You're reading AFT's Closer Look, an electronic newsletter
that seeks to bring a more balanced debate to education
and labor issues and counter the biased educational research, distorted news stories and uninformed opinion that too
often parade as fact. We hope it will help debunk the flawed arguments of those who attack public education, public
service, workers' rights and labor unions. All the better if it
also helps to untangle the spider web of organizations, individuals and financiers who care more about ideology
than sound public policy.

To subscribe (it's free), click HERE.

IN THIS ISSUE

Looking for Useful Info About What's Going On in Schools? Don't Read These Reports
Researchers recently have released studies on educator sexual misconduct, school-related deaths and education levels of adults. But the reports and news coverage shed little light. More . . .

Educator Sexual Misconduct: Serious, Rare and in Need of More Research
A Hofstra professor's report on sexual misconduct includes a shocking factoid that grabbed a lot of media attention. But the factoid doesn't mean what it seems to, and the report's sensationalistic style may make it just a footnote in the effort to protect children from sexual predators. More . . .

School Violence: Serious, Rare (but Maybe on the Rise) and . . . in Need of More Research
Police chase a man onto a school playground, shoot him, and the tally of "school-related deaths" rises. Did a so-called expert really try to claim that there was a connection between such deaths and federal spending to combat terror? Yep. More . . .

The Gadfly Bites . . . But Doesn't Draw Blood
Eric Hanushek's guest editorial in the Education Gadfly attacks people who are trying to make states provide adequate and equitable education funding. But no matter how often Hanushek says "funding doesn't matter," there's research that proves him wrong. More . . .

Chief State School Officers Shoot Down GOP's False Allegations
A report from ED found that states are managing to spend federal funds at a reasonable pace. And, for some reason (political posturing, perhaps) Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) has a problem with that. More . . .

Early Childhood Developments
Louisiana is the most recent state set to adopt Kindergarten-Plus, and a new analysis from ETS makes it clear, once again, that early childhood education is a wise investment. More . . .

Media Watchdog Sees Bias and Little Substance in CBS Voucher Story
The transcript shows that CBS News did a fluffy, one-sided piece on school vouchers. More . . .

Worth Reading
Reports find high costs for vouchers, glitches in e-learning. More . . .

Looking for Useful Info About What's Going On in Schools? Don't Read These Reports

Every now and then, you open a report on America's schools that promises to set the record straight yet manages only to muddy the issue. And sometimes the media coverage of the report makes it even less clear. That's happened three times in recent weeks, with the release of reports on educator sexual misconduct, school-related deaths and education levels of adults.

The statistics in the reports—or at least the words in the headlines—fail to shed much light on what's going on in America's schools. The stats seem more significant than they really are—4.5 million students are affected by educator sexual misconduct, 49 school-related deaths occurred during the last school year, and high school diploma rates are at an all-time high. But "educator sexual misconduct" and "school-related deaths" are overly broad terms that don't mean what most people would expect them to mean, and the record-high educational attainment is just the inevitable result of demographic changes.

If you've read all three reports—or at least news accounts of all three—try to answer this question:

As much as we'd like to say "c," a closer look at these reports suggests that good test-takers should fill in the oval next to the letter "d." Brief reviews of two of the reports follow.

Related Links:

"Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature"

"School-Related Deaths, School Shootings & School Violence Incidents"

The Census Bureau's press release for "Educational Attainment in the United States: 2003"

Educator Sexual Misconduct: Serious, Rare and in Need of More Research

Hofstra University professor Charol Shakeshaft's report, "Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature," was required by the No Child Left Behind Act in hopes of shedding light on a serious problem, but the report does little to provide new facts or clarify what goes on in schools. Instead, Shakeshaft's unusual use of words makes interpretation of the report difficult. Even the preface to the report, written by Deputy Education Secretary Eugene Hickok (never one to shy away from criticizing public schools), expresses reservations about the author's jumbling the terms "sexual abuse" and "sexual misconduct." This confusion is especially troubling because the report could have supported policymakers, parents and school officials working to keep sexual predators away from students.

Shakeshaft should have worked harder to make it clear that the vast majority of school employees have nothing but their students' best interests at heart. With that as a starting point, it's appropriate to draw attention to the very small number who are predators and the somewhat larger number who make inappropriate comments to students. But Shakeshaft undermined her credibility in March when she made gratuitous references to the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church while discussing a draft of her report with an Education Week reporter. By overstating her case, the professor does a disservice to school employees and, most important, to students harmed by serious sexual misconduct at school.

The theme of Shakeshaft's report seems to be "Something wicked this way comes," a phrase written by an Elizabethan playwright whose name is similar to Shakeshaft's. But, when the subject is adults who prey on children, what's needed is not added drama, but the discerning analysis called for by the late great statistician John Tukey, who said, "An approximate answer to the right question is worth a great deal more than a precise answer to the wrong question."

School Violence: Serious, Rare (but Maybe on the Rise) and . . . in Need of More Research

Drawing less attention than Shakeshaft's study but still earning extensive coverage in USA Today was "School-Related Deaths, School Shootings & School Violence Incidents," a report by National School Safety and Security Services, which found that the number of "school-related deaths" rose from 16 during the last school year to 49 this school year (2003-04). The sharp rise is troubling. It should and will lead school safety experts to monitor schools to see whether we're at the beginning stages of an escalation in school violence.

But it would be inaccurate and irresponsible to leap from this report's findings to the conclusion that schools are three times as dangerous as they were last year. Broad measures of school violence have been trending downward, according to the Department of Justice's comprehensive report, Indicators of School Crime and Safety. What's more, many of the incidents described in the report aren't what many people would think of as school violence. The 49 deaths include, for example, the off-campus suicide of a teacher falsely accused of hitting a student, a man killed by police after being chased onto an elementary school playground and a father who shot his son during cross country practice. Each of these is heartbreaking, but indiscriminately adding them up doesn't even begin to prove that schools are becoming more dangerous.

Another distortion of the report is provided by pundits, who already have misinterpreted the findings and, as a result, moved the story quickly from tragedy to farce. "Experts" cited in USA Today and Education Daily attributed the rise to various causes: children's anxiety after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, increased gang activity, principals who focus too much on improving test scores, and the loss of federal school safety funds because money was shifted to fight terrorism. Increased gang activity, at least on the surface, is the best of these explanations, but only five of the 49 deaths have been identified as possibly gang-related.

It may seem as if there are only two possible responses to this report: read too much into it, as some already have done, or ignore it. But here's another possible response for parents, teachers and school officials: Continue the work that has made schools among the safest places for children, monitor other indicators of school violence and look closely at the latest Indicators of School Crime and Safety, due this fall.

Gadfly Bites . . . But Doesn't Draw Blood

In a guest editorial for the Education Gadfly, the Hoover Institution's Eric Hanushek recently took on the well-meaning people who are seeking to make states provide adequate funding for education. Hanushek argues that "adequacy" lawsuits—and the "equity" lawsuits that preceded them—are just excuses for people who want to put more money into the system without making meaningful changes. But state constitutions require the state to provide an adequate education, and most people would agree that an adequate education includes quality preschools, small classes in the early grades and top-notch teachers—none of which can be done on the cheap.

Hanushek often produces research that seems to serve no purpose except to support the anti-adequacy parties in lawsuits, but he has at times produced quality research and thoughtful analysis. And even in this carelessly argued editorial, Hanushek makes a few points that adequacy advocates should consider. First, he notes that many children in this country are not receiving a good enough education. Second, he insists that states use their new and existing funds wisely, arguing correctly, if somewhat harshly, that we won't solve the problem with "more resources dumped onto the existing, unreformed system."

But Hanushek's piece in the Gadfly, while long on sophistry, is short on facts. He mischaracterizes his opponents' goals and somehow knows they are people "who generally are not at all interested in any reforms that change institutional incentives or the like." Like many public school bashers who want to be seen as thoughtful reformers, Hanushek invents the arguments of his nameless opponents and then shoots them down. He writes about a "massive amount of evidence" that supports his claim that money doesn't matter, but he doesn't bother to cite a single study. And he certainly doesn't cite the Economic Policy Institute's recently released Smart Money: Education and Economic Development, which identifies plenty of flaws in Hanushek's research.

When addressing the difficulties of determining the right amount to spend on education, Hanushek offers this solution: Don't even try. He ridicules the many people who have sought through serious analysis to put a dollar figure on what it takes to provide an "adequate" education. (And in a typo that creates an odd image, Hanushek describes these people as having "jumped into the breech," when he means "breach.") He notes that public education isn't perfect and that public spending is a political decision. But he then leaps to the conclusion that we shouldn't use analytical techniques to figure out how much to spend on education—a strange stance for a man whose bio describes him as "a leading expert on educational policy, specializing in the economics and finance of schools."

Hanushek's essay is not only sloppy but disingenuous. He argues, for example, that New York City doesn't need more education funding from the state because the city's per-pupil funding is higher than several other states'. But it's obvious that New York City's school spending should be compared to surrounding school districts that attract many good teachers through higher salaries and better working conditions. And Hanushek seems even less sincere when he tells readers to "be skeptical because [equity and adequacy] don't mean what you think." It's Hanushek who's playing word games here. He's not asking readers merely to be skeptical of education spending; he's asking them to oppose it.

All of Hanushek's ideas about education are based on his hollow contention that funding doesn't matter when it comes to helping kids in seriously neglected schools. And that's why, ultimately, he gets it wrong.

The American Institute of Architects has created a pictorial representation to highlight the effects of inadequate funding for schools in disadvantaged communities. "Good Enough for Congress?" graphically shows the deteriorating conditions in school buildings where members of Congress attended classes as children.

Chief State School Officers Shoot Down GOP's False Allegations

Economists like Eric Hanushek aren't the only people distorting the question of whether schools have enough money to do what's asked of them. Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other Republicans recently made the false claim that states have an abundance of unspent federal education funds. But as the Council of Chief State School Officers CCSSO pointed out in a letter to Boehner, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) has been slow to issue guidance, and an unreleased report from ED concludes that states are spending the funds faster than expected. Click here for the Associated Press's coverage of the exchange, which, once you get past the lead, shows the holes in the GOP's claims.

Early Childhood Developments

In an earlier issue of AFT's Closer Look, we cited some of the research and ideas that confirm why investing in early childhood education is a wise policy move. That piece also mentioned that Kindergarten-Plus, a highly regarded early childhood initiative first proposed by AFT president Sandra Feldman, is gaining traction in many states. Several new developments show why early childhood education remains a hot topic for journalists, politicians and policymakers.

Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco plans to sign a Kindergarten-Plus bill, making Louisiana the second state, after New Mexico, to create such a law. And New Jersey state official Ellen Frede, writing in a recent Educational Testing Service (ETS) publication, highlights the importance of early childhood education. Using cost-benefit analyses of three early childhood education programs, Frede reaffirms that early childhood education is not only a moral obligation but also a prudent investment. The Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers program, which cost $7,000, resulted in higher graduation rates and lower grade-retention rates, leading to a benefit to taxpayers of $48,000. Even North Carolina's Abecedarian Childhood Intervention program, which has a relatively high cost ($33,000/student), was a good investment, providing $123,000 benefit per student because the program's alumni were more likely to be employed, attend college and become skilled workers. The Perry Preschool program in Ypsilanti, Mich., was the most effective economically, producing $108,000 in benefits from its investment of $12,000 per child.

These results have huge implications for states considering cuts in early childhood education, including Texas. In designing an early childhood program, policymakers also should consider a recent report from the National Institute for Early Education Research recommending a gradual move to voluntary, universal preschool, as well as a recent article by LaRue Allen and Anita Sethi in American Educator magazine describing the Parent-Child Home Program, a simple, effective intervention that helps prepare disadvantaged children to enter school.

With mounting evidence that early childhood education is important and that effective programs exist, state legislators and governors—as well as federal officials—should follow the lead of Louisiana's lawmakers, who recognized one salient fact about early childhood education: Failing to make modest investments now will mean much higher costs for taxpayers in the future.

Media Watchdog Sees Bias and Little Substance in CBS Voucher Story

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) recently identified biased coverage in a CBS news story about school vouchers. Judging by the transcript of the CBS story, FAIR's criticism is right on target, as CBS gives too much weight to a voucher supporter and too little to a voucher opponent in a piece that does nothing to enlighten viewers. CBS could have gotten a more accurate picture of the voucher issue by looking at its own Web site. Last summer, the CBS Web site featured a story titled "Vouchers Don't Make the Grade." At least CBS can take solace in the fact that the network's coverage of the voucher issue isn't as bad as this journalistic disaster at the New York Post.

Worth Reading

One recent report found that vouchers may not be as inexpensive as their supporters claim. Another concluded that e-learning is not living up to proponents' claims.

An article in Education Policy Analysis Archives by Colorado researcher Kevin Welner suggests that the state's voucher plan is not "fiscally neutral," as supporters had claimed. Those of you who are in beach-reading mode can read a brief summary of the article, thanks to educationnews.org.

And "Thwarted Innovation: What Happened to E-Learning and Why," a recent report from professors at Penn and Stanford, concludes that e-learning in higher education "was an interesting idea that simply got hyped to the point that it created expectations that couldn't be met." AFT's "Technology Review," which provides guidelines for good practice for instructional technology, comes to similar conclusions.

If you have a comment or suggestion for AFT's Closer Look, let us know.

AFT's Closer Look is a publication of the public affairs department of the American Federation of Teachers, 202/879-4458, 555 New Jersey Ave. N.W., Washington, DC 20001.