Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Michigans
Talent Crisis:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. The Goal: Becoming a Top Ten Education State
14
24
VI. Sources
34
VII. Acknowledgments
35
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
I.
Jacqueline Dannis and Senior Data and Policy Analyst Sunil Joy
also contributed to this report.
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
the work that these and other leading states have been
doing for years.
Thankfully, in recent months business leaders across the
state have committed to a new effort to make Michigan
a top ten education state by 2030. The Michigan
Achieves initiative is designed to make that ambitious
and urgent goal happen for all students in our great
state. These leaders know with certainty what others
in our state are beginning to grasp: that Michigan has
Great Lakes and an increasingly strong economy but we
cannot be great, by any definition of greatness, if we
continue to educate our children in one of the lowestperforming public school systems in the United States.
In this report, we lay out the next steps in a
comprehensive plan initially published last year to
make Michigan a top ten education state for every
Michigan student. As promised, we also report on
Michigans progress toward this goal.
The business community has been an essential voice in
systemic change and investment in closing achievement
gaps and raising achievement in leading education
states. We ask business leaders in every corner of
the state to join us in this effort. Michigan students
are just as talented, bright and capable of learning at
II.
THE ECONOMIC
CASE FOR PUBLIC
EDUCATION
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
III.
MICHIGANS
EDUCATIONAL
COMPETITIVENESS
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
Alaska
California
New Mexico
190 195 200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240
Korea, Republic of
Singapore
Chinese Taipei-CHN
Hong Kong, SAR
Japan
Massachusetts
Vermont
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
Russian Federation
North Carolina
Maine
Wisconsin
Quebec-CAN
Montana
New York
North Dakota
Pennsylvania
Iowa
Alaska
Wyoming
Kansas
Virginia
Washington
Ohio
Indiana
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Colorado
Connecticut
DoDEA
Illinois
Israel
Texas
Delaware
Maryland
Finland
Florida
Oregon
Idaho
Ontario-CAN
Missouri
Nebraska
Utah
United States
Arkansas
United States (Public)
England-GRP
Slovenia
Alberta-CAN
Kentucky
Hungary
Australia
Hawaii
South Carolina
Lithuania
Arizona
Michigan
Massachusetts
United States
(Public)
Michigan
50
150
250
350
450
550
650
Source: U.S. States in a Global Context: Results from the 2011 NAEP-TIMSS Linking Study
Note: The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) assessment is administered every four years to measure the eighth-grade and fourth-grade math and science
achievement of U.S. students compared to those in other countries. In 2011, more than 60 countries and other education systems participated in TIMSS. The NAEP-TIMSS Linking Study predicts
2011 TIMSS mathematics and science scores in eighth-grade for all U.S. states based on their NAEP performance. This chart shows the top-performing countries and states in eighth-grade math.
240
Tennessee
220
National Public
320
Massachusetts
Michigan
Michigan is One of Only Five States That Show Negative Improvement for Early Reading Since 2003
Average Scale Score Change, NAEP Grade 4 - Reading - All Students (2003-15)
Louisiana
Alabama
Florida
Kentucky
Rhode Island
Mississippi
Georgia
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Massachusetts
Nevada
California
Utah
Indiana
Hawaii
Tennessee
Arizona
Wyoming
Nebraska
Illinois
Virginia
National Public
Washington
North Carolina
Arkansas
New Jersey
Maryland
New Hampshire
New Mexico
Vermont
Idaho
South Carolina
Texas
Ohio
North Dakota
Oregon
Wisconsin
Montana
Alaska
Kansas
Minnesota
Connecticut
Missouri
New York
Colorado
Iowa
Maine
Delaware
South Dakota
Michigan
West Virginia
-4
National Public
Michigan
-2
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 208; Proficient Scale Score = 238), 2003-15
10
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
10
12
Higher-Incom
14
The numbers are particularly devastating for lowincome and minority students.
Only 9 percent of Michigan African American students
are proficient in fourth-grade reading compared with
32 percent of white students, according to the new
national assessment results. And we see an almost 30
percentage point gap in proficiency between lowincome and higher-income Michigan students in eighthgrade math.
But our low-income students and students of color
dont just perform below our higher-income or white
students: they often perform below low-income
students and students of color in other states, falling
near or at the bottom in some cases.
Michigans African American students for decades
horribly under-served and under-supported by the
public education system are either at or near the
very bottom in reading and math compared with their
peers across the country. And while the relative rank
of Michigans Latino students compared to their peers
nationwide has been a brighter spot at times over the
years, the state still faces steep achievement gaps
240
11
Tennessee
235
230
10
Massachusetts
225
320
And lets be clear: those who think
that Michigans
unacceptable educational performance
is somehow
310
due to our large numbers of poor and African American
300
students need only look elsewhere around the country,
290
where other states are making enormous
progress and
learning gains for their most vulnerable
children.
280
270
220
National Public
Michigan
10
Louisiana
Alabama
Florida
Kentucky
12
Highe
Massachusetts
Michigan
11
an ncome
nts
300
310
290
280
270
260
250
240
230
Low-Income
Massachusetts
Higher-Income
Michigan
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 262; Proficient
Scale Score = 299), 2015
12
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
70%
60%
55%
50%
43%
40%
41%
All Students,
27%
30%
22%
20%
10%
0%
African American
Low-Income
Latino
White
13
IV.
WHATS BEEN
ACCOMPLISHED
Fortunately, our state already has a start on some
important building blocks:
14
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
An accountability system
with clear improvement
goals for every school and
district, full transparency
about progress toward
those goals, and action
wherever schools are
struggling.
16
Next Steps:
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
17
Next Steps:
18
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
Next Steps:
19
Next Steps:
20
Next Steps:
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
Next Steps
21
Next Steps
22
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
23
VI.
V.
MICHIGAN ACHIEVES
PROGRESS INDICATORS
To know whether were on track with our goals of becoming a top ten state, The
Education Trust-Midwest began tracking Michigans performance and progress of our P-16
system last year, in both academic measures and measures of learning conditions that
research shows are essential for equitable access to opportunities to learn. In the coming
pages we share our progress toward becoming a top ten education state by 2030, as part
of our Michigan Achieves initiative.
We use the best available state and national data to show where we are and where were
headed by 2030 if we continue down our current path.
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
Ladder of Opportunity
COLLEGE
ATTAINMENT
COLLEGE
AND POSTSECONDARY
ENROLLMENT
COLLEGE
READINESS
8TH-GRADE
MATH
4TH-GRADE
READING
KINDERGARTEN
READINESS
u
t
s
o
c
t
u
o
t
n
e
d
s
e
m
Opportunities to learn
TEACHER
EFFECTIVENESS
SCHOOL FUNDING
EQUITY
TEACHER SALARY
EQUITY
ACCESS TO
RIGOROUS
COURSES
TEACHER AND
STUDENT
ATTENDANCE
COLLEGE
AFFORDABILITY
25
National Public
Michigan
West Virginia
Louisiana
Arizona
Hawaii
Nevada
Mississippi
Alaska
California
New Mexico
41ST
48
TH
WHAT IT IS:
A telling indicator of whether Michigans students
are being prepared for success is how well our
young students read. The National Assessment
15
13
20
38
2003
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Vermont
New Jersey
Virginia
Connecticut
Wyoming
Kentucky
Indiana
Florida
26 National Public
33
Michigan
36
West Virginia
39
Louisiana
Arizona
Hawaii
Nevada
2005
2007
Mississippi
Alaska
African American
California
New Mexico
National
Public
35
38
Michigan
44
45
42
45
41
2009
2011
2013
2015
49
White
190 195 200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score =
208; Proficient Scale Score = 238), 2015
Michigan Last for African American Students in Early Literacy Compared to Nation
Average Scale Score, NAEP Grade 4 Reading African American Students (2015)
230
210
National
Public
230
200
220
190
210
180
200
170
190
160
180
Michigan
Mas
sach
use
tts
Ariz
Was ona
hing
ton
Rho
de I
slan
Colo d
rado
Nor
th C
arol
ina
New
Jers
ey
Flor
ida
Ken
tuck
y
Geo
rgia
In
Wes diana
t Vir
gini
Dela a
war
e
Alas
ka
Neb
ras
Nor
th D ka
ako
ta
Virg
inia
Mar
ylan
New d
York
Nati
ona
l Pu
b
Okla lic
h
Con oma
nec
ticu
t
Texa
s
Pen
nsy
lvan
ia
Ohio
Alab
ama
Lou
isian
Mis a
Mas
sou
sach
ri
use
A
rkan
tts
sas
Mis
Ariz
siss
Was ona
ippi
hing
ton
Illin
Rho
o
de I
slan South D is
ako
Colo d
ta
rado
Nor
Nev
Sou
th C
ada
th C
arol
ina
arol
New
ina
Jers
Ten
ey
nes
see
Flor
ida
Kan
Ken
sas
tuck
Cali
y
forn
Geo
ia
rgia
Mai
ne
Indi
an
Wes
Iow
t Vir a
a
Min
gini
nes
Dela a
ota
Wis
war
con
e
s
Alas
Mic in
ka
higa
Neb
n
ras
Nor
th D ka
ako
ta
Virg
inia
Mar
ylan
New d
York
Nati
ona
l Pu
220
170
160
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 208; Proficient Scale Score = 238), 2015
26
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
WHAT IT IS:
current rank:
38TH
Massachusetts
2030 projected
Tennessee rank:
Massachusetts
10
Tennessee
10
0
5
43RD
WHY IT MATTERS:
National Public
10
13
In addition to basic reading skills, math 15
skills are
essential for all students. Basic algebra is the
20
25
26
30
38
Michigan
33
National 36
Public
39
45 with
study conducted by ACT found that along
50vocational
reading skills, math skills are essential for
0
6jobs including
8
10
upholsterer.
2003
12
those
as a plumber, electrician or an
2005
2007
44
45
42
45
41
2009
2011
2013
2015
49
2
White
Michigan
African American
355
38
10
12
Michigan Among the Bottom Five States in the Nation for Low-Income Students in Eighth-Grade Math
Average Scale Score, NAEP Grade 8 Math Low-Income Students (2015)
290
270
National
Public
290
260
280
250
270
240
260
230
250
220
240
Michigan
sach
us
Vermetts
o
Mon nt
New
t
Ham ana
p
Min shire
nes
o
Indi ta
ana
Te
Wyo xas
min
Ariz g
ona
Was Maine
hing
ton
Idah
Kan o
sa
Ore s
g
Nor
th D on
a
New kota
York
Sou
U
th D tah
ak
Neb ota
rask
a
New Iowa
Jers
ey
Oh
Virg io
inia
Haw
aii
Il
Wis linois
con
sin
C
Nor olorado
th C
Nati arolin
ona
l Pu a
Ken blic
tuck
y
G
Pen eorgia
nsy
lva
Del nia
Rho aware
Mas
de I
sach
sla
us
Mis nd
Vermetts
sou
r
ont
Alas i
Mon
New
T
tana
enn ka
Ham
es
p
Arka see
Min shire
nsa
nes
o
Flor s
id
Indi ta
O
ana
klah a
oma
Texa
N
Wyo s We evad
a
st V
min
Ariz g New irginia
ona
Mex
ic
Was Maine S Mary o
outh
land
hing
ton
Caro
Cali lina
Ida
for
Kan ho
Mic nia
sa
Ore s M higan
g
is
Nor
th D on C sissipp
onn
a
i
ec
New kota
Lou ticut
York
isian
Sou
U
Alab a
th D tah
ama
ako
t
Neb a
rask
a
New Iowa
Jers
ey
Ohio
Virg
inia
Haw
280
Mas
230
220
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Basic Scale Score = 262; Proficient Scale Score = 299), 2015
i. ACT, Inc., Ready for College and Ready for Work: Same or Different, (Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc., 2006). http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/ReadinessBrief.pdf
27
KINDERGARTEN READINESS
Michigan has recently made the smart
COLLEGE READINESS
WHAT IT IS:
WHY IT MATTERS:
current rate:
27%
college readiness
toward a degree.
enrolled in
remedial courses
100th
percentile
53 percentile points
53%
enrolled in
remedial courses
37th percentile
Remediationpercentile
Rates Continue
to Rise for Michigan African American Students
Age 8
0th
Age 11
Michigan African American College Remediation Rates (Community Colleges & Four-Year Universities)
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
320
310
28
300
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
2014
current rank:
25
TH
ssachusetts
WHAT IT IS:
WHY IT MATTERS:
35
TH
College-Going Rates of High School Graduates - Directly from High School All Students
70%
tional Public
65%
Michigan
Massachusetts
60%
Nation
55%
50%
Tennessee
45%
Michigan
70%
40%
10
2000
12
2002
2004
2006
65%
2008
2010
National Public
assachusetts
Colorado
Maryland
Connecticut
New Jersey
Virginia
w Hampshire
Vermont
New York
Minnesota
Washington
Illinois
California
Kansas
Utah
Hawaii
Oregon
Delaware
Rhode Island
Nation
Nebraska
Maine
Montana
Georgia
Pennsylvania
North Carolina
Wisconsin
Alaska
South Dakota
Texas
Iowa
Arizona
Missouri
Michigan
North Dakota
Florida
Ohio
Wyoming
New Mexico
outh Carolina
Tennessee
Idaho
Indiana
Oklahoma
Alabama
Nevada
Louisiana
Kentucky
Arkansas
Mississippi
West Virginia
COLLEGE ATTAINMENT
60%
WHY IT MATTERS:
50%
WHAT IT IS:
This indicator represents the percent of
Michigan ranks 32nd of 47 states in the percentage of adults 25 or older who have
Michigan
45%
40%
or Hispanic Michiganders have completed a bachelors
degree.
bachelors degree.
32ND
2030 projected rank:
32ND
10%
10
2000
12
2002
2004
2006
2008
Percent of People 25 Years and Older with a Bachelors Degree or Greater in 2014
current rank:
5%
college
Attainmentii
0%
55%
15%
Massachusetts
Colorado
Maryland
Connecticut
New Jersey
Virginia
New Hampshire
Vermont
New York
Minnesota
Washington
Illinois
California
Kansas
Utah
Hawaii
Oregon
Delaware
Rhode Island
Nation
Nebraska
Maine
Montana
Georgia
Pennsylvania
North Carolina
Wisconsin
Alaska
South Dakota
20%
Texas25%
Iowa
Arizona
Missouri
Michigan
North Dakota
Florida
Ohio
Wyoming
New Mexico
South Carolina
Tennessee
Idaho
Indiana
Oklahoma
Alabama
Nevada
Louisiana
Kentucky
Arkansas
Mississippi
West Virginia
0%
i. Michigans 2030 projected rank is 32nd of 49
Nation,
30%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Michigan,
27%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Source: United States Census American Community Survey 1 Year Estimates, 2014
30%
35%
40%
45%
29
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
Without a doubt, a childs academic learning is dependent
Student Performance
100th
percentile
90th percentile
Studen
50th
percentile
0th
percentile
t with h
igh-per
forming
te
acher*
53 percentile points
37th percentile
teacher**
25%
Age 8
Age 11
20%
Source: Sanders and Rivers (1996): Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Student Achievement
Note: *Among the top 20% of teachers; **Among the bottom 20% of teachers
15%
Analysis of test data from Tennessee showed that teacher quality effected student performance more than any other variable; on average, two students with average
performance (50th percentile) would diverge by more than 50 percentile points over a three year period depending on the teacher they were assigned.
10%
Wyo
mi
Lou ng
isia
na
Ten Utah
n
e
s
New
se
Mex e
ic
Geo o
rgia
Alas
Nor
ka
th C
aro
Ark lina
ans
a
Haw s
Mar aii
ylan
Fl d
O orida
Sou klahom
th D
a
ako
ta
Id
Mis aho
siss
ipp
i
Nor Kansa
th D
s
a
Neb kota
rask
a
Ariz
ona
Tex
as
Io
Col wa
o
r
ado
Con
Mas nectic
sach ut
use
Mo tts
nta
Mis na
so
Ken uri
Was tucky
Wes hingto
t Vir n
gi
New nia
Y
Wis ork
con
Virg sin
inia
Nat
Cali ion
f
Min ornia
nes
ota
Sou Nevad
a
th C
aro
li
Alab na
am
Ind a
New iana
J
e
Rho
r
de I sey
sla
Ver nd
mo
nt
Or
New
Ham egon
psh
Del ire
awa
r
Illin e
Mic ois
hig
an
Ohi
o
Pen Maine
nsy
lvan
ia
0%
Access to Rigorous
Coursework
current rank:
29TH
2010
WHAT IT IS:
WHY IT MATTERS:
One of the best ways to ensure more students are college- and
just taking these classes even if a student does not earn credit in
2011
2012
2014
AP Exam Participation
600
AP Exams per 1000 11th and 12th Graders
30TH
2013
500
Michigan
400
Nation
300
200
100
0
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
i. Saul Geiser and Veronica Santelices, The Role of Advanced Placement and Honors Courses in College Admissions, In Expanding Opportunity in Higher Education: Leveraging Promise, edited by Gary Orfield and Catherine L.
Horn, 75-113. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2006.
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
Ore
gon
rth
Da
New kota
York
U
th D tah
ak
Neb ota
rask
a
Iow
a
ew
Jers
ey
Oh
Virg io
inia
Haw
aii
Il
Wis linois
con
Colo sin
ra
h Ca do
rolin
a
nal
Pu
Ken blic
tuck
Ge y
nns orgia
ylva
Dela nia
w
ode are
Isla
Mis nd
sou
r
Alas i
k
Ten
nes a
Arka see
nsa
Flor s
Okla ida
hom
Nev a
st V ada
irgin
ia
ew
Mex
Mar ico
y
h Ca land
ro
Cali lina
for
Mic nia
hig
issis an
si
nne ppi
c
Lou ticut
isia
Alab na
ama
30
$40,000
$30,000
$20,000
National Public
$10,000
42
0-20%
ND
41-60%
61-80%
81-100%
families receive about 6 percent less in state and local funding per
equitably distributed.
student than more affluent schools. This lack of equity can lead to
10
12
NOT YET
AVAILABLE
21-40%
Michigan is one of only six states in the analysis that provides substantially less funding to its
highest poverty districts than to its lowest poverty districts
Funding Gaps Between the Highest and Lowest Poverty Districts, By State
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
-5%
-10%
-15%
-20%
-25%
Michigan
OH
MN
SD
DE
TN
IN
KY
CA
MA
LA
NJ
GA
OK
UT
WI
OR
WV
MS
WA
CT
AR
FL
NM
ND
VT
SC
KS
CO
VA
AZ
AL
NH
NE
ME
WY
RI
ID
MO
MT
IA
NC
MI
MD
TX
PA
NY
IL
current rank:
$-WHY IT MATTERS:
WHAT IT IS:
Reading this figure: In Ohio, the highest poverty districts receive 22 percent more in state and local funds per student than the lowest poverty
districts (not adjusted for additional needs of low-income students). In states shaded in teal, the highest poverty districts receive at least 5
percent more in state and local funds per student than the lowest poverty districts; in states shaded in red, they receive at least 5 percent less.
Black shading indicates similar levels of funding for the highest and lowest poverty districts.
Source: The Education Trust, Funding Gaps Report, 2015
Note: Hawaii was excluded from the within-state analysis because it is one district. Alaska and Nevada are also excluded because their student populations are
heavily concentrated in certain districts and could not be broken into quartiles. Because so many of New Yorks students are concentrated in New York City, the
analysis sorted that state into two halves, as opposed to four quartiles. Since we last reported on this metric, new data has not yet become available.
$11,777
WHAT IT IS:
This measure represents the gap in
average teacher salaries between Michigan
high-income and low-income districts.
WHY
IT MATTERS:
Massachusetts
Teachers in Michigans wealthiest districts
$70,000
$60,000
NOT YET
AVAILABLE
andNational
retainPublic
highly effective teachers in the
schools that need them most, Michigan
$61,439
$60,521
$55,087
$50,000
$52,342
$49,661
$40,000
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
$-
0-20%
21-40%
41-60%
61-80%
81-100%
Michigan
Source: MDE Bulletin 1011, 2014-15, CEPI Free and Reduced Priced Lunch, 2014-15
10
12
31
TEACHER ATTENDANCE
Teacher
Attendance
current rank:
41
WHAT IT IS:
WHY IT MATTERS:
ST
60%
Nation,
36%
50%
Michigan,
46%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
30%
UT
SD
DE
FL
ND
TN
OK
MT
NV
IL
NJ
MS
CA
NE
ME
TX
SC
AZ
GA
MO
VT
MD
KS
PA
MA
Nation
WI
KY
NC
VA
CT
LA
IA
NH
AK
AL
OH
ID
WY
MN
NY
CO
IN
WA
WV
MI
NM
OR
AR
HI
RI
NOT YET
AVAILABLE
Source: Center for American Progress, Teacher Absence as a Leading Indicator of Student Achievement, 2012
Note: Since we last reported on this metric, new data has not yet become available.
25%
STUDENT ATTENDANCE
20%
15%
student attendance
WHY IT MATTERS:
Not only are Michigans teachers missing too much school, but our
percentage of eighth-graders
0%
absent
three or more times in
too many days of school, often against their will due to disproportionate
national assessment.
5%
ND
NY
ID
MT
MD
UT
VT
SD
ME
AK
WY
MA
NJ
CO
CT
NV
WA
LA
TX
KY
KS
NM
AZ
MN
VA
OR
NH
MS
IL
CA
OK
IA
GA
NC
SC
PA
RI
AL
AR
DE
OH
NE
TN
WV
IN
MO
MI
FL
WI
current rank:
WHAT IT IS:
10%
TH
had been absent from school three or more days in the last month.
600
Moreover, Detroit leads the nation for absences among urban districts,
with 37 percent of students absent three or more days in the last
month.
Michigan Current Path
500
200
40%
100
30%
0
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
National
Public,
20%
2009
2010
2011
2012
10%
0%
Ma
Source: NAEP Data Explorer, NCES (Reported for 8th Grade Math), 2015
i. In 2015 Michigan ranked 8th of 13 (tied with five other states). The projected 2030 rank for Michigan is 20th of 33 (tied with two others).
32
2013
Michigan,
22%
2014
2015
20%
ssa
chu
TH
set
Illin ts
Cal ois
ifor
n
Ind ia
New iana
Con Jersey
nec
t
Geo icut
rgia
Ken Iowa
t
Min ucky
nes
ot
M
New
iss a
Ham ouri
psh
Ten
i
nes re
see
Tex
Virg as
Del inia
aw
are
Id
Neb aho
No
r
a
rth
s
Car ka
olin
a
Nat
ion Ohio
al P
ubl
Kan ic
sas
M
Pen
a
nsy ine
l
v
Sou
th D ania
ak
Ver ota
m
Wis ont
co
Ala nsin
bam
a
Haw
aii
Ma
r
Mis yland
siss
ip
Nev pi
Rho
ada
de
Is
Ark land
an
Mic sas
hig
New an
Ok York
Sou lahom
th C
a
We aroli
st V na
irgi
n
Ariz ia
ona
Flo
r
Lou ida
isia
O na
Wa regon
shi
ngt
No
on
rth
Dak
Col ota
ora
do
M
New ontan
Me a
x
Wy ico
om
ing
20
400 than 20% of Michigan Eighth-Grade Students were Absent Three or Nation
More
More
Times
in
Last
Month
in
2015
300
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
OUT-OF-SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS
Out-of-School
Suspensions
current rank:
WHAT IT IS:
WHY IT MATTERS:
rates nationally.
40TH
Michigan Has Third Highest Out-of-School Suspension Rate Nationally for African
American Students at 21%
Michigan,
21%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
ND
NY
ID
MT
MD
UT
VT
SD
ME
AK
WY
MA
NJ
CO
CT
NV
WA
LA
TX
KY
KS
NM
AZ
MN
VA
OR
NH
MS
IL
CA
OK
IA
GA
NC
SC
PA
RI
AL
AR
DE
OH
NE
TN
WV
IN
MO
MI
FL
WI
NOT YET
AVAILABLE
30%
COLLEGE AFFORDABILITY
College Affordability
current rank:
42
ND
WHAT IT IS:
WHY IT MATTERS:
the
30%net cost as a percent of median
family income.
40%
20%
10%
0%
Michigan,
22%
25%
Nation,
17%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Wyo
mi
Lou ng
isia
na
Ten Utah
n
e
s
New
se
Mex e
ic
Geo o
rgia
Alas
Nor
ka
th C
aro
Ark lina
ans
a
Haw s
Mar aii
ylan
Fl d
O orida
Sou klahom
th D
a
ako
ta
Id
Mis aho
siss
ipp
i
Nor Kansa
th D
s
a
Neb kota
rask
a
Ariz
ona
Tex
as
Io
Col wa
o
rad
Con
o
Mas nectic
sach ut
use
Mo tts
nta
Mis na
so
Ken uri
Was tucky
Wes hingto
t Vir n
gi
New nia
Y
Wis ork
con
Virg sin
inia
Nat
Cali ion
f
Min ornia
nes
ota
Sou Nevad
a
th C
aro
li
Alab na
am
Ind a
New iana
J
e
Rho
r
de I sey
sla
Ver nd
mo
nt
Or
New
Ham egon
psh
Del ire
awa
r
Illin e
Mic ois
hig
an
Ohi
o
Pen Maine
nsy
lvan
ia
NOT YET
AVAILABLE
33
VI. SOURCES
i.
House Fiscal Agency, Economic and Revenue Report Update, (Lansing, MI:
House Fiscal Agency, 2015). http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/PDF/Revenue_
Forecast/Economic_Revenue_Review-Sep2015.pdf
xvi.
ii.
xvii.
iii.
xviii.
Christina Theokas, Shut Out of the Military: Todays High School Education
Doesnt Mean Youre Ready for Todays Army, (Washington, D.C.: The
Education Trust, 2010). https://edtrust.org/resource/shut-out-of-the-militarytodays-high-school-education-doesnt-mean-youre-ready-for-todays-army/
xix.
xx.
xxi.
xxii.
xxiii.
Jason Breslow, By the Numbers: Dropping Out of High School, (Boston, MA:
Frontline, 2012). http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/by-the-numbersdropping-out-of-high-school/
xxiv.
Nancy Doorey and Morgan Polikoff, Evaluating the Content and Quality
of Next Generation Assessments, (Washington, D.C.: Thomas B. Fordham
Institute, 2016). http://edexcellence.net/publications/evaluating-the-contentand-quality-of-next-generation-assessments
xxv.
xxvi.
The passage of the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in December
2015 establishes a new framework for school and district accountability
nationwide replacing No Child Left Behind. For more information on ESSA,
please visit: https://edtrust.org/issue/the-every-student-succeeds-act-of-2015/
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
FY 2015-16 School Aid Summary Conference Report House Bill 4089 (H-2)
CR-1. http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/PDF/Summaries/15h4089h2cr1_School_
Aid_Conference_Report_Summary.pdf
FY 2016-17 School Aid Summary: As Passed by the House Article I,
House Bill 5291 (H-1) as Amended. http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/PDF/
Summaries/16h5291h1_School_Aid_Summary_Article_I_house_passed.pdf
viii.
MCL 380.1249
ix.
Lily French and Peter S. Fisher, Education Pays in Iowa: The States Return on
Investment in Workforce Education, (Iowa City, IA: The Iowa Policy Project,
2009). http://www.iowapolicyproject.org/2009docs/090528-ROI-educ.pdf
x.
Eric A. Hanushek, Jens Ruhose, and Ludger Woessmann, Economic Gains for
U.S. States from Educational Reform, (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of
Economic Research, 2015). http://www.nber.org/papers/w21770
xi.
xii.
The Education Trusts analysis looks at state and local revenues to better
understand how states allocate their resources. The differences in funding
between Michigans highest and lowest poverty districts reveal that on
average, Michigan schools serving the highest rates of students from lowincome families receive about 6 percent less in state and local funding than
more affluent schools.
xiii.
xiv.
In our 2015 report we tracked Michigans progress compared to topperforming states when possible in key academic and opportunity indicators.
To determine Michigans projected performance if we stay on our current
path we calculated the improvement rate for each prior year of data. We
then averaged each of those improvement rates to establish an average
improvement rate for each state, for each metric. We then applied that
average improvement rate to each future year we are expected to have new
data to estimate our performance in 2030.
xxx.
Saul Geiser and Veronica Santelices, The Role of Advanced Placement and
Honors Courses in College Admissions, In Expanding Opportunity in Higher
Education: Leveraging Promise, edited by Gary Orfield and Catherine L. Horn,
75-113. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2006.
xxxi.
xv.
34
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System
VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many thanks to our school and philanthropic partners
who have supported our work and the Michigan
Achieves initiative including the Kresge Foundation,
the Skillman Foundation and the W.K. Kellogg
Foundation, and our many partners and supporters.
35
Michigans Talent Crisis: The Economic Case For Rebuilding Michigans Broken Public Education System