Education Reform - The Status of High School Education in Wisconsin

Following my last post on the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute’s analysis of the Milwaukee Publics Schools, I decided to go back to the well and read their report on The Status of High School Education in Wisconsin:A Tale of Two Wisconsins. (2006) But before I move ahead, I have another self-reflective confession to make. I am reading hard copies of WPRI’s reports, which look and feel legitimate and by all appearances are well researched, written, and documented. That said, I thought it might be prudent to think a little deeper about my source. To begin with, the WPRI report is a not peer reviewed material. Second, it only takes a quick trip to their web page to read their mission statement, which I only partially reported in my last post.

“The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute Inc., established in 1987, is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit Institute working to engage and energize Wisconsinites and others in discussions and timely action on key public policy issues critical to the State’s future, its growth and prosperity. The Institute’s research and public education activities are directed to identify and promote public policies in Wisconsin which are fair, accountable and cost effective. The Institute is guided by a belief that competitive free markets, limited government, private initiative, and personal responsibility are essential to our democratic way of life.”

This expanded version reveals a far more conservative slant, verified by Wikipedia’s entry

“Wisconsin Policy Research Institute is a non-profit conservative think tank advocating free market economics in the state of Wisconsin. It has played a prominent role in the development of the State's school voucher program and has formulated recommendations for state prison policy.”

So, with full disclosure concerning the possible bias of the research, what does the WPRI have to say about secondary education in Wisconsin? As the second half of the report title suggests the state is experiencing an achievement gap, an obvious area for reform. What is not obvious is what the solutions are. The paper readily acknowledges a “picture of two Wisconsins” where in

“Wisconsin’s top tier high schools 86% of the students score proficient or higher on the tenth grade test. This contrasts sharply with the lowest tier high schools, where only 60% score proficient or better. The averages of this lower tier are affected by the disturbing performance of the state’s two lowest-performing districts—Menominee and Milwaukee—in which approximately 30% of the students score proficient or higher. However, when data from these two districts are excluded, only 62% of students in the lower tier districts score proficient or higher on standardized tests.”

This performance gap is widening. The study finds “that the gap between high- and low-achieving high schools is getting worse rather than better.” (McDade, p.1) In most respect, this should come as no surprise. The real surprise is this statement:

“the unexpected finding is that the growing gap between the performance of top and bottom tier high schools occurred during a time when the spending gap between these two groups of schools remained relatively constant. In fact, during the seven years studied, spending in low-tier districts actually got closer to spending in high-tier districts. Yet, during that period, the achievement gap widened. The performance gap seems to be unaffected by spending.
Further, the study also includes a statistical analysis of the relationship between high school test scores and spending for all districts in Wisconsin. This analysis found there to be an insignificant relationship between spending and student test scores. In short, money cannot close the performance gap. Therefore, policy makers looking to close the performance gap need not consider spending as a primary solution.” (McDade, p.11)

How do we account for a narrowing spending gap but a widening performance gap? The WPRI concludes that the largest factors influencing school performance are socioeconomic – property wealth, race, and poverty.
----------
Wikipedia. Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. Wikipedia. Retrieved November 19, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Policy_Research_Institute
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Policy_Research_Institute
McDade, P.J. (2006). The status of high school education in wisconsin. Wisconsin Research Institute Report, 19(1), Retrieved from http://www.wpri.org/Reports/Volume19/Vol19no1.pdf
http://www.wpri.org/pages/about.html