John Chubb, Edison’s Chief Education Officer and author of this report, said: “We’re pleased to present strong achievement findings in our newly released report on school performance. This, our fifth annual report, includes more analyses, information, and data than ever before, including similar school comparisons that demonstrate the positive, improving achievement record of Edison Schools’ growing population of students and schools.”

Comparable Schools

For the first time, the performances of Edison schools were compared to every school within the same district with similar levels of economic disadvantage and ethnicity—an analysis that included more than 1,100 comparable schools. As a result of this analysis, Edison announced that achievement gains at its schools far exceed, by ratios as high as 5 to 1, and by an overall average of more than double, those gains at similar schools in the locales where Edison is working. These results apply to both types of high stakes tests mandated by state and district officials—criterion-referenced tests (CRT), which judge student performance against objective state or district standards, and norm-referenced tests (NRT), which judge performance against national population norms. Viewed over the period of time since Edison began management, Edison schools with comparison schools available have improved by an average of 3.5 percentage points every year on criterion-referenced tests and 5.5 percentiles on norm-referenced tests. By comparison, similar schools have gained only 1.4 percentage points and 2.7 percentiles, respectively—approximately one-half of Edison’s overall improvement rate. Edison schools’ comparable superior performance is not only true for cumulative gains, but for gains made during the last academic year. For the academic year 2001–2002, Edison schools with comparison schools available gained an average of 4.5 percentage points on criterion-referenced tests and 4.3 percentiles on norm-referenced tests, compared with the gains at more than 1,100 comparable schools, which were 0.6 percentage points and -0.4 percentile points, respectively. The report finds not only that Edison has outgained these schools on average, but that the differences are statistically significant. Similar schools were defined as those serving students with similar levels of economic disadvantage (as determined by free or reduced-price lunch eligibility) and a similar demographic population (Edison’s overall national demographic includes 88 percent minority enrollment) within plus or minus 10 percentage points of the Edison school. This process of identifying comparable schools found more than 1,100 public schools as comparable to some 66 Edison schools. (Some Edison schools had no comparable schools within their areas—usually because they served by far the most disadvantaged students within their locale.) “With more than 1,100 comparison schools, this analysis represented the largest comparative sample ever assembled on Edison,” continued Chubb. “And the results provide a powerful answer to the question of how well Edison schools perform in comparison to similar schools in the districts that we work. The answer is clear: Edison schools’ achievement gains far exceed those gains at similar schools in the locales where we are working. “Over time, these higher rates imply that students in Edison schools are progressing toward state standards or national norms at a faster pace than students in similar schools. An Edison school, for example, might enable the majority of its students to reach proficiency in five years, while a comparable school’s students might take ten to fifteen years to reach proficiency.”

Consistent Gains

Edison Schools’ efforts in measuring student achievement in its schools has focused on improvements in students’ performance over and above the improvements that students in demographically and ethnically similar, non-Edison schools would experience. Most of the schools in which Edison works have had traditionally low levels of achievement. Therefore, Edison schools generally begin at low levels relative to state standards and national norms—and at levels well below those of other public schools in their communities. For these reasons, the most appropriate measure of achievement in Edison schools is the level of improvement over time. On the basis of average achievement gains since opening, 79 out of 94 school sites—84 percent—are fulfilling the primary mission they set out to accomplish. After seven years of operation, the record compiled by 94 Edison schools shows advancing schools ahead of declining schools by 5 to 1. Edison schools have increased the percentage of students passing all criterion-referenced state tests—across all grade levels and all subjects—by 4.0 percentage points every year on criterion-references tests, and 4.4 percentile points on norm-referenced tests. The gain rates on the criterion-referenced tests are four times greater than the gain rates for the respective states in which Edison schools are located and two times greater than the gain rates for the respective districts in which Edison schools are located. “Taking into account every tested grade level, every tested subject, every tested student, and every piece of a school’s achievement record since it began with Edison, the evidence shows that the vast majority of Edison schools have improved student achievement,” continued Chubb. Edison schools have also sharply reduced the numbers of students failing state tests altogether. From 1995 to 2002, Edison schools reduced the failure rate on criterion-referenced tests by an average of 3.6 percentage points per year.

Leaving No Child Behind

Many of Edison schools on state “needs improvement” lists mandated by No Child Left Behind (NCLB) have made substantial student achievement gains during the 2001–2002 school year. NCLB is the demanding new federal law requiring every public school in America to bring all of its students to proficient levels in reading and math within the next twelve years. Often hired by school districts and charter school boards to manage low-performing schools, Edison was asked to work with thirty-seven schools that now appear on state NCLB “needs improvement” lists. The Department of Education estimates that, under NCLB, 8,600 schools are in need of improvement. Edison can report on the academic progress at its NCLB schools where state-reported data and more than baseline scores are now available. These NCLB-designated schools have improved their academic achievement by an overall average of 5.8 percentage points on criterion-referenced tests and 4.3 national percentiles on norm-referenced tests, on an annualized basis. This means that since Edison began managing them, through their achievement during the 2001–2002 school year, these schools have gained an average of 5.8 percentage points on criterion-referenced tests and 4.3 national percentiles on norm-referenced tests every year, across all grade levels and subjects, on each type of test. Over the same period of time, the districts and states in which these traditionally low-performing schools are located gained 2.3 and -0.1 percentage points, respectively, on criterion-referenced tests and 1.8 and 2.1 percentile points, respectively, on norm-referenced tests. “The importance of improving achievement in the Edison schools we have been hired to manage that are subject to No Child Left Behind sanctions cannot be overstated,” said Chubb. “Low-performing schools traditionally left many students without the skills needed to succeed. At the pace they are now improving, these Edison schools will have the vast majority of their students academically proficient within the next several years—well ahead of the ambitious schedule set by No Child Left Behind. Our ‘needs improvement’ schools are well positioned to respond to the requirements of NCLB.”

Closing the Achievement Gap

Probably the most important education issue facing America today is the persistent gap in achievement between Caucasian students on one hand and African-American and Hispanic students on the other. The issue is compounded by differences in achievement across economic classes, often overlapping racial and ethnic differences. While Edison Schools claims no special insights into the causes of the achievement gap or solutions to it, Edison schools are designed to take advantage of what is known about every element of high-achievement schools, for all types of students. In 2001–2002, an average of 58 percent of students served by Edison schools were African-American—four to five times more prevalent in Edison schools than in the general population. (In 2001–2002, Caucasian students represented 12 percent of Edison students, Hispanic students represented 25 percent. Seventy-three percent of all Edison students were economically disadvantaged as determined by eligibility for free or reduced-price lunches.) The average annual gain rates for all Edison schools with 90 percent or more of their students African-American during the 2001–2002 academic year (Edison manages 41 such schools) are 4.7 percentage points on criterion-referenced tests and 4.4 percentile points on norm-referenced tests—nearly identical to the rates of gain across all Edison schools. Since the district and state averages are not based on comparably high percentages of African-American students, it is clear that Edison schools with predominantly African-American enrollments are gaining at rates that begin to bridge the achievement gap. “Our data show that African-American and economically disadvantaged students are making clear, and sometimes spectacular, academic progress in their Edison schools,” Chubb said. “The gains that these Edison students have posted over the last seven years suggest that quality schooling can make a meaningful difference for students from any background.”

Parents Remain Satisfied

Each year, Edison commissions Harris Interactive (formerly Gordon S. Black Corporation) to conduct an anonymous, independently administered survey of parents, including one item that asks parents to assess their child’s Edison school with letter grades—an A for “excellent” through an F for “failure.” The findings of more than 26,000 parent surveys show, for the seventh consecutive year, that parents are over-whelmingly satisfied with their Edison schools. A majority of 51 percent gives their schools an A and 34 percent give their schools a B, for a total of 85 percent of parents giving their Edison school an A or a B. According to an annual Gallup poll, in a similar survey of public school parents nationwide, only 71 percent of parents rated their child’s school an A or B. Nearly twice as many parents gave their Edison schools an A grade (51 percent of parents), compared to the national average of 27 percent.

Prior to publication of Edison’s report, RAND staff examined the data and the text and provided Edison with comments on Edison’s analysis and discussion of the data, and Edison revised its report in response to those comments. In the summer of 2000, RAND began an independent evaluation of Edison schools, examining student achieve-ment outcomes as well as the implementation of Edison’s academic program in a variety of its schools around the country. The evaluation is expected to be complete in the summer of 2004.

Archive of all News From HQ stories.

Archive of all News From Our Schools stories.

Back...