![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Michigan is average on many measures--household income, student performance on national assessments (e.g., NAEP), and spending on education. These averages mask many disparities in the state. Minority students are concentrated in the state's largest cities. Their academic performance falls well below the national average for all students, and below the average for students of their own racial/ethnic group. Michigan passed a new school finance law in 1993 designed to moderate, although not close, large spending differences between wealthy suburban and poor rural and urban school districts.
The call for education reform in Michigan has been driven by its steady loss of high- paying manufacturing jobs, especially in the automotive industry. Financial support for schools is linked to the economic cycles--remaining stagnant or declining in times of recession, and growing in times of economic recovery. The new funding system, which shifts most responsibility for revenue-raising to the state level, will be tied even more closely to changes in state income.
The relatively limited capacity of Michigan's Department of Education (MDE) has led that agency historically to turn to the state's professional education community for assistance in the design and implementation of state policy. This has enabled Michigan to keep its state standards current with the new directions in the teaching of reading, mathematics and science. Michigan's Essential Goals and Objectives in mathematics and reading were first developed in the 1970s as a set of minimum performance objectives for the state's assessment program, the Michigan Education Assessment Program (MEAP). The Essential Goals and Objectives have been updated periodically to reflect national changes in the teaching of reading and mathematics. The current reading objectives, adopted in 1986, were developed jointly with the Michigan Reading Association (MRA). The state objectives reflect the new vision of reading that was emerging from the professional community at that time, one that recognizes comprehension as the ultimate goal of reading and emphasizes the interactive, constructivist and dynamic nature of the reading process. The Essential Goals and Objectives in mathematics were revised in 1988, under contract with the Michigan Council of Teachers of Mathematics (MCTM). Several of the authors of these objectives were also involved at the time in the development of the NCTM standards at the national level, and the Michigan standards incorporate the NCTM standards. The reading and mathematics standards are being reviewed and revised, with the involvement of MRA and MCTM, as the state develops curriculum frameworks and a new high school proficiency test.
While the education profession in Michigan plays a major role in defining the content of the state's standards and assessments, those outside the profession determine which policies (e.g., curriculum standards, assessment and/or accountability mechanisms) should drive education reform and in what direction. For two decades, Michigan used a low stakes assessment, based on the Essential Goals and Objectives, to communicate content standards and to encourage changes in local curriculum. This approach of "friendly persuasion" fit the state's strong tradition of local control, but did not produce the type of work force Michigan businesses needed. Responding to calls from the business community and the governor for a better-educated work force and greater accountability in education, the legislature enacted increasingly prescriptive laws, first calling for voluntary enactment of a state model core curriculum (PA 25 of 1990) and public reporting of test scores, and then requiring districts to develop a core curriculum in mathematics, science, social studies and communication arts by 1997 (PA 335 of 1993). The legislature also enacted a high stakes high school graduation test (1991).
The MDE has worked hard to link these different legislative initiatives together into a coherent reform. The Essential Goals and Objectives were the basis of the state model core curriculum in 1990, and the State Model Core Curriculum provided a foundation for the state's frameworks in mathematics and language arts. The frameworks, which were being developed at the time that PA 335 was passed, are viewed as an opportunity to update the state's mathematics and language arts standards. The state will use the standards developed under the state curriculum frameworks projects as the state core curriculum, and is in the process of adopting the standards. The relationship between these new standards and the state's assessment program, particularly the new high school proficiency tests, is less clear.
As it experiences downsizing in the face budget cuts initiated by a hostile governor, the Department has developed a strategy of using (and enhancing) a public and professional infrastructure to provide technical assistance for these education reforms. As discussed below, this infrastructure includes intermediate education units, like the state's Intermediate School Districts (ISDs) and regional math/science centers, professional organizations, like the MRA and MCTM, and privately-supported organizations, like the Michigan Partnership for a New Education.
The Core Curriculum Outcomes were based in large part on the more detailed Essential Goals and Objectives described above. The Core Curriculum Outcomes for Language Arts currently define separate outcomes for reading, writing, listening, speaking and literature for three different clusters of grade levels. The language arts frameworks will integrate all the components of language arts into one English Language Arts curriculum framework written around ten content standards.3 The Essential Goals and Objectives and Core Curriculum Outcomes in Mathematics are written to a framework of eight content standards and six process strands that mirror the NCTM standards. The mathematics frameworks project is designed to update the state's mathematics standards and provide a set of high school standards (9-12) which had been missing from the earlier documents. The draft framework contains 15 standards, grouped by six strands. Both the language arts and the mathematics frameworks recommend a set of benchmarks that demonstrate each content standard for three (mathematics) or four (language arts) non-grade specific levels.
Assessment. Michigan has had a state wide testing program in reading and mathematics, the MEAP, since 1970. The current MEAP mathematics assessment is consistent with, but not exactly aligned with, the NCTM standards. The current reading MEAP is based on the Essential Goals and Objectives adopted in 1986.
As of 1995-96 students will be required the pass the MEAP in reading, mathematics and science in order to receive a state endorsed diploma. In 1997 students will be required to pass a new tenth grade high school proficiency test to receive a state endorsed diploma. There is an assumption that the new proficiency test will replace the tenth grade MEAP. A number of issues remain unresolved about the proficiency tests, including the nature of the tests, insufficient development funding and fit with other state policies. There is also a new portfolio requirement evolving from 1991 legislation and then PA 335, which requires all school districts to start maintaining portfolios by 1994-95 for students in grades 8-12. The portfolios, which appear to be an expansion of the state's employability skills portfolio program, are to cover planning activities, academics, career preparation and personal recognition.
School Accreditation and Accountability. Michigan's main mechanisms for accountability are the annual report and accreditation provisions of PA 25 of 1990. The annual report requires local school boards to prepare and distribute annual education reports, which must include a status report on the school's improvement plan (SIP), student achievement data from tests chosen by the school, retention and dropout rates, descriptions of specialized schools, enrollment process, and data on parent participation in student-teacher conferences. Schools must also report on the status of their accreditation and their curriculum as it compares to the state's required curriculum.
The accreditation process encompasses specified areas of the school including purposes, staff, curriculum and facilities. As a result of the sheer volume of work entailed in the accreditation process, PA 335 called for a "summary" accreditation process, which will be designed by the MDE with input from public hearings and reviews by the SBE and the Senate and House committees responsible for education.
Teacher Certification. Michigan law currently requires all teachers to pass a basic skills and subject area test prior to certification. Teacher education students must pass the basic test prior to their student teaching, and the subject test prior to their certification. In addition to passing their assessments, the teacher education students must have an academic major and minor, and have the requisite course work for the subject area they are testing in. The teacher tests are consistent with the existing model core curriculums, but the teacher education program requirements, which are under the purview of a constitutionally independent higher education system, are currently not entirely consistent with the teacher certification tests.
Professional Development. The state plays a minimal role in teacher professional development. There are no specific state policies on professional development for reading or math, although PA 25 calls for school improvement plans to include plans for professional development. PA 335 made two major changes to the state role in professional development. First, funding was increased from less to $2 million to $10 million for fiscal year 1994-95. The funds will be allocated to schools and ISDs on a per pupil basis, and to the MDE to support state wide professional development initiatives. Schools must submit professional development plans in order to qualify for the funds and use of the funds must meet certain standards.
Intermediate Service Districts (ISDs). ISDs are county level agencies which provide special services to the districts within their boundaries. In addition to providing special and vocational education, and gifted and talented programs, the state's PA 25 charged them with providing technical assistance with school improvement, achievement, data, core curriculum and accreditation. Yet, these increased responsibilities have not been matched with sufficient state dollars. Because these entities are funded in part by their own tax levy, the capacity of the ISD to help districts is strongly related to the size of their tax base, and ISDs in more affluent areas are able to hire additional staff and provide more services. They do provide a structure, however, for districts to pool professional development dollars from sources like the Eisenhower program.
Mathematics and Science Centers. The Mathematics and Science Centers are regional units designed to provide accelerated learning experiences for secondary students and technical assistance for local school districts to improve their mathematics and science programs. Twenty Centers serve all but ten of the 88 counties in the state. The Centers are housed in local school districts or ISDs. There is considerable difference in the resources available to the centers (the size of the staff, scope of the program and quality of the facilities reflect the availability of private funds, such as Upjohn in Kalamazoo and Kellogg in Battle Creek, and local public funds) and the historical emphasis of the centers: accelerated programs versus professional development and technical assistance. A large increase in funding from the state legislature in 1994 should begin to equalize the level of services provided by the Centers. By law, the master plans of the Centers must support the reform vision of mathematics and science developed by the state's SSI program.
Professional Organizations. Professional organizations in Michigan have traditionally played a major role in the development, dissemination and training of teachers in reading and mathematics reform programs. The MRA and MCTM have been involved in curriculum, goals and objectives and assessment development. The Michigan Council of Teachers of English (MCTE) has also been involved in the development of the language arts frameworks project. The professional organizations also play an active role in disseminating information on the revised content objectives to their members and play a significant role in providing professional development to the state's mathematics and reading teachers.
Unions. The state's principal teacher's union, the Michigan Education Association (MEA), is also involved in providing professional development opportunities for their members. The MEA provides training in a broad range of areas including school improvement, special education and pre-service education. They also provide information about professional development and research in the areas of curriculum and teacher certification. The MEA has participated in the PA 25 training coalition aimed at helping members implement new requirements, training members of state curriculum development committees, and evaluating the core curriculum outcomes documents. The MEA provides site coaches for their professional development schools, called "pioneer schools"; these coaches help with strategy and intervention plans.
The Michigan Partnership for a New Education. The Partnership is a non-profit corporation established in 1990 as a collaboration among Michigan business, education and government. Housed at Michigan State University, it receives both state and private funding. The Partnership has four program units or components. The School and University Alliance focuses on the creation and maintenance of local innovation and preparation sites for educators, also know as professional development schools (PDSs). The second component of the Partnership is the Business and Community Alliance which develops locally-based coalitions to support local innovation in the schools. The third component is the collaborative Leadership Center which develops a critical mass of leaders in education reform. The fourth component is the Educational Extension Service (EES) which provides schools with practical, research based knowledge. One of the EES's major efforts is the Frameworks Project, which, by working through the ISDs, helps schools rethink their curriculum in light of the state's core curriculum outcomes; and improve their curriculum, teaching and learning. The project has three phases: to support local districts in developing an "overarching curriculum framework," to help them apply the revised frameworks to their own core curricula, and to implement the new frameworks.
[Vermont]