Tag Archives: Fordham Institute

Welcome to the Profit of Education website. Continuing the conversation begun in the book Profit of Education, we discuss the latest economic evidence on education reform.

Good enough for government work?

Over at Flypaper, Michael Petrilli makes a great point. Birth rates fell precipitously during the Great Recession, as birth rates usually do during hard economic times. In fact, from their 2007 peak births fell by 9 percent. Mike points out that if … Continue reading

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Strong unions and education

Lots of reformers “know” that teacher unions are the obstacle to fixing our educational woes. Facts please? Here’s a picture of the relation between teacher union strength in a state and educational outcomes as measured by 8th grade math test … Continue reading

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Petrilli’s pondery

Mike Petrilli makes a point and raises a question about progress in teaching math in Education Next and Fordham’s Flypaper.  One of the great mysteries of modern-day school reform is why we’re seeing such strong progress (in math at least, … Continue reading

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

2 Responses to Petrilli’s pondery

  1. Dick Startz says:

    Fair points. But applying ocular statistics to Petrilli’s graph it looks like the drop has been equal at higher percentiles. Maybe even greater. Without having thought through your math, wouldn’t that suggest a pretty minimal effect?

  2. Jesse Rothstein says:

    I don’t think we can dismiss the selection story so quickly. You have assumed that there is a perfect correlation between test scores and latent graduation propensities. But that can’t be right — my guess is that the correlation is relatively weak. That would mean that the effect of the changing selection would be spread throughout the distribution, not just at the very bottom. Combine that with a hypothesized rightward shift in the latent, unselected distribution and it seems to me that Petrilli’s figure could well be consistent with a selection story.

    I’m too lazy to take the idea to data, but it seems to me there are two ways to do it. First, you could assume that the latent 12th grade distribution shifted rightward by the same amount as was observed for the 8th grade distribution, and ask whether any feasible correlation between selection and test scores could generate the observed selected data in Petrilli’s figure. Second, you could use the NELS to estimate the correlation between test scores and continuation probabilities, then apply those to the changing selection seen in your second graph to estimate the trend in the unselected distribution.

    I don’t have any idea what either would show. My hunch is that selection will account for a meaningful portion, though not all, of the slowdown between 8th and 12th grades.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Harrison, Colorado: Pay for performance

Harrison, Colorado’s pay for performance plan has garnered a huge amount of attention for two reasons. The plan is very interesting. The Fordham Institute and Harrison Superintendent Mike Miles have written a brilliantly clear piece explaining the plan. Go read … Continue reading

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Do High Flyers Maintain Their Altitude?

The Fordham Institute reports on a new study that tracks individual, high-performing (90th percentile) students over time and checks on how many fall from the heights. The answer, according to Fordham, is that almost half descend from top decile performance. This is … Continue reading

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 1 Comment

One Response to Do High Flyers Maintain Their Altitude?

  1. JFCronin says:

    Thanks for noticing the appendix in which we discuss the adjustment to the attrition statistic. While it’s true that 30% to 50% dropped out, a substantive portion is explained by error in the measure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *