
Children and Youth;Education and Literacy
When the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law on January 8, 2002, the President and Congress presented the American people with an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity rests in an historic piece of education legislation designed to close the achievement gap between high- and low-performing students. The challenge lies in the need for parent and community leaders to become knowledgeable about and take advantage of various NCLB provisions for collaboration, engagement, and action.
NCLB is indeed a groundbreaking piece of federal legislation. It sets forth national expectations of high academic achievement for all public school children through a mandate that all children will be performing proficiently by 2014. It significantly broadens the federal role in public education and defines more stringent standards of accountability for local public schools and districts.
However, as evidenced by numerous reports and articles in the media, implementation of various provisions of the law is raising deep concerns at state and local levels. Clearly missing from this important and growing national debate are the voices of the public, particularly those from disadvantaged and disconnected communities. Parents, students and other members of the public -- largely unorganized and under-represented in national education policy -- are significantly affected by this law, inasmuch as the law is intended to enhance the effectiveness of public schools in every community by holding those schools accountable for educating every child to high standards.
What has been the impact of the law on students, families, schools and communities? How can the perspectives and experiences of these individuals -- all directly or indirectly impacted by the law -- inform and improve the law and its implementation? What role does the public play in ensuring public schools that work in the context of NCLB for all children?
In spring 2004, Public Education Network (PEN) sought answers to these questions by holding a series of nine public hearings across eight states. Our intention was to listen to public voices and to bring these voices to local, state and federal policymakers; to educators; to the media; and back out to the public at large. We also saw these hearings as a way to further educate the public about NLCB, building on a set of tools that PEN has produced since 2002, and to remind all Americans of the essential role that they must play to ensure a public education system that works for all children.
It was important to us to honor the time and attention that the public was giving to this task. We were intentional in structuring the hearings in a respectful and consistent manner. We chose states in which to hold the hearings based on their large percentage of low-income children. All hearings were co-hosted by a local partner organization with deep ties to the community. A set of distinguished hearing officers who would listen attentively and ask probing questions of witnesses also helped to ensure authentic and meaningful testimony. The panels who testified were composed of almost equal numbers of students (high school and early college), parents of school-aged children attending public schools, and community members (including business and civic leaders and community activists) across the nine hearings. We also conducted an online survey regarding NCLB through our online advocacy tool, GiveKidsGoodSchools.org, to which we received 12,000 responses. These are referenced as well in the report. Since the absence of the public is too often evident in forums on public education, we intentionally did not invite professional educators to formally testify, although some did speak during 'open microphone' time following each of the formal panels.
We are pleased to share what we heard. The findings include specific quotes from the public. We think it's important to bring the public's voice as clearly as we could. However, we also endeavored to cite findings and draw conclusions that reflect a general pattern or theme, which we heard across the hearings. We took great pains not to include opinions, experiences or perspectives that were unique to a particular family, community or district. The ecommendations derive from what we heard and PEN's own understanding of and experiences with the law.
Our hope is that these representative voices from the public help inform how federal, state and local officials work to improve public education. As importantly, we hope that it serves as testimony to the deep concern and commitment that the public has about public education and about their local public schools.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Children and Youth;Education and Literacy
When the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law on January 8, 2002, the President and Congress presented the American people with an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity rests in an historic piece of education legislation designed to close the achievement gap between high- and low-performing students. The challenge lies in the need for parent and community leaders to become knowledgeable about and take advantage of various NCLB provisions for collaboration, engagement, and action.
NCLB is indeed a groundbreaking piece of federal legislation. It sets forth national expectations of high academic achievement for all public school children through a mandate that all children will be performing proficiently by 2014. It significantly broadens the federal role in public education and defines more stringent standards of accountability for local public schools and districts.
However, as evidenced by numerous reports and articles in the media, implementation of various provisions of the law is raising deep concerns at state and local levels. Clearly missing from this important and growing national debate are the voices of the public, particularly those from disadvantaged and disconnected communities. Parents, students and other members of the public -- largely unorganized and under-represented in national education policy -- are significantly affected by this law, inasmuch as the law is intended to enhance the effectiveness of public schools in every community by holding those schools accountable for educating every child to high standards.
What has been the impact of the law on students, families, schools and communities? How can the perspectives and experiences of these individuals -- all directly or indirectly impacted by the law -- inform and improve the law and its implementation? What role does the public play in ensuring public schools that work in the context of NCLB for all children?
In spring 2004, Public Education Network (PEN) sought answers to these questions by holding a series of nine public hearings across eight states. Our intention was to listen to public voices and to bring these voices to local, state and federal policymakers; to educators; to the media; and back out to the public at large. We also saw these hearings as a way to further educate the public about NLCB, building on a set of tools that PEN has produced since 2002, and to remind all Americans of the essential role that they must play to ensure a public education system that works for all children.
It was important to us to honor the time and attention that the public was giving to this task. We were intentional in structuring the hearings in a respectful and consistent manner. We chose states in which to hold the hearings based on their large percentage of low-income children. All hearings were co-hosted by a local partner organization with deep ties to the community. A set of distinguished hearing officers who would listen attentively and ask probing questions of witnesses also helped to ensure authentic and meaningful testimony. The panels who testified were composed of almost equal numbers of students (high school and early college), parents of school-aged children attending public schools, and community members (including business and civic leaders and community activists) across the nine hearings. We also conducted an online survey regarding NCLB through our online advocacy tool, GiveKidsGoodSchools.org, to which we received 12,000 responses. These are referenced as well in the report. Since the absence of the public is too often evident in forums on public education, we intentionally did not invite professional educators to formally testify, although some did speak during 'open microphone' time following each of the formal panels.
We are pleased to share what we heard. The findings include specific quotes from the public. We think it's important to bring the public's voice as clearly as we could. However, we also endeavored to cite findings and draw conclusions that reflect a general pattern or theme, which we heard across the hearings. We took great pains not to include opinions, experiences or perspectives that were unique to a particular family, community or district. The ecommendations derive from what we heard and PEN's own understanding of and experiences with the law.
Our hope is that these representative voices from the public help inform how federal, state and local officials work to improve public education. As importantly, we hope that it serves as testimony to the deep concern and commitment that the public has about public education and about their local public schools.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Children and Youth;Education and Literacy
When the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law on January 8, 2002, the President and Congress presented the American people with an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity rests in an historic piece of education legislation designed to close the achievement gap between high- and low-performing students. The challenge lies in the need for parent and community leaders to become knowledgeable about and take advantage of various NCLB provisions for collaboration, engagement, and action.
NCLB is indeed a groundbreaking piece of federal legislation. It sets forth national expectations of high academic achievement for all public school children through a mandate that all children will be performing proficiently by 2014. It significantly broadens the federal role in public education and defines more stringent standards of accountability for local public schools and districts.
However, as evidenced by numerous reports and articles in the media, implementation of various provisions of the law is raising deep concerns at state and local levels. Clearly missing from this important and growing national debate are the voices of the public, particularly those from disadvantaged and disconnected communities. Parents, students and other members of the public -- largely unorganized and under-represented in national education policy -- are significantly affected by this law, inasmuch as the law is intended to enhance the effectiveness of public schools in every community by holding those schools accountable for educating every child to high standards.
What has been the impact of the law on students, families, schools and communities? How can the perspectives and experiences of these individuals -- all directly or indirectly impacted by the law -- inform and improve the law and its implementation? What role does the public play in ensuring public schools that work in the context of NCLB for all children?
In spring 2004, Public Education Network (PEN) sought answers to these questions by holding a series of nine public hearings across eight states. Our intention was to listen to public voices and to bring these voices to local, state and federal policymakers; to educators; to the media; and back out to the public at large. We also saw these hearings as a way to further educate the public about NLCB, building on a set of tools that PEN has produced since 2002, and to remind all Americans of the essential role that they must play to ensure a public education system that works for all children.
It was important to us to honor the time and attention that the public was giving to this task. We were intentional in structuring the hearings in a respectful and consistent manner. We chose states in which to hold the hearings based on their large percentage of low-income children. All hearings were co-hosted by a local partner organization with deep ties to the community. A set of distinguished hearing officers who would listen attentively and ask probing questions of witnesses also helped to ensure authentic and meaningful testimony. The panels who testified were composed of almost equal numbers of students (high school and early college), parents of school-aged children attending public schools, and community members (including business and civic leaders and community activists) across the nine hearings. We also conducted an online survey regarding NCLB through our online advocacy tool, GiveKidsGoodSchools.org, to which we received 12,000 responses. These are referenced as well in the report. Since the absence of the public is too often evident in forums on public education, we intentionally did not invite professional educators to formally testify, although some did speak during 'open microphone' time following each of the formal panels.
We are pleased to share what we heard. The findings include specific quotes from the public. We think it's important to bring the public's voice as clearly as we could. However, we also endeavored to cite findings and draw conclusions that reflect a general pattern or theme, which we heard across the hearings. We took great pains not to include opinions, experiences or perspectives that were unique to a particular family, community or district. The ecommendations derive from what we heard and PEN's own understanding of and experiences with the law.
Our hope is that these representative voices from the public help inform how federal, state and local officials work to improve public education. As importantly, we hope that it serves as testimony to the deep concern and commitment that the public has about public education and about their local public schools.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Children and Youth;Education and Literacy
When the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law on January 8, 2002, the President and Congress presented the American people with an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity rests in an historic piece of education legislation designed to close the achievement gap between high- and low-performing students. The challenge lies in the need for parent and community leaders to become knowledgeable about and take advantage of various NCLB provisions for collaboration, engagement, and action.
NCLB is indeed a groundbreaking piece of federal legislation. It sets forth national expectations of high academic achievement for all public school children through a mandate that all children will be performing proficiently by 2014. It significantly broadens the federal role in public education and defines more stringent standards of accountability for local public schools and districts.
However, as evidenced by numerous reports and articles in the media, implementation of various provisions of the law is raising deep concerns at state and local levels. Clearly missing from this important and growing national debate are the voices of the public, particularly those from disadvantaged and disconnected communities. Parents, students and other members of the public -- largely unorganized and under-represented in national education policy -- are significantly affected by this law, inasmuch as the law is intended to enhance the effectiveness of public schools in every community by holding those schools accountable for educating every child to high standards.
What has been the impact of the law on students, families, schools and communities? How can the perspectives and experiences of these individuals -- all directly or indirectly impacted by the law -- inform and improve the law and its implementation? What role does the public play in ensuring public schools that work in the context of NCLB for all children?
In spring 2004, Public Education Network (PEN) sought answers to these questions by holding a series of nine public hearings across eight states. Our intention was to listen to public voices and to bring these voices to local, state and federal policymakers; to educators; to the media; and back out to the public at large. We also saw these hearings as a way to further educate the public about NLCB, building on a set of tools that PEN has produced since 2002, and to remind all Americans of the essential role that they must play to ensure a public education system that works for all children.
It was important to us to honor the time and attention that the public was giving to this task. We were intentional in structuring the hearings in a respectful and consistent manner. We chose states in which to hold the hearings based on their large percentage of low-income children. All hearings were co-hosted by a local partner organization with deep ties to the community. A set of distinguished hearing officers who would listen attentively and ask probing questions of witnesses also helped to ensure authentic and meaningful testimony. The panels who testified were composed of almost equal numbers of students (high school and early college), parents of school-aged children attending public schools, and community members (including business and civic leaders and community activists) across the nine hearings. We also conducted an online survey regarding NCLB through our online advocacy tool, GiveKidsGoodSchools.org, to which we received 12,000 responses. These are referenced as well in the report. Since the absence of the public is too often evident in forums on public education, we intentionally did not invite professional educators to formally testify, although some did speak during 'open microphone' time following each of the formal panels.
We are pleased to share what we heard. The findings include specific quotes from the public. We think it's important to bring the public's voice as clearly as we could. However, we also endeavored to cite findings and draw conclusions that reflect a general pattern or theme, which we heard across the hearings. We took great pains not to include opinions, experiences or perspectives that were unique to a particular family, community or district. The ecommendations derive from what we heard and PEN's own understanding of and experiences with the law.
Our hope is that these representative voices from the public help inform how federal, state and local officials work to improve public education. As importantly, we hope that it serves as testimony to the deep concern and commitment that the public has about public education and about their local public schools.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Education and Literacy;Science;Women
Science, technology, engineering and math: for many students, especially young women, achievement in the "STEM" subjects will be the key to high growth rates, higher paying jobs and career advancement in the knowledge economy.
Yet for years girls have under-performed at these subjects: dropping out early, expressing low interest, opting out of STEM degrees in college and out of STEM careers as college grads. There's even a name for this: the "leaky pipeline."
It's not that girls can't achieve. In fact, girls not only score as well as boys in elementary school, but in societies abroad where math and science achievement is valued equally in both sexes, they continue to do well throughout their educational careers.
Nor is it just the result of patriarchal school systems. Millions have been invested in improving a host of external education variables of this nature that may be holding girls back: hostility in the computer room, lack of female role models, masculine pedagogical models, etc. In some cases, high schools have even refused to let girls drop STEM classes, which has only succeeded in delaying the problem until they matriculate.
What could be causing elementary school girls who excel at math and who love science, to suddenly lose all interest or develop low grades in these subjects in late adolescence and early teens?
One important and under-explored answers is feminine gender norms. As girls age, they internalize gender norms that force them to make a choice between excelling at STEM or being feminine. And STEM loses.
This report documents the existing literature and surveys the problem in depth, including new results of new focus group studies with young women of color.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Education and Literacy;Employment and Labor
In an effort to gain a better understanding of the community college presidency, the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) has periodically conducted surveys asking CEOs a range of questions about their tenure, demographic characteristics, and compensation and benefits. The results of three prior surveys were published as AACC research briefs (Larson, 2007; Shults, 2001). Results of research specific to the CEO contract were published by Community College Press (Wallin, 2007). Although the 2012 CEO compensation survey explores similar topics and draws on previous research for comparison, its focus is on compensation.
Highlights of the 2012 survey results include:
Community college CEOs typically receive a variety of allowances in addition to cash compensation. Most respondents (70%) indicated such allowances included college-provided housing, a housing allowance or both; 66% received a college-provided car, a car allowance or both; 58% received an allowance for professional club dues.
Retirement plans were also common, with most (73%) receiving a defined contribution plan such as a 403(b) or 401(k).
Women's median base salaries surpassed those of men slightly, although men earned more in total cash compensation. (Women comprise 28% of all community college CEOs.)
Black and Hispanic CEOs earned more on average, than white CEOs. The median total cash compensation was $210,000 for Black CEOs, $207,553 for Hispanic CEOs, and $176,300 for white CEOs. (Study authors say further analysis indicates that Black and Hispanic CEOs were more likely to work at larger institutions and in urban areas, where salaries tend to be higher.)
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Children and Youth;Education and Literacy
This report assesses Illinois' academic performance from early childhood through postsecondary, providing a snapshot of how Illinois compares to other states and nations as we collectively work to provide all students a world-class education. The analysis is divided into three parts.
The first section examines how Illinois public schools serve 2 million students by spotlighting performance on key academic milestones such as 4th-grade reading, 8th-grade math, college readiness in core subjects and postsecondary graduation.
The second section examines the interlocking set of reforms that state education leaders, legislators and advocates have crafted to lay the foundation for future academic growth since the State We're In: 2010. The report also illustrates how the various initiatives fit together to lay a strong academic foundation for Illinois going forward.
The third section contains 55 data measures that examine Illinois' standing in early education, K-12 and postsecondary readiness and success.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States (Midwestern) / Illinois

As schools move towards a 21st century model of preparing students for college and a career, it is becoming unnecessary to maintain a system based on time spent in the classroom, according to the report's authors. Rather, learning happens at different times in a variety of settings, and progress should be demonstrated by mastery of content, not merely grade promotion. In the proficiency-based systems examined in "Making Mastery Work", students advance at their own pace as part of a cycle of continuous learning and achievement. This mix of freedom and responsibility is positively impacting both the teaching and the learning at the ten schools studied by Nora Priest, Antonia Rudenstine and Ephraim Weisstein, the report's authors.
Issues examined through the collected experiences of the participating schools include: the creation of a transparent mastery and assessment system, time flexibility, curriculum and instruction, leadership for competency education development, and the role of data and information technology in a competency-based education model.
August 1970
Geographic Focus: North America / United States (New England)