Youth Programs: What works, What Doesn’t Work, And at What Cost?

Megan K. Beckett RAND Corp. (Please do not cite without permission)

ABSTRACT What Do We Know About The Reported Costs of youth Programs? Introduction In determining alternative investments in Policymakers nationwide are facing the social programs, cost is an important factor. decision about how to best invest in All else equal, policymakers will prefer a education and related opportunities for their program that either serves a larger number youth populations and, if so, how to allocate of people at the same cost as a program that these investment across alternative serves fewer people or a program that serves investment opportunities given their a fixed number of people at lower cost. respective costs and benefits. In this paper, Recognizing that cost will feature in the we review the costs, benefits, and cost and decision of whether to fund new programs benefits relative to one another for one or to expand or close existing programs, alternative type of investment: youth more and more youth program creators have programs that are offered during the time included cost information into their that youth are not in school. Such programs evaluations and descriptions. We reviewed are often viewed as a mechanism for the costs associated with many of the more addressing the school-age care needs of prominent youth programs. working parents, for improving youth Excluding enrichment programs, the developmental outcomes, and for reducing lowest-cost programs are the basic before- the academic achievement gap between and after-school programs (and the funding advantaged and disadvantaged youth. streams that support them): By our Most of the programs considered in estimates, their cost per hour ranges from this paper are targeted to some extent, with $1.17 to $2.57, excluding the two programs some (which usually provide more intensive that provide a fuller set of services, programming, such as a case manager, and including case management (for Beacon’s involve fewer youth) more targeted than Initiative) and Extended Services Schools others. The youth programs we consider are Initiatives (which contained several before and after-school programs, Beacon’s). The costs of these two programs enrichment programs, specialized after- were $4.03 and $4.03 per hour per child, school programs, summer learning respectively. programs, and drop-out and teen The specialized after-school intervention programs. programs, summer learning program, and

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 39 the youth drop-out/intervention programs What Do We Know About the Positive are much more expensive per hour of (and Negative) Effects of These service than the lower cost after-school Programs? programs, reflecting the greater resource Our update of an earlier RAND research intensity of these programs. The lowest cost synthesis of the effects of group-based youth per hour per child of these programs is for programs on youth participants supports the group mentoring programs ($3.32); the same broad conclusions: The current others range from $5.36 (Children’s Aid generation of youth programs can provide Society/Carrera Adolescent Pregnancy modest positive impacts on academic Prevention Program) to $8.36 for one-on- achievement, academic attainment, and one mentoring. social behaviors, such as pregnancy, and A limitation with most cost data is most of the benefits of youth programs are that they generally exclude key cost concentrated in programs that serve youth elements and, thus, underestimate the full individually and are more resource- cost of replicating a program. Most of what intensive. is known about program costs relate to The current synthesis relies on operating costs. At the program level, results from evaluations that use an operating costs are likely to account for the experimental design whose integrity was majority of costs; some estimates suggest maintained throughout the full evaluation, operating costs account for between 60 and because research suggests that weaker study 80 percent of total costs. However, if the designs tend to yield more false positives aim is to replicate programs throughout a and are less likely to result in negative state, operating costs as a proportion of total results than the strongest study designs. Our costs may go down, and costs to monitor the synthesis is restricted to evaluations training and performance of programs may screened for inclusion on either of two increase. In most cases, even published websites: “What Works and What Doesn’t operating costs are incomplete. Cost Work in Social Policy? Findings from Well- estimates of youth programs tend to ignore Designed Randomized Controlled Trials” in-kind resources (e.g., volunteer mentors, (www.evidencebasedprograms.org) or a list community speakers) and omit key of studies assigned a “Proven” rating on the operating cost components (e.g., use of Promising Practices Network on Children, donated facilities and janitorial services). Families, and Communities Such omissions are particularly important if (www.promisingpractices.net/criteria.asp). the goal is to replicate a program in many While many after-school programs sites, including some sites where it will be have undergone less rigorous outcome difficult to rely on volunteers and donated evaluations, only the evaluation of the 21st space. Of further concern is that the level of Century Community Learning Centers incompleteness in the operating costs varies (CCLCs) had a rigorous evaluation design. across the programs making it difficult to A key characteristic of 21st CCLC is that like compare costs from one program with costs other lowest-cost after-school programs we from another. reviewed, 21st CCLC is more of an after- school funding stream than a specific after- school program model. Each Center is allowed to design its offerings within some broad guidelines. This means that the results of its evaluation may be considered more

Page 40 Growth & Justice akin to what an average (rather than a Three drop-out and teen intervention model) after-school program might expect. programs have been rigorously evaluated. Random assignment to such an average The Children’s Aid Society Carrera after-school programs means essentially that Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Program students are receiving the same services reduced teen pregnancy and births among elsewhere and thus we expect to see smaller female participants after four years and effects than we would in a program that increased high school graduation and provides greater services. college enrollment (seven years following Program participation had an overall program start and three years after program negative effect on the participants conclusion). Quantum Opportunities themselves. In the second year, participants Program (QOP) is described as a youth were more likely to be suspended from development program for economically school and to have been disciplined in disadvantaged youth. Youth, who are called school (e.g., missed recess or sent to hall), “Associates”, receive year-round services, and their teachers were more likely to have including comprehensive case management, called parents about behavioral problems. for high-school years. Associates engage in Why might children who participate 250 hours of education, development, and in average after-school programs act-out community service activities each year and during school? There are several hypotheses, receive financial incentives for doing so. such as students may be tired from spending Compared with the control group, so much time in school or the programs may Associates were more likely to graduate tolerate behavior that would not be tolerated from high school, more likely to be in in school. Further research is necessary to postsecondary school, and less likely to be understand what may be happening here and high school dropouts (Hahn, 1999). whether this finding is generalizable to other CASASTART is a substance abuse after-school programs and if so, under what and delinquency prevention program serving circumstances. high-risk young adolescents and their Interventions targeting at-risk youth families. It also involves schools, law tend to be more research-based and have a enforcement agencies, and social service and longer history of careful program health agencies. One year after program evaluation; for either or both these reasons, completion, CASASTART participants were more convincing evidence of positive significantly less likely to have used drugs behavioral impacts can be found among in the past month, less likely to have targeted (specialized) programs. The Big reported lifetime sales of drugs and drug Brothers Big Sisters of America (BBBSA) sales activity in the last month, and less program yielded promising results. This likely to have committed a violence crime in program involved matching the intervention the year following program completion group with a volunteer mentor (usually with (Harrell et al., 1998, 1999). a college degree) who agreed to meet with The evaluation results for each of the youth (ages 10–16) at least once a week these three programs suggest potentially (in most sites) for at least three hours. After powerful impacts if they can be replicated in 18 months in the program, participants were other settings. less likely to have started using illegal drugs or alcohol and less likely to report having hit someone or having skipped school.

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 41 What Do We Know About the Costs Aid Society Carrera Adolescent Pregnancy Relative to the Benefits Prevention Program). At this time, the of These Programs? evidence is strongest for programs that are Policymakers need to decide how to allocate costlier and provide more intense resources scarce resources among alternatives. Done to youth. It is important to note that all well, cost-benefit analysis provides useful evaluations of these programs are based on information for choosing among programs. at-risk groups. We lack evidence that such We review the results of cost-benefit programs will benefit youth who are not at- analyses completed on the four youth risk or who are less at-risk. Because these programs for which positive effects have programs were designed to provide services been found using rigorous evaluation and for at-risk youth and because other youth are conclude there is evidence that youth more likely to obtain the needed services programs may produce benefits that elsewhere (like families and schools), we outweigh costs. But limitations in the would expect weaker, if any, effects for the information available to analysts who wish average youth. to conduct cost-benefit analysis restrict their We also lack evidence that less ability to quantify by how much and how expensive, less resource-intensive programs, consistently effective programs are worth like after-school programs, benefit youth. their costs. Primarily, evaluations vary While evidence from nonrigorous widely in the range of short-term and long- evaluations are largely positive, the one term outcomes they measure. For example, rigorous evaluation of 21st CCLCs suggests reduction in crime and grade repetition and that at least this program can produce increase in high school graduation each negative short-term outcomes among translate into substantial monetized benefits, program participants, especially boys and yet no evaluation measured all three children with behavioral problems. More outcomes. We recommend that future research is needed to assess lower-cost rigorous evaluations of youth programs seek programs and to assess whether there are to measure a larger (and consistent) set of ways to reduce short-term adverse effects, outcomes to facilitate cost-benefit analysis. such as those seen in the 21st CCLCs. These results do not generalize to the How Should Policymakers Proceed in larger population of after-school programs, Deciding If and How to Invest in Youth including those that serve higher-income Programs Relative to One Another and to neighborhoods or that provide more Other Alternatives? intensive services (which may include some At this time, there is enough evidence to 21st CCLCs). suggest that some youth programs can Our conclusions about alternative improve important youth academic and youth programs should be considered behavioral outcomes. They can reduce drug preliminary and should be revised as we and alcohol use (BBBSA, CASASTART), learn more about the cost and impacts of violence (BBBSA), and crime youth programs. Thus far, only one rigorous (CASASTART), and teen pregnancy and evaluation each of after-school and births (The Children’s Aid Society Carrera specialized after-school programs has Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Program), occurred. Given the increasing recognition and they can improve high school of the need of rigorous evaluation in graduation rates and enrollment in post- education, more such youth programs will secondary schools (QOP, The Children’s be rigorously evaluated.

Page 42 Growth & Justice There are other considerations activities before implementing them across policymakers can use in deciding how to multiple programs. allocate across youth programs. In For school-based programs, one can particular, investments can be made to also imagine establishing a continuous support or improve the quality and content quality improvement system that involves of existing programs. monitoring school-based behavioral To reduce the chance of doing harm, problems of participants and nonparticipants investments could be made to understand the to immediately identify unintended program circumstances in which after-school consequences, design an intervention to programs may contribute to adverse address the problems, and track programs’ behavioral outcomes. It may be useful to success. establish model programs--programs that Finally, policymakers should keep in can be laboratories in which practitioners mind that moving forward requires and program developers can observe student advancing the youth programming field and behavior and pilot different approaches to learning what does and does not work. The avoiding problem behavior and that can be field will particularly benefit from rigorous used to evaluate enrichment and other and well-done evaluations of large-scale (e.g., statewide) initiatives.

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 43 Current-Generation Youth Programs: What Works, What Doesn’t Work, and at What Cost?

Megan Beckett RAND Corporation

November 12, 2007

Confluence of Factors Show Potential of Youth Programs for Society/Families

• Long-term rise in single-parent households, leaving more kids home after school • Spike in crime for youth between 3 and 6 PM on school days and 8 and 10 PM on weekends • Lack of key “developmental assets” that lead to better long-term social/economic factors among youth • Growth of gap in achievement during time spent out of school • Growth in proportion of time youth spend out of school

beckett 2 011/07

Page 44 Growth & Justice Whether Youth Programs Can Help Address These Factors Is Unclear • If effective, such programs can be powerful policy lever to address short- and long-term family needs • Policymakers now lack enough information on which type of intervention is best • But enough information to assess potential benefits, pitfalls, and costs of current generation of youth programs

beckett 3 011/07

How Does the Study Define Youth Programs?

• Offered outside of the regular school day

– Before or after school

– Evenings

– Weekends

– Summers

• May be school-based or delivered by a community- based organizations

• Excludes lessons and competitive sport teams

beckett 4 011/07

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 45 Today’s Briefing Focuses on Answering Four Questions

• What are the major types of youth programs?

• How much do they cost?

• What are the impacts on participants?

• What are the costs relative to the benefits?

beckett 5 011/07

Such Youth Programs Can Be Categorized into Five Types

Before- After- • 21st Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) School Care • LA’s BEST • Extended Services School Initiative (ESSI)

beckett 6 011/07

Page 46 Growth & Justice Such Youth Programs Can Be Categorized into Five Types

Before- After • 21st Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) School Care • LA’s BEST • Extended Services School Initiative (ESSI) Enrichment • Afterschool Kidzlit • Boys & Girls Club Teen Initiative

beckett 7 011/07

Such Youth Programs Can Be Categorized into Five Types

Specialized After • After School Matters clubs (Chicago) School • Mentoring (Big Brothers Big Sisters of America/BBBSA)

beckett 8 011/07

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 47 Such Youth Programs Can Be Categorized into Five Types

Specialized After • After School Matters clubs (Chicago) School • Mentoring (Big Brothers Big Sisters of America/BBBSA) Summer Learning • Building Educated Leaders for Life (BELL)

beckett 9 011/07

Such Youth Programs Can Be Categorized into Five Types

Specialized After • After School Matters clubs (Chicago) School • Mentoring (Big Brothers Big Sisters of America/BBBSA) Summer Learning • Building Educated Leaders for Life (BELL)

Drop-out and • Children’s Aid Society Carrera Adolescent Teen Prevention Pregnancy Prevention Program (Carrera) • Quantum Opportunity Program (QOP)

beckett 10 011/07

Page 48 Growth & Justice Today’s Briefing Focuses on Answering Four Questions

• What are the major types of youth programs?

• How much do they cost?

• What are the impacts on participants?

• What are the costs relative to the benefits?

beckett 11 011/07

Costs Vary Significantly Across Five Types of Programs

14 QOP ($12.98) 12

10 1-on-1 Cost/ Mentoring Hour 8 ($8.36) ($) BELL ESSI ($7.04) ($7.03) 6 Carrera ($5.36)

4 Group Mentoring B&G Club ($3.32) 2 LA’s BEST Teen ($1.17) Initiative ($.52) 0 Before- / Enrichment Specialized Summer Drop-Out/ After- After-School Learning Intervention School Care beckett 12 011/07

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 49 Cost Estimates Tend to Be Underestimates

• Budget based on—and almost always reflect— operating costs (which are majority of costs)

– Exclude in-kind donations (volunteers, space)

– BBBSA costs are underestimated by at least 50% because of donated mentor time

• Excludes start-up costs, capital costs, and infrastructure or capacity-building cost

beckett 13 011/07

Today’s Briefing Focuses on Answering Four Questions

• What are the major types of youth programs?

• How much do they cost?

• What are the impacts on participants?

• What are the costs relative to the benefits?

beckett 14 011/07

Page 50 Growth & Justice How Did We Determine Program Effects on Participants?

• Prior RAND synthesis showed promising results based on limited number of rigorous evaluations

• In updating synthesis, we restricted it to evaluations screened as rigorous – Center for Evidence-Based Research Social Programs that Work – RAND’s Promising Practices Network • Doing so restricts the number of programs evaluated and categories: after school care, specialized after school, and drop-out/prevention

beckett 15 011/07

Of After School Programs, 21st CCLC Shown to Be Ineffective or Adversely Effective

• 29% more likely to have been disciplined (22% vs. 17%)

• 22% more likely to have had their parents contacted by a teacher about a behavioral problem (28% vs. 23%)

beckett 16 011/07

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 51 Of After School Programs, 21st CCLC Shown to Be Ineffective or Adversely Effective

• 29% more likely to have been disciplined (22% vs. 17%)

• 22% more likely to have had their parents contacted by a teacher about a behavioral problem (28% vs. 23%)

On positive side, suggestive evidence of that maternal labor force participation increased

beckett 17 011/07

Of Specialized After School Programs, BBBSA Shown to Be Effective

• 46% less likely to have started using drugs

• 27% less likely to have started using alcohol

• 32% fewer incidents of hitting someone

beckett 18 011/07

Page 52 Growth & Justice Of Drop-out/Prevention Programs, Three Were Shown to Be Effective (1)

QOP • 50% more likely to graduate from high school • Nearly three times more likely to be in post- secondary school

beckett 19 011/07

Of Drop-out/Prevention Programs, Three Were Shown to Be Effective (2)

QOP • 50% more likely to graduate from high school • Nearly three times more likely to be in post- secondary school

CASASTART • 14% less likely to have used drugs in the past (after 1 year) month

• 11% less likely to use any drugs in the past year • Significantly less likely to report lifetime sales of drugs in past month or in lifetime

• 19% less likely to have committed a violent crime in past year

beckett 20 011/07

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 53 Of Drop-out/Prevention Programs, Three Were Shown to Be Effective (3)

Carrera • Females: 40% less likely to ever have been (after 4 pregnant years) • 50% less likely to have given birth • More than twice as likely to use hormonal contraceptive

• Males: No effects on causing pregnancy or fathering child Carrera • 30% more likely to have graduated high school or (after 7 obtained a GED years) • 37% more likely to be enrolled in college

beckett 21 011/07

Today’s Briefing Focuses on Answering Four Questions

• What are the major types of youth programs?

• How much do they cost?

• What are the impacts on participants?

• What are the costs relative to the benefits?

beckett 22 011/07

Page 54 Growth & Justice Among Effective Programs, There Is Potential for Benefits to Outweigh Costs

Measured Benefits per Youth Short-Term Benefits/$ Program Outcomes Benefits Costs of Cost Big Brothers Crime, test $4,058 $4,010 $1.01 Big Sisters scores, initiation of alcohol/illicit drugs CASASTART Crime, initiation $4,949 $5,559 $0.89 of illicit drugs Carrera Sexual initiation, $2,409 $11,501 $0.21 teen births/ pregnancy, contraception

QOP High school $10,900 $25,921 $0.42 graduation, public assistance

Source: Adapted from Aos et al., 2004.

beckett 23 011/07

But Limitations Are Too Great for a Horse Race

• Evaluation are inconsistent in the outcomes they measure

– Only some measure crime reduction

– Only one measures reduction in teen birth

• Evaluations often may not track youth outcomes over long enough period for them to be observed

beckett 24 011/07

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 55 Conclusions

• Youth programs vary in cost: From $1/hr to $13/hr • Evidence that more expensive programs can produce range of benefits • Evidence that less-expensive, group-based programs can worsen behaviors of participants from low-income schools • Existing programs can be enriched with little cost, but we don’t know anything about effectiveness of enrichment • Program costs and benefits are underestimated

beckett 25 011/07

Conclusions

Moving forward, important to advance field and learn more about what does/doesn’t work in youth programming

beckett 26 011/07

Page 56 Growth & Justice

Improving the Transition from High School to College in Minnesota: Recommendations Based on a Review of Effective Programs

Laura W. Perna Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania [email protected]

Executive Summary Dakota) (Minnesota Office of Higher Postsecondary education is increasingly Education, 2006). important to the nation’s, and Minnesota’s, Nonetheless, although Minnesota continued economic prosperity and global has high rates of educational attainment, the competitiveness, given the shift from an state needs to do more to increase college industrial economy to an information and access and success, especially for students technology-driven economy (Advisory from low-income families, Blacks, and Committee on Student Financial Assistance, Hispanics. College enrollment and 2006; Carnevale & Desrochers, 2003; persistence rates in Minnesota lag behind Lumina Foundation for Education, 2006). the rates of the nation’s top-performing New jobs increasingly require at least some states, vary across counties within the state, postsecondary education and the educational and are lower for students from low-income requirements of all jobs, including those that families, Blacks, and Hispanics than for once required no more than a high school other students. education, have been rising (Carnevale & The lower educational attainment Desrochers, 2003). for Blacks and Hispanics than for Whites is especially problematic when considered in Minnesota Must Do More to Improve the light of projected demographic trends. Transition from High School to College Between 2001-02 and 2017-18, the numbers Minnesota has much to be proud of with of Black and Hispanic public high school regard to the educational attainment of its graduates in Minnesota are projected to population (National Center for Higher increase substantially (193% and 470%, Education Management Systems respectively), while the number of White [NCHEMS], 2007). For example, the public high school graduates is projected to likelihood that ninth graders enroll in college decline by 17% (WICHE, 2003). In other by age 19 is greater in Minnesota than all but words, the fastest growing groups in two other states (New Jersey and North Minnesota have among the lowest rates of college enrollment and degree completion. Investing in the Transition from High Minnesota policymakers are to be School to College is Cost Effective commended for their interest in using cost

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 57 analyses and cost-effectiveness studies to Efforts to determine the optimal guide education investment decisions. investments for improving the transition Certainly this information can help to from high school to college are limited for determine the most appropriate and effective several reasons. First, in addition to the ways to invest scarce resources to improve relatively scarcity of studies that examine educational attainment cost-effectiveness, this review also reveals The federal and state governments, that relatively few studies use rigorous philanthropic organizations, non-profit research designs to examine the effects of organizations, and other entities have these programs. Therefore, existing research developed numerous policies and programs does not permit conclusions about causal with the goal of improving students’ relationships between program participation transition from high school to college. and college-related outcomes (California Despite the plentitude of programs and Postsecondary Education Commission, magnitude of investment in these programs, 2004; Lerner & Brand, 2006). Second, however, relatively little rigorous research comparisons of benefits across programs are examines the cost-effectiveness of these limited by differences in the populations programs. served by particular programs (and the Reflecting the many challenges resulting variation in the magnitude of associated with conducting relevant rigorous barriers limiting college enrollment). Third, research, this review of available research existing programs focus on addressing and policy reports identifies only a small particular subsets of the barriers that limit number of analyses of the cost effectiveness college access and success and, or return on investment of programs consequently, are designed to achieve a designed to promote college access and range of college-related outcomes. These success. The available studies show a outcomes include higher college enrollment positive return on investment for the and graduation rates, as well as outcomes following three programs: Early College that indirectly promote college enrollment High Schools (ECHSs) (Palaich, Augenblick and graduation, including greater academic et al., 2006), Quantum Opportunities preparation for college, greater awareness Program (Hahn et al., 1994), and Admission of financial aid, increased interest in Possible (Heegaard, 2005). Variations in college, and improved high school program duration, program services, and graduation rates. characteristics of the population served limit Despite these limitations, this review comparisons of per-student costs across of promising programs suggests that programs. Nonetheless, the available data Minnesota should invest in efforts that: (1) show modest per-student costs for most reduce the financial barriers to college programs, particularly when considered in access and success; (2) improve academic light of the substantial individual and public preparation for college; (3) improve benefits that result from higher education college-related knowledge; and (4) improve enrollment and degree attainment (Baum & data collection and analysis of college Payea, 2004; Baum, Payea, & Steele, 2006). transition programs.

Recommended Investments for Improving Reduce the Financial Barriers to College the Transition from High School to Access and Success College Although prices of public colleges and universities in Minnesota reflect the “high

Page 58 Growth & Justice tuition” component of a “high tuition/high $1,096.36 in need-based undergraduate aid” approach to financing public higher grants per full-time-equivalent [FTE] education, more resources are required to undergraduate) would require the state of achieve the “high aid” component. The Minnesota to invest an additional $115 sticker prices of public and private colleges million. Raising the availability of total and universities in Minnesota exceed the undergraduate grants (both need- and non- national averages (College Board, 2006), but need based) per undergraduate FTE in many other states average higher state grant Minnesota from the current $584.15 to the awards than Minnesota (NASSGAP, 2007). level of the nation’s leader (South Carolina, As a result, many Minnesota students are $1,704.25 in undergraduate grants per required to borrow and work in order to undergraduate FTE) would require an enroll and complete college. While the need additional investment of about $251 to borrow may deter enrollment for risk- million. Raising the availability of total adverse students (e.g., Eckel, Johnson, grants per the 18-24 year old population in Montmarquette & Rojas, 2007), the need to Minnesota from its current $245.65 to the work high numbers of hours per week level of the nation’s leader (Washington, reduces the likelihood of persisting to degree DC, $650.71) would require an additional completion (Perna, Cooper & Li, in press). $216 million. Therefore, assuming no Research consistently shows the changes in the general pattern of data since positive relationship between financial aid 2005-06, Minnesota must increase the level awards and students’ college enrollment and of investment by approximately $115 persistence, particularly among students million to $251 million in order to be the from low-income families and minorities nation’s leader in the availability of state (e.g., Heller, 1997; Kane, 1999; Paulsen, grants to financially needy undergraduates. 2001). Therefore, the state of Minnesota should increase its investment in need-based Improve Academic Preparation for College grants. The available data and research do Research consistently shows the importance not permit precise calculations of the of adequate academic preparation to college additional investment in state financial aid enrollment and degree completion programs needed to realize particular rates of (Adelman, 1999, 2006; Cabrera & La Nasa, increase in college enrollment for different 2000; Cabrera, La Nasa, & Burkam, 2001; groups of students. One approach to Perna, 2000). Being academically prepared estimating the necessary investment for college appears to be particularly considers Minnesota’s current practices important to the college enrollment of relative to other states. In 2005-06, students from lower-income families Minnesota invested $130,921,000 in need- (Cabrera et al., 2001) and the bachelor’s based grants, $89,000 in non-need based degree completion of African Americans grants, and $139,893,000 in non-grant aid and Latinos (Adelman, 2006). (i.e., loans and work-study), for a total Although Measuring Up notes that investment of $270,903,000 (NASSGAP, Minnesota’s performance on indicators of 2007). In 2005-06, Minnesota had $583.76 college preparation has improved over the in need-based undergraduate grants per FTE past 13 years and that Minnesota is a top undergraduate, the eighth highest level in the performer on some of these indicators nation. Raising the availability of need-based (National Center for Public Policy and grants for undergraduates to the level of the Higher Education, 2006), challenges nation’s highest-ranking state (New York, remain. For example, smaller shares of high

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 59 school students in Minnesota than in the top- (Kirst &Venezia, 2004; Martinez & performing states enroll in upper-level math Klopott, 2005; Venezia, Kirst, & antonio, and upper-level science courses. Only 16% 2003). of 8th graders in Minnesota are enrolled in To improve academic preparation algebra, compared with 35% of 8th graders for college access and success, Minnesota in the top-performing states (National Center should increase the availability of rigorous for Public Policy and Higher Education, coursework, provide support services to 2006). AP exams are offered in only 222 of ensure that all students may succeed in Minnesota’s more than 500 high schools these courses, and encourage systemic P-16 (Minnesota Office of Higher Education, reform. Researchers consistently call for 2007a). Only 29% of Minnesota’s ACT test- improved alignment of curricula, takers are academically ready for college assessments, and other requirements (Minnesota Office of Higher Education, between K-12 and postsecondary systems as 2007b). a means for improving college access and In Minnesota, academic readiness for success (Martinez & Klopott, 2005; college is also lower for Blacks, Hispanics, Venezia et al., 2005). A P-16 approach to American Indians and students from low- educational attainment will likely produce a income families than for other students. more comprehensive approach to Substantially smaller shares of Blacks, addressing the barriers to college Hispanics, and American Indians than of enrollment, particularly barriers associated Whites and Asians complete advanced math with inadequate academic preparation in high school (Growth & Justice, 2007), one (Palaich Blanco et al., 2006). of the most important predictors of With the establishment in 2003 of bachelor’s degree attainment (Adelman, the Minnesota P-16 Education Partnership, 2006). Blacks, Hispanics, and American Minnesota has taken a “necessary but not Indians represented fewer than 5% of AP- sufficient [step] for reform” (Venezia et al., test-takers in 2005-06 (Minnesota Office of 2005, p. 22). The Minnesota P-16 Education Higher Education, 2007a). Moreover, Partnership is designed to facilitate the smaller shares of Blacks, Hispanics, and transitions of students in the state across American Indians than of Whites and Asians successive educational levels. The earned grades of 3 to 5 on the exams Partnership has 19 members, including (Minnesota Office of Higher Education, representatives from public and private 2007a). higher education; K-12 teachers, principals, Three forces contribute to the lower and school boards; and businesses. The levels of academic preparation for low- involvement of multiple entities is an income, African American, and Hispanic important start, given the conclusion by students: (1) the tendency of these students Venezia et al. (2005) that responsibility for to be placed in non-academic curricular K-16 reform must be shared across sectors. tracks and low-ability groups (Gamoran & Nonetheless, the state should encourage Mare, 1989; Hallinan, 1996; Lucas, 1999; work that builds on these initial efforts in Oakes, 1995; Perna, 2005b); (2) the relative order to create an integrated P-16 absence of rigorous courses at the schools educational system. these students attend (Adelman, 2006; Perna, This review identifies three 2005b); and (3) the lack of alignment promising mechanisms for increasing the between K-12 and higher education systems availability of rigorous coursework, providing the necessary academic support,

Page 60 Growth & Justice and promoting P-16 alignment: ECHSs in these programs both across and within all (Berger et al., 2005); dual enrollment and schools (Hoffman, 2005; Nathan et al., other accelerated learning program (Blanco, 2005). 2006; Hoffman, 2005; Nathan et al., 2005); But, simply providing accelerated and AVID-like programs. Research suggests learning options is not enough. that ECHSs are associated with improved Policymakers should also increase the student outcomes and positive return-on- availability of related support services to investment (Martinez & Klopott, 2005; minimize the challenges of providing Palaich, Augenblick et al., 2006). ECHSs rigorous coursework to students with low- were initiated in 2002 by the Bill & Melinda levels of academic preparation (Berger et Gates Foundation, with additional support al., 2005). In other words, to ensure that from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, students succeed in academically rigorous the Ford Foundation, and the W.K. Kellogg courses, the state of Minnesota should also Foundation. To date, the Gates Foundation increase the availability of necessary has invested more than $114 million in support services to facilitate the success of ECHSs (Gates Foundation, 2006). Overseen students who participate in these courses by Jobs for the Future, the “Early College and to maintain the academic integrity and High School Initiative seeks to create a rigor of the “accelerated” options (Karp et network of small schools that blend high al., 2004; Lerner & Brand, 2006; Martinez school and college experiences” (Berger et & Klopott, 2005; Schultz & Mueller, 2006). al., 2005, p. ii). By including grades 9 to 14 As Karp and colleagues (2004) note, in one school, students are expected to attend relatively few existing accelerated learning ECHSs for four to five years and leave with programs reflect a comprehensive approach a high school diploma as well as an that includes attention not only to academic associate’s degree or up to two years of preparation but also “the needs of students college credit that may be applied toward a beyond academic course taking” (p. viii). bachelor’s degree. Targeted toward first- This review also suggests the generation, low-income, English language- promise of programs like AVID that learner, and minority students, ECHSs are provide services that promote students’ designed to increase high school graduation personal and social enrichment, as well as rates, reduce the time required to complete a their academic preparation (Lerner & college degree, and improve preparation for Brand, 2006; Schultz & Mueller, 2006). college and careers. In 2006, more than Designed to serve students in the “academic 12,000 students attended 86 ECHSs in 24 middle,” the AVID program may be a states (Palaich, Augenblick et al., 2006). particularly useful model for both This review also suggests the benefits increasing enrollment in rigorous academic of ensuring that all students, regardless of the courses and ensuring the success of students high school attended, not only have the who enroll in these courses (AVID, 2007; opportunity to participate in at least one type Martinez & Klopott, 2005; Oswald, 2002a, of accelerated learning or credit-transition 2002b; Watt et al., 2006). AVID requires program but also are encouraged to students to enroll in rigorous courses as well participate in these programs. In other words, as the daily AVID “elective” course. The the reach of existing programs (e.g., AVID elective is taught by an AVID- Advanced Placement, Post-Secondary trained teacher and focuses on improving Enrollment Options [PSEO]) should be students’ organizational, study, and critical increased to encourage greater participation thinking skills, provides tutoring and

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 61 enrichment activities, and exposes students before students enroll in [dual enrollment] to college via college visits and other courses” (Blanco, 2006, p. 76), students activities. participating in Minnesota’s PSEO program consistently report the need for additional Improve College-Related Knowledge information about the PSEO program in Although research consistently shows the general, and the transferability of course importance of college-related knowledge to credits in particular (Nathan et al., 2005). students’ college-related outcomes (e.g., A few studies show the positive GAO, 1990; Perna, 2004), the availability of effects of school counselors on students’ a primary source of college-related college-related outcomes (e.g., Plank & knowledge – high school counselors – is Jordan, 2001), while other research severely limited (McDonough, 2005; describes the ways that counselors promote NACAC, 2006). The shortage of school students’ college opportunity (e.g., counselors is particularly striking in McDonough, 1997; Perna, Rowan-Kenyon, Minnesota, where the ratio of students to Thomas, Bell, Anderson, & Li). Moreover, counselors is the third highest in the nation the reported success of such programs as (NACAC, 2006). Admission Possible (Heegaard, 2005; More school counselors would help McLain, 2006) and Talent Search to ensure that all students and their families (Constantine et al., 2006) suggests that are knowledgeable about college in general increasing students’ college-related and the availability of existing college knowledge improves students’ college- transition programs more specifically. related outcomes. Providing better and more complete college- Increasing the availability of school related information to students earlier in the counselors in Minnesota schools would educational pipeline may enable more provide a more universal and systematic students and their families to engage in the approach to ensuring that all students have necessary preparatory behaviors (Perna, access to necessary college-related 2005a; Hoffman, 2005). For example, information. California provides an example examinations of Indiana’s 21st Century of the investment required to reduce the Scholars Program suggest that providing student-to-counselor ratio. In July 2006 the assurances of the availability of financial aid California state legislature allocated $200 to students in the 8th grade encourages million to increase counseling services to students to engage in behaviors that promote students in grades 7 through 12. This block college enrollment (e.g., St. John et al., grant program is intended to help bring 2005). The preliminary evaluation of GEAR current student-to-counselor ratios (500:1 in UP suggests that program efforts to increase the middle schools and 300:1 in the high the availability of counseling do not replace schools) closer to the national average existing efforts but address unmet counseling (California Association of School needs (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Counselors, 2006). To receive funds (about Several studies point to the absence $67 per student), school districts must of sufficient information as a force that implement a school counseling program that limits the success of some existing college includes “individualized review of student transition programs. For example, although academic progress;” increased counseling the state of Minnesota requires “schools or services to students at-risk of not graduating districts to provide counseling services to from high school; and increased assistance students and their parents or guardians to students at-risk of failing to pass the

Page 62 Growth & Justice California High School Exit Exam should also be designed to compare the (California Association of School outcomes that are realized by program Counselors, 2006b). Moreover, the participants with the outcomes that are legislature requires that funds supplement, realized by a matched group of non- not replace, existing counseling resources. participants (Gándara, 2001). While random assignment of students to intervention Improve Data Collection and Analysis of treatment and control groups is not possible College Transition Programs in most cases, research must be able to Clearly the paucity of cost-effectiveness demonstrate the benefits of programs for studies and research showing the effects of participants relative to non-participants. programs on students’ college-related outcomes limits resource allocation Concluding Note decisions. Therefore, regardless of the The relative scarcity of rigorous studies strategies adopted, policymakers should examining the cost-effectiveness or effects support efforts to collect the data necessary of programs should not paralyze efforts to to evaluate program effectiveness and improve college access and success. The conduct rigorous evaluations. Minnesota limited available data and research suggest should provide financial support to ensure that investments in college transition that systems are in place to collect data that programs are cost effective. Moreover, track students’ participation in college although useful, cost-effectiveness studies transition programs and students’ should be just one piece of information used educational progress across successive to guide policymaking (Blanco, 2006a; educational levels (Bailey & Karp, 2003; Swail, 2004). As Blanco (2006a) notes, Blanco, 2006b; Hoffman, 2005). policymakers should be interested not only The state of Minnesota should also in the return on their investment in various provide financial support to conduct research initiatives but also other goals, including the to guide future policymaking. As this and opportunity of different groups to other reviews show, rigorous research is participate and thus benefit from the required to more completely understand both programs, as well as the extent to which the the extent to which participation in particular program serves as a “band-aid” or programs causes improved college-related encourages systemic reform. outcomes and the effectiveness of particular This review shows that investing in program components and strategies (Bailey programs that promote the transition from & Karp, 2003; Nathan et al., 2005; Perna & high school to college is not only cost- Cooper, 2005). Such research should be effective but also is necessary to promoting longitudinal in order to draw conclusions the state’s future economic competitiveness. about the extent to which program By reducing the financial barriers to college participation causes a range of college- access and success, improving academic related outcomes that are realized over time, preparation for college, and improving including increases in high school students’ college-related knowledge, coursework, high school graduation rates, Minnesota policymakers will address the college enrollment rates, and college primary barriers that limit students’ graduation rates (Swail, 2004). Research successful transition to college.

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 63 IMPROVING THE TRANSITION FROM HIGH SCHOOL TO COLLEGE IN MINNESOTA

Laura W. Perna University of Pennsylvania

November 12, 2007

Minnesota Can Do More to Improve the Transition to College

z On many indicators, Minnesota’s performance is strong But: z College enrollment and persistence rates in Minnesota • Are lower than in top-performing states • Are lower for students from low-income families, Blacks, and Hispanics than for other students

Page 64 Growth & Justice Is an investment in the transition from high school to college cost effective?

z Few studies examine cost effectiveness or return-on-investment z Research shows positive return-on-investment for: • Early College High Schools • Quantum Opportunities Program • Admission Possible z Differences across programs limit per-student cost comparisons BUT per-student costs of programs are typically modest

Where should Minnesota invest to improve the transition to college? Challenges to answering this question: z Few studies examine cost effectiveness z Few studies use rigorous research methods z Populations served by programs vary z Program goals and services vary

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 65 Where should Minnesota invest to improve the transition to college? Recommendations: z Reduce financial barriers z Improve academic preparation z Improve college-related knowledge z Improve data collection and analyses of college-transition programs

Financial Resources Gap

z Sticker prices of public and private colleges and universities in Minnesota exceed the national average z Other states average higher state grant awards than Minnesota z Result: high levels of borrowing and working to pay college prices

Page 66 Growth & Justice Recommendation: Invest to Increase Availability of State Need-Based Aid

State Aid MN Top-State Add’l $$

Need-based $584 $1,906 $115 grants/UG (NY) million Total UG $584 $1,704 $251 grants/UG (SC) million Total grants/ $246 $651 $216 18-24 pop. (DC) million

Academic Preparation Gaps Compared with top-performing states: z Smaller shares of MN high school students enroll in upper-level math and science courses z Smaller shares of 8th graders enroll in algebra z AP courses available in only 222 of more than 500 MN high schools In Minnesota, lower rates of academic readiness for college for Blacks, Hispanics, and low- income students

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 67 Forces that Contribute to Academic Preparation Gaps

z Curricular tracking z Absence of rigorous courses at the schools attended z Lack of alignment between K-12 and higher education systems

Recommendation: Invest to Improve Academic Preparation To improve academic preparation: z Increase access to rigorous coursework z Provide academic support z Encourage P-16 reform

Page 68 Growth & Justice Recommendation: Invest to Improve Academic Preparation Three promising approaches: z Early College High Schools

Recommendation: Invest to Improve Academic Preparation Three promising approaches: z Early College High Schools z Dual enrollment WITH support services for lower-achieving students

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 69 Recommendation: Invest to Improve Academic Preparation Promising approaches: z Early College High Schools z Dual enrollment WITH support services for lower-achieving students z AVID programs

Information Gap

z Insufficient college counseling in schools nationwide z Shortage particularly severe in Minnesota • Ratio of students to counselors in Minnesota public schools is 3rd highest in the nation

Page 70 Growth & Justice Recommendation: Invest to Increase Availability of School Counselors

z Research suggests benefits of increasing availability of school counselors z Potential model: California 2006 • $200 million in block grants to increase counseling in grades 7 to 12 • About $67/student

Recommendation: Improve Data Collection and Analyses of College Transition Programs Provide financial support to: z Ensure that systems are in place to collect data that track students’ participation in programs and educational outcomes z Conduct research that examines effects of programs on student outcomes

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 71 Concluding Note Although limited, available research suggests the benefits of investing in programs to promote the transition from high school to college.

Page 72 Growth & Justice

Education Scholar Biographies

Arthur J. Rolnick is senior vice president Rob Grunewald conducts regional and director of research at the Federal economic research and co-authors the Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, and an Minneapolis Fed’s “Beige Book” report on associate economist with the Federal Open current economic conditions. He also writes Market Committee. Rolnick has been a articles on the regional economy and other visiting professor of economics at Boston economics and banking issues for the College, the University of Chicago, and the Fedgazette and The Region, two periodicals University of Minnesota, and an adjunct published by the Minneapolis Fed. professor of economics, MBA program, Grunewald regularly speaks to business, Lingnan College, Guangzhou, China and the community and school groups about the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Federal Reserve and the regional economy. Management. He is past president of the He co-authored “Early Childhood Minnesota Economic Association. He serves Development: Economic Development with on several nonprofit boards including the a High Public Return” (January 2003), an Minnesota Council on Economic Education, economic policy paper, which has been Greater Twin Cities United Way, Citizens featured in the media, legislative hearings, League of Minnesota and Ready 4 K, an and seminars throughout the United States. advocacy organization for early childhood Grunewald sits on advisory boards for the development. He is also on the Minneapolis Academy of Finance of St. Paul Public StarTribune’s Board of Economists, and is a Schools, Minnesota Visiting Nurse Agency member of Minnesota’s Council of and First Children’s Finance Growth Fund. Economic Advisors. Rolnick has received Grunewald joined the bank in 1993 and numerous awards for his work on early holds a bachelor’s degree in economics and childhood development, including being religion from St. Olaf College in Northfield, named 2005 Minnesotan of the Year by Minn. Minnesota Monthly magazine. A native of Michigan, Rolnick has a bachelor’s degree in Prof. Arthur Reynolds studies the effects mathematics and a master’s degree in of early childhood intervention on children's economics from Wayne State University, development from school entry to early Detroit; and a doctorate in economics from adulthood as well as the family and school the University of Minnesota. influences on children's educational success. More broadly, his work centers on school and family influences on children's development, the evaluation of social programs, prevention science, intervention research, and the determinants of economic

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 73 and social well-being in early adulthood. As included evaluations of the economic well, he also studies how child development consequences of pre-school programs at the and evaluation research affect social policy. state level. He has also analyzed the He is the Director of the Chicago consequences of education privatization. Longitudinal Study, one of the largest and most extensive studies of the effects of early Dr. Megan Beckett is a RAND childhood intervention, along with Demographer and Sociologist who was economist Judy Temple, who conducts cost- worked on a range of topics. In the area of benefit analyses. A cost-benefit analysis of after-school programs, she was lead author the Child-Parent Center program has been on Accountability for After-School Care: published up to age 21. Dr. Reynolds is also Devising Standards and Measuring Co-Director of the Early Childhood Adherence to Them. This book provided the Research Collaborative at the University of first systematic synthesis of the literature on Minnesota. after-school care practices in an effort to identify and devise measures for adherence Prof. Henry Levin is the William Heard to good after-school care practices. She co- Kilpatrick Professor of Economics and wrote the first comprehensive, objective Education at Teachers College, Columbia overview of the after-school and out-of- University, and the David Jacks Professor school time field, Making Out-of-School- Emeritus of Higher Education and Time Economics at Stanford University. He has Matter: Evidence for an Action Agenda, published over 300 articles on the which has been influential in shaping the Economics of Education. With Prof. Clive larger national policy and research agenda. Belfield, Levin has co-authored Privatizing Dr. Beckett's other interests include Educational Choice: Consequences for program evaluation, survey methodology, Parents, Schools, and Public Policy and child health and well-being. (Paradigm Publishers, 2005) and a forthcoming volume The Price We Pay: The Prof. Laura Perna is Associate Professor Economic and Social Costs of Inadequate in the Higher Education Management Education (Brookings Institution Press, program in the Graduate School of 2007). He holds a B.S. in Marketing and Education at the University of Economics, New York University, and M.A. Pennsylvania. Her scholarship uses an and Ph.D. in Economics from Rutgers integrated theoretical approach and a variety University. His areas of specialization are: of analytical techniques to understand the Economics of Education, Economics of ways that individual characteristics, social Human Resources, Urban Economics, Public structures, and public policies separately Finance, and Education Policy. and together enable and restrict the ability of women, racial/ethnic minorities, and Prof. Clive Belfield is an Assistant individuals of lower socioeconomic status Professor of Economics at Queens College, to obtain the economic, social, and political City University of New York. He is also co- opportunities that are associated with two director of the Center for Benefit-Cost aspects of higher education: access as a Studies in Education, Teachers College, student and employment as a faculty Columbia University. He is the co-editor of member. Her research has been recognized The Price We Pay (Brookings Press, 2007) by the Association for the Study of Higher and two other books in the Economics of Education's 2003 Promising Scholar/Early Education. He has published widely in the Career Achievement Award. Perna serves economics of education. His recent work has or has served on the editorial boards of the

Page 74 Growth & Justice Journal of Higher Education, Review of B.A. in psychology and B.S. in economics Higher Education, the Journal of College from the University of Pennsylvania, and a Student Development, and the Journal of the Master’s of Public Policy and Ph.D. in Professoriate, and is a consulting editor for education from the University of Michigan. Research in Higher Education. She holds a

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 75 Page 76 Growth & Justice

State Policymaker Biographies

State Senator Larry Pogemiller was elected when the DFL Caucus elected her as an to the Minnesota House of Representatives assistant minority leader. In 2004, Anderson in 1980 and first elected to the Minnesota Kelliher was elected to serve the DFL Senate in 1982 where he is in his eighth Caucus as a minority whip. Anderson term. Pogemiller serves Dist. 59 which Kelliher officially became the House includes neighborhoods in Minneapolis. minority leader after the 2006 session. This biennium, Pogemiller was Under Anderson Kelliher’s elected by his peers to be the Senate leadership, the House DFL Caucus was majority leader. Prior to serving in this extremely successful in the 2006 election, leadership position, Pogemiller served as increasing its members from 66 to 85. chair of the Tax Committee and the K-12 Anderson Kelliher attributes her success to Education Committee. Pogemiller was in hard work, experience, and, having grown charge of the Senate’s omnibus education up on a farm near Mankato, an urban/rural bills from 1993 – 2000. Significant items in background. those bills included: lowering class sizes; A former legislative staffer for statewide education testing for competency several members, including former Speaker in math, reading, and writing; reform of of the House Bob Vanasek and former education funding formulas; increased Senate President Alan Spear, Anderson general education funding; and increased Kelliher earned a B.A. from Gustavus funding for special education. Adolphus College and M.P.A. from Harvard A graduate of the University of University. Minnesota, Pogemiller first got involved with politics during college. A member of State Senator Dave Senjem was first the first board of directors of the Minnesota elected to the Senate in 2002. He represents Public Interest Research Group (MPRIG), Dist. 29 which includes all of Dodge he also chaired a citywide economic County, and the North and Westerly development committee for then- portions of Olmsted County including half Minneapolis Mayor Al Hofstede. of Rochester. In November 2006, Senjem was elected by his caucus to serve as the Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher Senate Republican leader. Elected by her peers this year to serve as Senjem graduated from Hayfield Speaker of the House, State Representative High School and received a B.A. from Margaret Anderson Kelliher was first Luther College. He was inspired for a life of elected to the Legislature in 1998. She public service by his father who was mayor represents Dist. 60A which includes diverse of Hayfield and involved with the Jaycees. neighborhoods in Minneapolis. Senjem has decades of involvement Anderson Kelliher began her ascent including 11 years on the Rochester City to the job of Speaker of the House in 2000 Council, four years as a Park Board

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 77 member, and six years as a member of the Early childhood panel Olmsted County Environmental Commission. He spent 16 years on the Rep. Nora Slawik Minnesota Emergency Response State Representative Nora Slawik was first Commission, and four years on the elected to the Minnesota House of Minnesota OSHA Advisory Committee. He Representatives in 1996, and represents also served as vice chair for the Community Oakdale and part of Maplewood. Slawik and Economic Development Committee of serves as chair of the Early Childhood the National League of Cities. Learning Finance Division. Considered on Outside of Senate activities, Senjem of the Legislature's leading authorities on works at Mayo Clinic where he serves as an early childhood education issues, Slawik has institutional biosafety officer and is focused much of her committee's work to responsible for all aspects of environmental raising the academic achievement levels of regulatory compliance. He joined Mayo in at-risk kids and providing more high quality 1964 and continues to be inspired by the childcare and pre-school options for challenges and opportunities Mayo provides. families.

Minnesota Department of Education Sen. Kathy Saltzman Commissioner Alice Seagren was Senator Kathy Saltzman was elected to the appointed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty in July Minnesota Senate in 2006 to represent 2004. As commissioner, she is responsible District 56, which includes 11 east metro for Minnesota Department of Education communities, including Woodbury, Lake (MDE) operations and policymaking for all Elmo, Bayport and portions of Stillwater. aspects of K-12 education, implementing the She serves as a member of the Senate’s E-12 “No Child Left Behind Act” in Minnesota, Budget Division and Education Policy early learning, libraries, and adult, career Committee. and technical education. Prior to her election to the Minnesota A former member of the Senate, Saltzman was at Schools for Equity Bloomington School Board, Seagren served in Education, working on education funding six terms in the Minnesota House of issues. She helped pass legislation that not Representatives (1992 – 2004) where she only provides greater adequacy and equity in served as a chair of the House Education funding for schools, but also significant Finance Committee. An active community property tax relief for local property owners. and church volunteer, currently Seagren is a board member of the Normandale K12 panel Community College Foundation Board and Fraser, an organization providing services to Rep. Mindy Greiling people with disabilities. State Representative Mindy Greiling is the On the national level, Seagren has Chair of the House K-12 Education Finance served as a chair of the Education Committee. She has a B.A. in education Committee of the National Council of State from Gustavus Adolphus College and an Legislatures’ (NCSL) Assembly of State M.A. from the University of Minnesota, and Issues. Currently Seagren is a commissioner was an elementary teacher in St. Paul Public on the Education Commission of the States Schools. Elected in 1992, Greiling serves the and on the ECS Teaching Quality & communities of Roseville, Lauderdale, and Leadership Advisory Committee. St. Anthony Village. She is a nationally recognized leader in education and mental health issues, and in

Page 78 Growth & Justice 2007 the Association of Metropolitan 1984, where she served three terms. In 1990 School Districts named her a "Friend of she was elected to the Minnesota State Public Education." Senate where she has served since that time. Her district includes downtown St. Paul, Sen. Chuck Wiger inner city neighborhoods to the west, north Senator Chuck Wiger has been active in and south of downtown, and the area public policy issues since he was 21 years surrounding the capitol. old when he was first elected to the District In addition to chairing the Senate 662 North St. Paul-Maplewood-Oakdale Higher Education Budget and Policy School Board. For three decades, he was Committee, Pappas also serves as the elected and re-elected seven times and Minnesota Commissioner to the Education completed his final three years as board Commission of the States and as a chair. Sen.Wiger was elected to the Minnesota Commissioner to the Midwestern Minnesota Senate in 1996. He serves the Higher Education Compact. communities of North St. Paul, Maplewood, and Oakdale. Out-of-school time panel A third-generation resident of North St. Paul, he proudly reports he is a product Rep. Carlos Mariani of the community’s public schools. He State Representative Carlos Mariani serves chairs the Senate Education Committee and as chair of the House E-12 Education Policy is a member of the E-12 Education Budget Committee. A graduate of Macalester Division and Higher Education Budget and College, Mariani also serves as executive Policy Division. director of the Minnesota Minority Education Partnership. Higher education panel Elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives in 1990, Mariani is one of Rep. Tom Rukavina only three Hispanic members currently State Representative Tom Rukavina is serving in the Minnesota Legislature. He serving his 11th term in the Minnesota House represents downtown St. Paul, including the of Representatives. Rukavina serves as the neighborhoods of Lowertown, northern chair of the House Higher Education and West Seventh, Cathedral Hill, and the West Work Force Development Policy and Side. Finance Division, and is a member of the Co-chair of the Legislative Education Finance and Economic Commission to End Poverty, Mariani has Competitiveness Finance Division. He has a focused his legislative efforts on issues Bachelor of Arts degree in political science affecting communities of color and from the University of Minnesota-Duluth. economic disadvantage, including Over the course of his 20-plus year tenure in improving and expanding HeadStart, the legislature, Rukavina has been an narrowing the achievement gap and outspoken advocate for workers, families, expanding public school options such as and education. He represents district 5A, charter schools. He has been recognized by which is the Mesabi Range, part of the Literacy Minnesota for his outstanding region collectively known as Minnesota's advocacy on behalf of public education. Iron Range. Sen. Patricia Torres-Ray Sen. Sandy Pappas Senator Patricia Torres Ray made history on Senator Sandy Pappas was first elected to November 7, 2006 by becoming the first the Minnesota House of Representatives in Latina to be elected to the Minnesota State

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 79 Senate. As a newly-elected member, she was Budget Division and Education Policy selected to serve on the Senate’s committees. Prior to her election to the reorganization team that decided the Senate, Torres Ray worked as a State committees and membership in the Program Administrator for the Minnesota Minnesota Senate for the 2007 Session. Department of Human Services. Torres Ray serves on the E-12 Education

Page 80 Growth & Justice

Background Paper

Building on our successful Invest for Real continuum over another. The added value Prosperity proposal, Growth and Justice is that our Smart Investments in Minnesota’s moving into a second stage of this work, Students project will bring is the exploring and advancing ideas around how establishment of a framework for discussion to invest public dollars wisely for maximum on investment of education dollars along the public return. educational pathway in empirical terms. As In our proposal, Invest for Real well, the process of developing the Prosperity, we argue that investing in human framework will engage a broad array of capital in Minnesota is a driver of economic stakeholders in consensus building centered prosperity, and investing in education pays on where to make the most cost-effective off twice. A well-educated populace investments based on the best evidence. strengthens the economy by enhancing We envision framing the Smart productivity, and it puts all Minnesotans in a Investments in Minnesota’s Students project better position to benefit from that growth. around a cost-benefit analysis model used in We aim to maximize the impact of our a widely-acclaimed global economic investments in education—along the entire priority consensus project known as the educational pathway from birth to adulthood Copenhagen Consensus. The Copenhagen – by focusing on a singular measure of Consensus process established a framework success: increasing by 50% the number of in which solutions to global challenges were Minnesota students who complete a post- prioritized based on cost-benefit analysis. A secondary degree (one, two or four year team of world-renown economists were degree). asked to study the costs and benefits of the We propose an innovative approach global challenges and to answer the to exploring this question, and seek to apply question: “What would be the best ways of this approach to investing in education, from advancing global welfare, and particularly early learning to post-secondary learning. the welfare of developing countries, We know from the growing body of supposing that an additional $50 billion of evidence, for example, that early childhood resources were at governments’ disposal?” investments realize a rate of return ranging Our approach to this project would from $3 to $9 for every dollar invested be similar, guided by the following (Grunewald & Rolnick, 2003; Heckman and questions: What are the most cost- Mastarov, 2004). But research also tells us effective strategies for reaching our key that positive early learning experiences alone measurable educational outcomes? Based are not sufficient to ensure that children on the evidence, where would we direct perform well throughout their lives (Ramey the use of state funds to achieve these & Ramey, 1998). It is unfortunate that outcomes, and particularly for students limited public funds force policy choices to in the achievement gap, supposing that rely on one segment of the educational

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 81 an additional $1 billion of resources were along the educational pathway from early at governments’ disposal? learning to post-secondary learning. It is The Smart Investments in well understood that there are a number of Minnesota’s Students project would be in gateways through which a student must three phases. The first phase would involve progress to qualify them to enter and then assembling key stakeholders who would succeed in post-secondary institutions. In serve as steering committee members Minnesota, the legislature has made the throughout the three-phased project; the gateways mandatory: reading at or above second phase would involve recruiting and grade level by the 3rd grade, completing commissioning a set of scholars in education Algebra I by the 8th grade, and completing finance and economics to analyze what Chemistry or Physics and Algebra II by the works in the most cost-effective manner in 12th grade. At the bookends of the K-12 reaching the educational outcomes in curriculum, there exists a set of educational Minnesota. The third, and perhaps more or preparatory options for students difficult, phase would be building consensus (preschool and post-secondary education). among key stakeholders on how to cost- These levels of education are not effectively invest $1 billion of new funds compulsory. Rather, they are market-driven and reallocate existing dollars along the and as such have different requirements educational pathway based on the empirical imposed upon them. Mostly, however, the findings in Phase II. requirements are a measure of “readiness.” In the case of early learning, the outcome is Phase I: Setting the gateways “ready for kindergarten.” In the case of The Smart Investments in Minnesota’s post-secondary education, the outcome is Students process would bring together a “ready for work.” group of stakeholders – business leaders, In Phase II, scholars (or team of education leaders (including both scholars) would be commissioned to management and union), parent and identify the most cost-effective strategies community leaders and policy leaders – to for reaching Minnesota’s key educational develop an educational investment outcomes, or gateways, such as: framework based on the best evidence of Every child in Minnesota enters cost effectiveness. Growth and Justice would school ready to learn assemble this group of key stakeholders to All 3rd graders read at or above grade serve as steering committee members. These level members would first review a synthesis of All students complete Algebra I by global and national educational literature on the end of 8th grade program effectiveness along the educational All high school seniors complete pathway, and from that come to agreement Algebra II and Chemistry or Physics on the key measurable outcomes in Every high school graduate who Minnesota (from early learning to post qualifies for post-secondary secondary learning). They would also set enrollment starts within 3 years of criteria for selecting nationally-reputed high school graduation scholars to conduct the cost-benefit analyses Every student who enters post- in Phase II on the most effective ways of secondary school finishes it, reaching the outcomes. increasing the current number by

50%. Phase II: Commissioning the evidence

The question is not as much whether to invest as it is where and how much to invest

Page 82 Growth & Justice The literature in education finance but on conventional wisdom combined with and economics is fairly clear that investing political clout. The Copenhagen Consensus matters when it comes to enhancing student approach establishes a framework in which achievement and labor market outcomes. A solutions to problems are prioritized based 35-year review of research on production upon the best information possible. The function (resource inputs that yield framework would answer where to cost- measurable outcomes), concludes that “there effectively invest $1 billion new dollars in is substantial agreement …that resource education, and how to reallocate existing inputs can and do make a difference in dollars, to ensure that students pass through student’s educational outcomes…[but] the critical gateways on the path to attaining results do not provide detailed information post-secondary education. on the most educationally efficient means to This final phase would draw on allocate existing and new dollars” consensus-building expertise, facilitating (Verstegen & King, 1998). If resource difficult discussions among stakeholders expenditures matter, as the literature tends to who share the same goal of educating show (Dolan & Schmidt, 1987; Ferguson, Minnesota’s students but who might be 1991; Grimes & Register, 1990, Sebold & competing among themselves in the Dato, 1981; Greenwald, Hedges & Laine, prioritization of limited resources. Growth 1996), then which expenditures are the most and Justice would employ considerable cost effective? expertise in making the consensus process As a deliverable at the end of Phase productive and sustainable. II, we would conduct an Education Summit that presents the scholarly papers to a lay The final product of the Smart audience that would include a broad array of Investments in Minnesota’s Students project stakeholders and interested parties. A panel would be a report with concrete proposals of experts from education, economics, that would be designed to inform and shape business and public policy would provide Minnesota education policy. reactions and remarks on the methods and implications of the papers. This scholarly References assessment would leave us with actionable Dolan, R. C. and Schmidt, R. M. (1987). findings, but not policy recommendations. "Assessing the Impact of Expenditures on That work would be conducted in the next Achievement: Some Methodological and phase of building consensus around the Policy Considerations," Economics of evidence. Education Review 6, no. 3: 285-299.

Phase III: Coming to Consensus Ferguson, R. F. (1991). "Paying for Public Borrowing loosely from the Copenhagen Education: New Evidence on How and Why Consensus process, Phase III would involve Money Matters," Harvard Journal on coming to a consensus among key Legislation 28: 465-498. stakeholders in Minnesota as to how to prioritize our investments in education based Grimes, P. W. and Register, C. A. (1990). on the evidence presented in Phase II. "Teachers' Unions and Student The idea of the Consensus project is Achievement in High School Economics," simple and powerful, yet often ignored. Journal of Economic Education 21: 297- When financial resources are limited priority 306. setting is critical. However, many times, and particularly at the political level, decisions Grunewald, R. & Rolnick, A. (December, on priorities are made not based on evidence 2003), “Early Childhood Development:

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 83 Economic Development with a High Public Contact information Return,” The Region 17, no. 4 Supplement: Angela Eilers, Ph D 6-12. Research and Policy Director Growth and Justice Heckman, J. J. and Masterov, D. V. 2324 W. University Ave. (October, 2004). “The Productivity St Paul, MN 55114 Argument for Investing in Young Children: Working Paper 5,” Invest in Kids Working (651) 251-0684 Group, Committee for Economic [email protected] Development.

Ramey, C. T. & Ramey, S. L. (1998). “Early Intervention and Early Experience.” American Psychologist, 53, 109-120.

Sebold. F. D. and Dato, W. (1981). "School Funding and Student Achievement: An Empirical Analysis," Public Finance Quarterly 9, no. 1: 91-105.

Verstegen, D. A. and King, R. A (1998). “The Relationship Between School Spending and Student Achievement: A Review and Analysis of 35 Years of Production Function Research,” Journal of Education Finance, 24, no. 2; 1-13.

Page 84 Growth & Justice

Participant List

Ben Aase Mary Bents Armando Camacho LarsonAllen University of Minnesota Whittier International Elementary School Joyce Abramson Sara Benzkofer Minnesota House of JoAnn Campbell Ada Alden Representatives Minnesota Campus Compact Early Childhood Consultant Dan Berg Jim Carlson Nicola Alexander The Minneapolis Foundation Child Care Works University of Minnesota Dave Bernhardson Senator Jim Carlson Senator Ellen Anderson South Washington County Minnesota Senate Minnesota Senate School District Karen Carlson Siri Anderson Jim Bernstein MN Department of Education Bemidji State University Anoka Technical College Rep. Lyndon Carlson Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher Dale Blyth Minnesota House of Minnesota House of U of MN Extension Service Representatives Representatives Lois Bollman Cliff Carmody Paul Anton Minneapolis Community and SW/WC Service Cooperatives Wilder Foundation Technical College Dr. Meria Carstarphen Saint Paul Public Schools Michael Ayers Senator Terri Bonoff The Commonwealth Practice Minnesota Senate Brenda Cassellius Minneapolis Public Schools Linda Baer Michael Bowlus MnSCU Saint Paul Public Schools Mary Cecconi Parents United for Public Schools Dean Darlyne Bailey Ellen Bracken University of Minnesota MN Department of Education Richard Chase Wilder Research Heidi Barajas John Brandl University of Minnesota University of Minnesota Carter Christie

Jim Bartholomew Anne Brataas Rose Chu Minnesota Business Partnership The Story Laboratory Metropolitan State University

Colleen Baumtrog, PhD Karl Brown Maureen Cisneros Intermediate District 287 Mounds View Public Schools University of Minnesota

Megan Beckett Rep. Kathy Brynaert Senator Tarryl Clark RAND Corp. Minnesota House of Minnesota Senate Representatives Kristin Beckmann Matthew Collie Growth & Justice Board of Rep. Julie Bunn Minnesota House of Directors Minnesota House of Representatives Representatives Clive Belfield Pam Costain CBCSE Minneapolis School Board

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 85

John Couchman Carol Freeman Eric Haugee The Saint Paul Foundation University of Minnesota Ready 4 K

Cyndy Crist Luz Maria Frias Susan Heegaard MnSCU City of Saint Paul Office of Higher Education

Scott Croonquist Amanda Frie Luther Heller Association of Metropolitan Office of US Rep.Tim Walz SW/WC Service Cooperatives School Districts Claudia Fuentes Tom Hesse Dr. George Davis City of Minneapolis Minnesota Chamber of Minnesota State University Commerce Moorhead Susan Gaertner Ramsey County Attorney Barbara Hexum Rep. Jim Davnie Lakes Country Service Minnesota House of Christine Ganzlin Cooperative Representatives The McKnight Foundation Gary Hill Senator Mark Dayton Rep Pat Garofalo Minnesota Senate Minnesota House of Ellen Delaney Representatives Rep. Debra Hilstrom Spring Lake Park High School Minnesota House of Heidi Gegax Representatives John DeSantis Jim Gelbmann Christy Hlavacek Rep. Denise Dittrich Minnesota House of Parents United Minnesota House of Representatives Representatives Senator John Hottinger Paul Glewwe Susan Doherty University of Minnesota Jamie Hultgren Achieve! Minneapolis MN Association of School Jennifer Godinez Administrators Rep. Willie Dominguez MMEP Minnesota House of Eric Jackson Representatives Christina Gosack Parents United Minnesota House of Joanna Dornfeld Representatives Gwen Jackson Minnesota House of Edina Public Schools Representatives Rep. Mindy Greiling Minnesota House of Jessica Jackson Josh Downham Representatives Cirlutions LLC Urban Planet Aaron Grimm Marcie Jefferys Mary Lou Dresbach EdVisions Off Campus High Minnesota Senate Office of Higher Education School Phil Jemielita Beverly Dretzke Rob Grunewald Minnesota Chamber of University of Minnesota Federal Reserve Bank of Commerce Minneapolis Chad Dunkley Dave Jennings New Horizon Academy Julie Guy Independent School District 112 Sojourner Truth Academy Kathi Eilers Wayne Jennings Jabbok Family Services Lynn Haglin Northland Foundation Barbara Johnson John Fitzgerald Minnesota2020 Jerome Halverson Associate Dean David Victoria Ford Capella University R. Johnson Citizens League University of Minnesota Trista Harris Cheryl Frank The Saint Paul Foundation Denise Johnson Inver Hills Community College Star Tribune Vernae Hasbargen MN Rural Education Association

Page 86 Growth & Justice

Rob Johnson Laura LaCroix Dalluhn Kevin McHenry Cargill Foundation Youth Community Connections Minnesota Senate

Robert Johnson David Laird Jr. Scott McMahon St. Cloud State University Minnesota Private College Minnesota Private College Council Council Cathy Jordan Children, Youth and Family Rene Lara Bob Meeks Consortium Education Minnesota MN School Boards Association

Nancy Jost Nate Lassila Jim Meffert-Nelson West Central Initiative Minnesota Private College Children's Platform Coalition Foundation Council Jon Millerhagen Judith Kahn George Latimer Washburn Elementary School Minneapolis Youth Coordinating Macalester College Board Dr. Molly Minkkinen Jim Lenfesty UMD Department of Education Ann Kaner-Roth Child Care Works Yvonne Lerew Matthew Mohs Wallin Scholarship Program Saint Paul Public Schools Ben Kanninen Burnsville-Eagan-Savage School Henry Levin Deborah Moore District CBCSE MN Youth Work Institute

Sylvia Kaplan Bill Linder-Scholer Len Mrachek Growth & Justice Board of SciMath Directors Dan Mueller Joanie Lofgren Wilder Research Ginny Karbowski University of Minnesota STEP Paul Mueller Jean Lubke Education Minnesota Tom Kayser Eden Prairie Schools Growth & Justice Board of Van Mueller Directors Brad Lundell University of Minnesota Schools for Equity in Education Steve Kelley Robin Murie University of Minnesota Deanne Magnusson University of Minnesota University of Minnesota Karen Kingsley Mark Murphy Ready 4 K Monica Manning Cargill Foundation Mary Kirchhof The Nova Group Edina Public Schools Joe Nathan Rep. Carlos Mariani Center for School Change Anne Knapp Minnesota House of Representatives Pam Neary Joann Knuth Eileen Nelson MASSP Geoffrey Maruyama MN Department of Education University of Minnesota Ted Kolderie Beth Newkirk Education Evolving Rep. Sandra Masin OAP Minnesota House of Mary Kosak Representatives Mike Newman Blandin Foundation Travelers Foundation Paul Mattessich Joel Kramer Wilder Foundation Zoe Nicholie Growth & Justice Board of Ready 4 K Directors Jim McCorkell Admission Possible Jenni Norlin-Weaver Jane Kretzmann Edina Public Schools Bush Foundation Dick McFarland Rep. Carol McFarlane Kristen Norman-Major Melissa Krull Minnesota House of Hamline University Eden Prairie Schools Representatives

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 87

Rep. Kim Norton Earl Potter III Kevin Sampers Minnesota House of Saint Cloud State University Association of Metropolitan Representatives School Districts Paul Pribbenow Sandi Novak Augsburg College Jim Scearcy Burnsville-Eagan-Savage School Catherine Reid Day District Minnesota Campus Compact Lynn Scearcy Independent School District 112 Nancy Nutting Arthur Reynolds SciMath University of Minnesota Senator Linda Scheid Minnesota Senate Kay O'Keefe Tami Reynolds St. Louis Park Public Schools Chris Schmitter Senator Rick Olseen Office of US Rep.Tim Walz Minnesota Senate Sam Richter James J. Hill Reference Library Don Schuld Bob Olson Stillwater Area Schools Mary Cathryn Ricker Senator Gen Olson St. Paul Federation of Teachers Jennifer Lee Schultz Minnesota Senate Wilder Research Patrick Ridgely Anni O'Neill Medtronic, Inc. Judy Schumacher Southern Minnesota Initiative Greater Twin Cities United Way Foundation Colleen Riley Sauter Minnesota High Tech Grace Schwab Dave Pace Association MSBA East Grand Forks Public Schools Mark Ritchie Commissioner Alice Seagren Joey Page Minnesota Secretary of State Department of Education Sheridan Hills Elementary School Arthur Rolnick Senator David Senjem Federal Reserve Bank of Minnesota Senate Senator Sandra Pappas Minneapolis Minnesota Senate Tim Sheldon Vicki Roy University of Shannon Patrick Burnsville-Eagan-Savage School Minnesota Minnesota House of Board Representatives Rep. Nora Slawik Doris Rubenstein Minnesota House of Mitch Pearlstein Representatives Center of the American Kristi Rudelius-Palmer Experiment University of Minnesota MaryJo Smith Ypsilon Associates Katie Pearson Rep. Tom Rukavina Minnesota House of Peggy Smith Kent Pekel Representatives Minnesota PTA University of Minnesota Senator Sandy Rummel Tina Smith Rep. Sandra Peterson Minnesota Senate Growth & Justice Board of Minnesota House of Directors Representatives Peter Sadowski Don Smithmier Antares Pharma Inc. Capella University Eugene Piccolo MN Association of Charter Elaine Salinas Jim Southwick Schools MIGIZI Communications Medtronic, Inc

Senator Larry Pogemiller Meredith Salsbery Sally Standiford Office of US Rep.Tim Walz Winona State University Minnesota Senate Angie Pohl Senator Kathy Saltzman Sharon Stenglein University of Minnesota Minnesota Senate Mathematics Education Consultant Mari Pokornowski

Page 88 Growth & Justice

Lee Ann Stephens Emanda Thomas Danie Watson Park Spanish Immersion School University of Minnesota The Watson Group

Jill Stever-Zeitlin George Thompson Luke Weisberg McKinsey & Company Blandin Foundation Anne Weyandt P. Fred Storti Senator David Tomassoni Anoka Technical College MESPA Minnesota Senate Betsey Whitbeck Judy Stucki Senator Patricia Torres Ray Growth & Justice Board of MN Council of Teachers of Minnesota Senate Directors Mathematics Dr. Craig Vana Larry Wicks Rep. Marsha Swails Minnapolis Public Schools Minnesota House of Senator Charles Wiger Representatives Greg Vandal Minnesota Senate Sauk Rapids-Rice School District Deborah Swenson-Klatt Pam Willard MN Department of Human Vallay Varro Golden Heart Child Care Center0 Services City of Saint Paul Kayla Yang-Best Suzanne Tacheny Kyla Wahlstrom Cargill Foundation Consultant University of Minnesota Barbara Yates Jack Tamble Rebecca Wallin MN Early Learning Foundation Minneapolis Public Schools Wallin Foundation Stuart Yeh Nancy Tellett - Royce Sam Walseth University of Minnesota Search Institute Capitol Hill Associates

Judy Temple Rep. Tim Walz University of Minnesota U.S. House of Representatives

Neal Thao Rep. John Ward Metropolitan State University Minnesota House of Representatives Carol Thomas MN Department of Education Lee Warne MN Rural Education Association Doug Thomas EdVision Education Cooperative

Smart Investments in Minnesota's Students Page 89

S TAFF

PRESIDENT D ANE S MITH

RESEARCH & POLICY DIRECTOR A NGIE E ILERS

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR A NDY F ULLER

ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR & POLICY ANALYST J ENNIFER W EDDELL

COMMUNICATIONS & OUTREACH COORDINATOR E LLEN M . P ERRAULT

ADMINISTRATIVE & PROGRAM ASSISTANT M ARK T UNDEL

COMMUNICATIONS FELLOW C HARLIE Q UIMBY T HANK Y OU T O TH E G ENEROUS S UPPORT E RS OF THE Smart INVESTMENTS IN M INNESOTA ’ S S TUDENTS P ROJECT

W ILLIS C . H ELM F UND OF THE M INNEAPOLIS F OUNDATION