High-Achieving Students Often Lose Momentum, Fordham Study Shows

In the eyes of Michael Petrilli, education discussions and policies based on the disparity in performance between subgroups of U.S. students -- known as the achievement gap -- leave some honors students behind.

"The overwhelming focus has been on gap-closing and equity," said Petrilli, a George W. Bush-era education official who is now executive vice president of the right-leaning Thomas B. Fordham Institute. "There are trade-offs. Policies good for the lowest-achieving kids may be bad for the highest-achieving kids. But we're not even having that conversation."

Petrilli's observations come on the heels of the release of Fordham's latest paper, "Do High Flyers Maintain Their Altitude?" The paper suggests that high-performing students lose ground because of policies -- such as the federal No Child Left Behind act -- that incentivize proficiency, instead of growth or excellence, and direct resources toward the lowest-scoring students.

"When No Child Left Behind was passed, people worried about it," he said. "It wasn’t hard to predict that this focus on the lowest-achieving kids could lead the highest-achieving students to be ignored."

The report defines the elite group it calls "high flyers" as those who score in the 90th percentile or higher on the Measures of Academic Progress exam, a computer-administered test that districts use as a diagnostic exam to assess how students might perform on state standardized tests. The MAP, developed by the Northwest Evaluation Association, adapts the rigor of its questions to students' grade level.

The report's findings were determined by NWEA researchers' analysis of individual student data. They show that between one-third and half of the 120,000-student sample dropped out of the top-performing group over time.

In reading, 44 percent of students first categorized as high flyers fell out of the top tier between third and eighth grades, and 48 percent dropped below the 90th percentile between sixth and 10th grades. In math, 43 percent of students lost their high flyer status between third and eighth grades, and 30 percent dropped between sixth and 10th grades.

But the mobility works both ways: The overall group of high-achieving students increased over time. While some "high flyers" dropped out, other students, whom the paper calls "late bloomers," joined the cohort.

The Fordham paper calls this a "glass half-empty or half-full" situation. The paper's authors wrote:

Eight, ten, twelve, seventeen years old, with little more than a coin toss determining whether they wind up in their school careers simply "above average" or among the country's top achievers and brightest hopes for the future.

The authors call for more attention to be paid to students performing in the upper tier in order to keep them there, as well as encourage an increase in the number of "late bloomers" who join their ranks.

The paper suggests its findings can be explained by NCLB's focus on the lowest-performing students, but the lack of data on the performance trends of pre-NCLB era "high flyers" makes that claim hard to prove. NCLB, meanwhile, is up for re-authorization.

The report shows the importance of using student growth -- not proficiency rates -- as the basis for school funding decisions, Petrilli said. "Schools should have an incentives to make sure all their kids are making progress," he added.

The study also found that "high flyers" improved their scores in reading more slowly than their low-achieving peers did. Jaekyoung Lee, associate dean for academic affairs at SUNY Buffalo's Graduate School of Education, said that phenomenon is merely a regression to the mean.

"This is well known," he said. "If someone does extremely well on a test today, the person is much less likely to do as well tomorrow."

Lee also suggested that the Fordham study might have found different results -- and drawn different conclusions -- had it used different tests or cut-off points. "State standards are all over the place," he said. "There's no consistency."

The results might also be misleading, Lee said, because the tests are MAP diagnostic -- they are not high-stakes standardized tests.

"There might be some motivation issues, especially with high achievers," he noted. "If [a test] doesn’t matter, why should they try so hard?"

Comments

[parkerblock]

12:22 PM on 10/18/2011

an example of what happens when the media focuses all its attention on train wrecks

[Jenniferdericks]

08:03 PM on 10/10/2011

It is not politically correct to point out that it is mandated that students with special needs or even those who score in less than proficient on standardized tests MUST have money directed to develop specialized educational plans to meet their educational needs. On the other end of the spectrum, high achieving students are left to get the budgetary crumbs of a system that so undervalues their talents that there are no standards for educational programs or even certifications for Gifted and Talented teachers. There are neither standards nor mandates for the enhancement of the education provided to our highest achieving students- who, lest we forget, will one day be the leaders and innovators of this (still?) great nation. ALL students should have their educational needs met. There needs to be honest conversation and action.

[edufaison]

06:28 PM on 09/23/2011

Interesting conversation. My wife is likewise a foreigner, from Jamaica, W.I. Our two children boy and girl now 32, and 28 benefited from home school. However, my son’s only child, Betheseda is an average seven years old who attends a public school. Immediate family members encourage higher level learning including calculus concepts, critical thinking, higher level reading such as Shakespeare, and other developmental learning skills. The video site shown below demonstrates low pressure and least amount of labor approach to learning. Please take a look at it:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Bethchem1121?feature=mhsn

[Marx Twain]

08:28 PM on 09/22/2011

I work in a facility for high needs children, and it costs tax payers over $4000 a month to pay for kids who, quite frankly, will likely en d up in prison or institutionalized. We don't spend a fraction of that on our top tier students.

[J R M]

07:18 PM on 09/22/2011

The popular culture in this country is the enemy. We celebrate athletics and make fun of academics.

My daughter goes to a very good high school which has a notably tough academic program and offers a full IB diploma. I have been to the parent meetings of the IB / Running Start programs. I was shocked when I realized that the parents in these academically focused programs were predominantly highly educated immigrants. There were a few misfit "Americans", but most of the parents had at least one immigrant. Actually, we fall into this category as well, as my wife is Ukrainian.

Talking to my daughter, she says that she knows of kids with "Chinese Tiger" moms, "Indian Elephant" moms, and "Soviet Bear" fathers. There seem to be very very few American Eagle fathers.

If you look at the athletic programs, you find a great overrepresentation of "Americans".

Why?

[Rubberfish]

05:40 PM on 09/22/2011

To combat leaving the higher-performing kids behind, my kids' school separates kids into different ability-level reading groups. There were 4 groups in 1st grade, with the highest one for kids that already read fluently, and the lowest for kids that had never held a book in their hands. The groups were not fixed; if a child from a lower group improved they could move up, and likewise, kids could also move down if they couldn't perform as well after a while. What this system did for the kids was to teach them at a level that they could understand. Lower-performing kids got the support they needed and avoided frustration, and higher-performing kids got the stimulation they needed in order to avoid boredom.
But regardless of what the teachers did with the kids, the one thing I noticed that was the most important thing was parent participation. Since I volunteered in the classroom I've seen it time and time again that kids who didn't read with their parents at home didn't do as well in school as they could have and had to move into a lower group. So, if you have a kid who is excelling in school YOU will have to be the one who makes sure your child doesn't become a statistic.

[Leon Engelun]

12:53 PM on 09/22/2011

I guess cloning is gonna come to be afterall. That way all are equal and no one is above or below.

[beyondliberal]

12:44 PM on 09/22/2011

This is precisely why tracking students like they do in Europe and Japan would solve all sorts of problems.
Separate the college-bound kids from the kids who would do better on a trade-school track at the end of 8th grade. Kids who have more success with a rigorous academic path will be better prepared for college and won't have to sit in the corner to do busy work while the less academically talented get what they need. Lower-achieving students would learn a trade and be ready to join the workforce when they graduate.
I would bet my last dollar that far fewer children would drop out of school, juvenile delinquency would be far lower, and more people would be prepared to support themselves when they graduate.
Thinking college is the goal for all students is preposterous. It's about time our schools see the reality of the situation and adapt as soon as possible.

[Rubberfish]

05:21 PM on 09/22/2011

By 8th grade a lot of the high-flyers will have already dropped below the 90% level. You have to separate them much sooner to get them to stay motivated. In my native Germany teachers usually determine at the end of 4th grade which kids will go on to preparatory schools, and which will go to regular high schools. It's usually the top 10% of the class.

[SLS11]

06:07 PM on 09/22/2011

A "determination" at that age is not necessarily an advantage. And, fyi, teachers do not "determine" which school a child will attend in Germany. Teachers may make a suggestion, but in the end the decision is up to the parents, all too often depending on THEIR social, economical and educational status.
While I agree that not all children are university bound, nor should they be, grade 4 is WAY too early to make any kind of determination about the academic future of a child. In fact, I think it is downright ridiculous.

[J R M]

06:19 PM on 09/22/2011

That assumes that the teachers know what they are doing. I was the one non-Jewish kid in my class in 5th grade. The teacher told my parents that I was just slow and wasn't a good reader or a very good student. My parents offered to pay for independent testing. I tested with a 12th grade reading level and above level math skills. Then the schools gave my parents grief for intellectual bullying for "driving me so hard".

I have no doubt that I was below level till 3d grade. My mother had 3 other kids and figured education was the school's job. I got interested in jets and artillery in 3d grade and started hitting the library. I drove my reading and science/math level up as I learned all the related technologies. By fifth grade I was far beyond the other students. The school and teachers never realized.

I still remember a report on stars I did in 5th grade - working extensively from Scientific American. It was 6 pages (single spaced) long. The teacher didn't understand it. My grandfather, a notably tough teacher who taught high school astronomy and chemistry later said that he would have awarded it an A+ in his class.

[J R M]

12:40 PM on 09/22/2011

If the best students are left marking time, it is no surprise that their interests may turn elsewhere and grades may slip. If you appropriately challenge all students, you are likely to find that the best students do not drift so much and the gap between them and the others will increase.

Our schools are willing to push our student athletes to world standards and performance far beyond their peers. Why are we unwilling to do the same in other areas, such as academics?

To some extent I think we need to challenge our time-based lockstep approach in class. It leaves students who master the material rapidly doing makework while the rest of the class is working on the material. My daughter who is taking a college-in-high-school calculus class, has complained about the makework level and the teacher's pickyness about showing every step - she does the simpler steps in her head without thinking about it.

When I registered my daughter at high school I told them not to get in her way. I actually told them that I did not care about high school graduation -- all I cared about was the entrance requirements for her engineering college (which does not insist on a high school diploma). The higher degree washes the lower degree.

[Silken17]

06:49 PM on 09/22/2011

"Our schools are willing to push our student athletes to world standards and performanc­e far beyond their peers. Why are we unwilling to do the same in other areas, such as academics?"

Exactly! Seems to be a problem with our values in this country.

[daughterusmc]

08:52 PM on 09/22/2011

because we are not evaluated on our successes we are hounded about failure, however, "All 3's,4''s and5's on an AP...great, but why did slacker boy fail level 1, what did you do to intervene Mrs. Smith, why did you not wake him up every day? Did you have weekly contact with his parents?..etc.etc..."...no one has ever asked me what percetnage of my students have decided to pursue Latin beyond high school ( quite a few, thank you very much) but I have had to explain ad nauseum why some lazy manipulative child has failed or someone who is clearly lacking the chops to hack it in any kind of rigorous academic subject.. Because we cannot except the reality that sports acknowledges without batting an eye...not everyone belongs on the team.

[NewBubba]

11:08 AM on 09/22/2011

Advanced students stuffed in a corner to read on their own while teachers spend an hour plus day trying to catch the others up is a travesty. All students should be appropriately challenged. At least this should be the goal. My 3rd grader is in a private school and even they usually fail in this endeavor. Readers of this article should also take into consideration the inevitable ebb and flow of natural drive. Additionally, high achieving test takers do not necessarily make the best doctors and/or intellectuals which is why labeling and dividing kids is not always the best idea...

[LearningCommunity]

09:50 AM on 09/22/2011

Instead of using the term homeschooling, I recommed we use the term Internet schooling.

I think a combination of Internet schooling and bricks and mortar schooling works well.

Here is an example. I often buy books online. It works great and meets my needs. But I also often go into a book store and look at different books and review them, skim through them. I cannot do that on the Internet. I often go to the Intenet to learn how to do something, but I also often sit with a group of people in front of a white board and collaborate on new ideas.

Both the Intenet and personal interaction are critical for a learning community. The thing that is changing is the amount of bandwidth available to the learner over the Internet that never existed before. This bandwidth makes video practical and video changes everything. I can now watch lectures from MIT and other top minds. I don't have to go to MIT to gain knowledge from those people.

So wake up world. The Internet is the tipping point and learning communities based on common interests not proximity are the future.

[brianartstar]

09:28 AM on 09/22/2011

..."the country's top achievers and brightest hopes for the future."
This is the phrase that bothers me the most in this article. I want all kids to achieve and see them all as our hope for the future. The "country's top achievers and brightest hopes for the future" just a few years ago sunk our economy and created misery for others.

[Silken17]

06:28 PM on 09/22/2011

All kids are not created equal. Some kids are destined to do manual work and there is nothing wrong with that. Such work can be an honorable service to society. However, I want my medical doctor to be one of those bright high achievers not one of the kids who had trouble reading at his grade level.

The country's top achievers did not sink our economy, it was selfish and unscrupulous people and it had nothing to do with their intellectual achievements.

[Robert Schwartz]

09:16 AM on 09/22/2011

A really important conversation to have. This is most egregious in under-performing schools where schools only teach the minimum required to be proficient on the statewide assessment. The real crime is that by ALL teaching students critical thinking and problem solving skills you will improve the learning of low achieving, average, and high achieving students at the same time. If you were to re-infuse the arts and science into schools, all students would achieve higher. This is the true legacy of NLCB - a narrowing of the curriculum to support the lowest achieving students at their own expense and the expense of other students as well.

[Silken17]

06:32 PM on 09/22/2011

" This is the true legacy of NLCB - a narrowing of the curriculum to support the lowest achieving students at their own expense and the expense of other students as well. "

I agree. Bring the arts and sciences back into the classroom and all students will benefit. But we must remember that the more talented kids will always need greater challenges to remain interested and motivated.

[sinocensio]

08:35 AM on 09/22/2011

Two years ago, my 6th grade class in southwest Fresno, Ca., included only one student who qualified and capable of handling a magnet middle school. With each layer of de facto segregation put into the system, i.e. running to the latest suburb, private schools, vouchers, magnet schools, charter schools, homeschooling, has left no classroom leadership, too many far below grade level and very little instruction in academic behavior, academic language or test directions, to function independently or in study/activity groups,leaving the teacher to deal with admin and discipline more than actual academic instruction. After being asked to return from 4th grade,because admin deemed it necessary due to my very out of control life and pressure, to get this very out of control class in a disciplined group. This was sign along with countless discipline referrals sent to me over the years, and excellent evals throughout my career, that they wanted and would support me.Instead I was accused of threatening students who lied and were the worst of the lot. Treated like a criminal and escorted off. I feel this of situation will increase unless we change the way we teach. I no longer teach. High achievers need to be with their peers, mixed with more challenging academics, via, a more mobile system.

[SoCalifTeacher]

08:31 AM on 09/22/2011

Under NCLB, teachers in elementary schools have to spend 45 minutes (minimum) working with the lows and slows in small groups. Capable children sit and do busy work. They receive no direct teacher instruction. Then elementary school teachers have to spend another 45 minutes with English Language Learners (ELLs). Capable children sit and do busy work for another 45 minutes. They receive no direct teacher instruction. Many of the lows and slows/ELLs become "lifers" - the students who never progress, suck up an incredible amount of resources, yet don't qualify for special education. And our best and brightest are neglected. They can't be separated. They can't be helped. They can't be saved.