College Preparatory Curriculum for All

1. College Preparatory Curriculum for All Lessons Learned from Chicago Elaine Allensworth with TakakoNomi and Nicholas Montgomery at the Consortium on Chicago School Research and Valerie Leeat the University of Michigan Funded by the Institute for Education Sciences and the National Science Foundation

2. Movement for More Rigorous Course Requirements Criticisms of low high school academic standards Recognition of need to improve college-readiness Requires a dramatic change in schooling Strategy based on research tying coursework to learning Students in schools with stronger curricula learn more; equity is better Students in higher tracks perform better than students in lower tracks Students with advanced coursework do better in intro college courses

3. But prior research may not be applicable to a universal mandate Students selecting higher level classes are different than others More motivated, with better support Schools offering higher level classes are qualitatively different than others More likely to be college-focused in other ways Mandates are different than bottom-up decisions Issues of school, teacher and student capacity

4. Chicago was an early adopter of the core curriculum Required a college-prep curriculum for all students, beginning in 1997 Three years of math Algebra in 9th grade, followed by geometry and algebra II Previously 2 years were required; many students took remedial math in 9th grade Four years of English English I through English IV Previously many students took remedial English in 9th grade Three years of social science World studies, U.S. History and an elective Previously 3 years required of any social studies course Three years of lab science Earth or Environmental Science; Biology; Chemistry or Physics Previously 1 year required

5. The Chicago Context Third largest school system in the U.S. Over 85% students eligible for free/reduced priced lunch Racial composition mostly minority 50% African-American 38% Latino 9% White 3% Asian Before the policy: Graduation rates were at 51% More than half of entering ninth graders failed at least one course

6. The policy changed… • What courses students took • e.g., algebra instead of remedial math • How many core classes students took • e.g., 3 years of science instead of one • The composition of students in college prep classes

7. Study 1.The effects of ending remedial coursework in ninth grade English and math

8. Algebra enrollment increased immediately with the policyOnly students with below-average skills were affected

9. English I enrollment increased with the policyStudents with average-skills and low-skills were affected

10. Students Eligible for Special Education Were Most Affected by the Policy College Prep Course Enrollment, Pre- and Post-Policy

11. Slight racial-ethnic gaps in college-prep coursework diminished with the policy College-Prep Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity 9th Graders not receiving special education services English Math

12. Equity in coursework improved…What happened to achievement?

13. More students earned credit in Algebra or English Ibut failure rates increased and test scores did not improve Numbers in bold are significantly different post-policy compared to pre-policy.

14. What happened to coursework by the end of high school? Study 2. A close look at science coursework Science Graduation Requirements Pre-1997 1 year of science No content specified Beginning in the 1997-98 school year 3 years of science Content specified: Earth or Environmental Biology/Life science Chemistry or Physics

15. The requirements led to a large increase in students completing three years of science Post-policy: 48% Among graduates: 86% Pre-policy: 25% Among graduates: 44%

16. But students mostly earned Cs and Ds And students with low grades show little learning Post-policy: 48% Among graduates: 86% Pre-policy: 25% Among graduates: 44%

17. The policy led more students to take chemistry or physics, but fewer to take both Highest level of college-prep science completed by high school graduates Controlling for student background Graduates

18. What happened to high school graduation and college-going?

19. Graduation rates declined with the policy Percent of students graduating from high school in 5 years Policy Year All students

20. High school graduates were slightly less likely to go to college with the policy Percent of graduates in each cohort attending a 4-year college after graduation Controlling for student background Policy

21. College persistence rates did not increase with graduation requirements Percent of students remaining in college for two years Policy

22. Why didn’t we see more positive effects? • The policy focused on WHAT students were exposed to, but they were poorly engaged in that material • Teachers often lack strategies for engaging students with weak behavioral skills • Instructional quality and classroom climate matter at least as much as curriculum • The curricular policy led schools to change the way they grouped/tracked students, with greater demands on teachers and staffing and students • Required teachers to adjust to teaching mixed-ability classrooms with more attendance & disciplinary problems • Schools lacked staff for expanded higher-level science and math; led to a decline in curricular rigor for top students • More demanding work for students with the weakest skills, including students with disabilities—but no extra support

23. More recent Chicago policies build on the 1997 requirements…

24. Double-period algebra for students entering high school with below-average skills • Low-skill students received twice as much instruction, and their teachers received training and resources • Concentrated together students with attendance/behavior problems • Instructional quality improved dramatically • Academic demands did not decline • Test scores improved substantially • Grades did not change • High-skill students took algebra without low-skill peers, OR with low-skill peers receiving extra instruction • Academic demand increased • Test scores improved • Grades declined

25. Better monitoring of students’ grades and attendance for early intervention • Research shows that • Grades are the best predictors of graduation, learning gains, college entrance & persistence • Grades are primarily determined by effort (more so than by skills) • Attendance is the strongest determinant of course failure • CPS has responded with • Warning lists based on current grades/attendance • Guides for using data on student performance • Teacher teams that look at student grades/attendance across classes

26. Better monitoring of the path to college • Lists of FASFA completion • Postsecondary counselors • Match to schools with better financial aid, fewer part-time students • Emphasize the importance of high grades, behavioral skills • Some attention to upper-division courses • Expansion of AP/IB classes in some schools

27. Conclusions Curricular reforms affect the content students receive Coursework is a first step: without the requirements, many students took very little core coursework Equity in coursework improved with the requirements Expectations changed Increased coursework does not necessarily improve achievement or later outcomes Coursework matters little without engagement: we need to focus on students’ academic behaviors and the quality of instruction Curricular reforms affect classroom composition and instructional environment These changes require school and teacher capacity to respond Students with low abilities & disabilities and their teachers need support Students with high and average abilities may be affected by policies that appear to be aimed at low-ability students

28. For more information go to: ccsr.uchicago.edu