DC Parental Choice

Yesterday the Senate passed the $410 billion spending bill that included within it language that severely threatens the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program. Written by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, the bill funds the program for one year beyond its original scope but requires that future appropriations be contingent on Congressional reauthorization and approval of the DC city council. I watched a little CSPAN (for the first time in my life) yesterday and saw Durbin defend the move by claiming that he just wants to be sure the program works before dedicating more money to it. Now that the spending bill has passed with Durbin's language intact, the DC OSP will have to be reauthorized by Congress, which will draw more attention than ever to research on parental choice programs. Because parents who are able to choose schools for their kids often choose Catholic schools, the research surrounding urban Catholic schools will come under scrutiny in the coming weeks as well.

Watching Durbin and Senator Mike Ensign of Nevada debate the research prompted me to reread the study by Wolf et al. (2008) that evaluated the DC program after its first two years. My understanding is that the evaluation of the third year of the program is complete and will be released later this year, but in the meantime, this study is how we’ll need to assess the value of the program in terms of educational achievement.

Generally only one line of this study is paraphrased in mainstream news outlets:

“Overall, the primary analysis indicated there were no statistically significant general impacts of the Program on reading or math achievement after 2 years. That is, the ITT analysis indicates that the outcome test scores of the treatment group as a whole, on average, were not significantly different from those of the control group as a whole in the second year (table 3-2)” (p. 34).

This is followed a few pages later by the claim that “The offer of a scholarship, and therefore also the use of a scholarship, did not appear to have an impact on academic achievement in the second year for most of the subgroups of students examined (table 3-3)” (p. 36).

This raises an important question, because 26% of the kids offered scholarships did not use them. Can we really lump kids who were offered scholarships with the kids who used them?

Regardless, there are some findings in the study that haven’t been much reported in the mainstream news media:

· Lots of kids are learning. Three subgroups, which comprise 88% of the students in the study, demonstrated statistically significant achievement gains in reading (p. 37).

· Parents are satisfied. OSP parents are more highly satisfied with their children’s schools than parents whose children remained in DCPS schools (p. 45).

· Parents feel safer. Parents believe their children’s new schools are significantly less dangerous. (p. 41).

· OSP students enjoy improved school conditions. OSP students attend schools that are smaller, have smaller class sizes, and are better racially integrated than the schools (p. 58).

Also, the same group issued a report on family satisfaction in January 2009. There are two findings here that jumped out at me and are worth discussing:

· Parents are empowered. Parents report taking an active role in their children’s educational lives and they see the OSP as providing a means for their family to break the cycle of poverty (pg. 49).

· Low-income Latinos are particularly satisfied with the program. They believe their children are more motivated, more focused, and working harder than they did in their previous schools (p. 32).

Finally, I’ve been thinking about the financial side of this. This program seems like a bargain. Consider: The Census Bureau reports that, in 2005-06, the District of Columbia spent nearly $13,500 per student in DC Public Schools (pg. xii). The OSP is federally-funded and costs, on average, only $5,000 per child. So for every kid that leaves the DCPS and takes an OSP scholarship, the District seems to save money.

No wonder Michelle Rhee isn’t opposed to this program – absorbing 1,700 kids is going to cost her schools a ton of money. I just don’t understand why the mayor is staying so silent on this – especially when parents are applying to the program at a rate of 4 applicants for every scholarship.

What does Religious Education "look like" in Catholic Schools?

In the last post, I suggested that the experiences of preparing for and celebrating the Sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance, and Confirmation as a student in a Catholic School might somehow prepare students to understand and participate in the Sacraments more deeply as adults. I did not provide a theoretical framework to support the idea, although one framework that might be useful in describing part of the effect of experiencing the Sacraments might be social capital, as described in relationship to Catholic Schools by Fr. Andrew Greeley in a presentation he made in 1997 called Catholic School Research at the Crossroads. That is, the experience of the Sacraments might help to solidify students' identities as Catholic and their participation in the Catholic community. From the perspective of faith, experiencing the Sacraments might help students to develop a sort of "spiritual capital" - a shared faith experience - that benefits them both socially and spiritually and that they continue to seek throughout their lives.

The Role of Curriculum and Textbooks
Of course, it is also probable that students' experiences of the Sacraments - and of their faith more broadly - depend at least in part on the quality of the catechesis they experience. Like any other academic subject, teaching the Catholic Religion occupies a space in the class sequence of every day in the lives of K-12 Catholic School students. Also like other subjects, what students learn and how it affects their lives depends in large part on the knowledge of the teacher and the skill of the teacher in organizing instruction around the religion curriculum. In many (most?) cases, the primary source for organizing instruction is the religion textbook.

Based solely on personal experience, I found religion textbooks to be dull as both a student and a teacher. The textbook series that I used as a teacher rarely afforded the opportunity to do anything beyond reading the text and answering questions. There were no additional activities suggested; no suggestions for providing opportunities for students to live their faith; no instructions to the teacher about the Church teaching on the topics in the textbook or how to talk to kids about them. Textbooks in other subjects can - and do - provide teachers with all of those kinds of resources to enrich the classroom environment.

I know of no current research on Catholic religion textbooks outside of textbook evaluation studies. One such study was conducted by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. Their study provides a useful guide to evaluating whether a textbook series is aligned with the Catechism and a list of textbook series that have been found to be so aligned. This is definitely a good first step. However, there is an important difference between the content of a textbook and the means through which the content is experienced by students.

Therefore, an interesting line of research for Catholic Schools researchers might be to investigate what religious education "looks like" in a Catholic School using one of the textbook series that conform to the teaching of the Catechism. Do the textbook series allow opportunities for students to experience their faith? Do they encourage reflection about the faith and action? Or do they support knowing about the faith but not knowing it personally?

Of course, I base my hunches on my own experiences in the classroom. I'd love to hear the experiences that others have had using religion textbook series, and whether or not these curriculum materials (i.e., textbooks) encourage an active faith, and not just rote learning of facts and stories through reading.

Do Catholic Schools Enhance the Experience of the Sacraments?

A recent article published by the Catholic News Service that summarized the Bishops' survey on US Catholics' practices and views on marriage starts with these interesting findings from the survey:

"Although nearly three-quarters of American Catholics say they are somewhat or very familiar with Church teachings on marriage, many mistakenly believe that a non-Catholic spouse must promise to raise the couple's children as Catholic and that Church teaching accepts divorce in cases of marital infidelity."

I might have to count myself among those who believe(d) the first statement.

The study found that Catholics aged 18-25 and 65 and over were more likely to agree with Church teachings than Catholics aged 26-46 and 47-64. It also found, perhaps not surprisingly, that those who attended Mass regularly were six times more likely to report that their marriage has been very informed by Church teachings. Although the data were disaggregated by age, they do not appear to have been disaggregated by whether or not those surveyed attended Catholic school.

A Catholic school education might have an important influence on the study's two main investigations of interest: 1) Catholics' knowledge of Church teaching about marriage, and 2) Catholics' agreement with the Church teaching about marriage. It might also have an influence more broadly on Catholics' understanding of and agreement with Church teaching on a central part of their faith: the Sacraments.

Catholic schools provide first-hand experience of the Sacraments. Through a typical K-8 religious education sequence, most students in Catholic schools will recieve the Sacraments of Eucharast and Pennance for the first time, and they will recieve the Sacrament of Confirmation. Their peers in public schools who attend CCD will also receive the Sacraments. However, having prepared four classes for Confirmation, I can personally attest to the time it takes to prepare young adolescent students for the seriousness of the Sacrament. Religion was taught every day at the school where I taught, and Confirmation preparation comprised most of the teaching in Religion for at least half the year during which the students were preparing for the Sacrament. It is hard to believe that one or two hours of instruction, once a week, as in the case of students in the CCD program, provides the same kind of preparation. In addtion to the preparation for Sacraments, students in Catholic schools will also experience the Sacrament of Pennance at least twice a year, and Eucharist at least once a month.

The nature of students' experience with the Sacraments probably has much to do with how they impact the students' future experience of Sacraments - and this depends upon the culture of the school, the quality of the teaching, and the curriculum used. It is not hard to imagine the two extremes. On the one hand, perhaps the easiest way to teach Religion is as a series of "rules" to memorize (e.g., the Ten Commandments; the Beatitudes; the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy). On the other, perhaps a more comfortable approach is the "Jesus loves us all, and we should all love each other according to His example" attitude. To my knowledge, there isn't much data on what Catholic Religion curriculum and instruction "looks like" (although I would be happy to stand corrected if such data exist). Without having any data beyond the anecdotes of past and current Catholic school teachers, I would hazard the guess that most Catholic Religious Education programs align with one of those approaches.

I wonder if students' future experiences of the Sacraments is enhanced (or hindered) by either - or both - of these approaches? The Sacraments, and Catholicism more broadly, are complex interactions with God along our faith journey. It seems like a disservice to reduce them to a list of rules or oversimplify them with a well-meaning message of love. Perhaps a more ideal religious education curriculum lies somewhere in the middle, in the description and justification of the "rules" and other beliefs by understanding them as manifestations of God's love. Or perhaps that's a bit too much for a K-8 curriculum. Perhaps the "extreme" versions of religious education I've described above prepare people for a deeper integration of all the parts of their faith when they continue their education in high school or college, or through Mass or youth groups, or in conversation with peers or adult role models.

In any case, the issue of whether or not Catholic education influences experiences of the Sacraments, including knowledge of and agreement with church teaching about them, seems to be a fruitful one for research. If it is, indeed, the responsibility of the entire Catholic community to educate our youth in the faith, then it behooves us to know whether or not what we are doing is making a difference to the faith lives of students as they become adults. If so, then we might further narrow the question to explore what kinds of religious education experiences work, when they work, and for whom they work. If not, we might begin to explore ways to improve school-based religious education to prepare students for continuing their own faith journey outside of their time in Catholic schools.

Long Term Impact of Catholic Schools

Having attended Catholic school from grades K-12, I received instruction in Religion as a graded class subject for my entire pre-college academic life. I also attended Mass with my friends, teachers, and the other students every First Friday (K-8), practiced for and attended 9 May Crownings, and planned a religious peace service during the 1st Iraq War for my whole high school.

In my "day job" as a doctoral candidate in curriculum & instruction, I spend a lot of time thinking about how different kinds of experiences prepare students to learn in the future. For example, actually being at the field site of a river ecosystem collecting data on dissolved oxygen or species penetration as part of a science field trip might prepare kids to learn more about ecosystem balance and interdependence when they encounter it in the confines of school. I've lately been wondering if the same might be said of Catholic education.

During my formal schooling, I actually attended Mass with my friends. I didn't always understand it, particularly when I was younger, but I was in the space, with friends and teachers/mentors, hearing and saying the prayers, smelling the incense, and processing with my friends to receive the Eucharist. I had the opportunity in school to read the Bible and learn the teachings of the Church. More importantly, I think, I had the opportunity to ask questions of my teachers (and bring questions home to my parents) that helped me to understand why Catholics believe what we do, and not just what we believe. Those questions - and the process of seeking their answers - helped me not only to find answers appropriate to me at the time, but also to be mentored into the Catholic community and to learn how to learn about and experience my faith in the future.

Although I am only one "data point", I can't help but think that my experiences in K-12 Catholic education provided me with experience with which to learn more about - and live as an adult - my Catholic faith. When a person who attended 12 years of Catholic school attends mass on Sunday, does he or she listen with different ears than a person who did not? I think so. Although it would be hard (but not impossible) to capture, the mentoring, messages, and values with which a person with a Catholic education is raised seem to set that person up with a good foundation upon which to build a mature, adult, Catholic faith.

But how would we translate that belief (or intuition) into research to advance Catholic education. For starters, I wonder if it would be worthwhile to explore the educational backgrounds of current leaders in the Catholic church - those who teach, those who work for social justice, and those who give their time, talent, and treasure to the Church? Do people with a Catholic education volunteer more at their church? In their communities? Do they hold leadership positions in the Church and in other faith-based organizations? How do they understand, practice, and explain their faith? How does it influence their lives? These questions might just be the start of an agenda that could uncover some of the long-term effects of Catholic education on individuals and on the societies they serve.

What's "Catholic" about Catholic Education?

This is a question that could no doubt mean many things to many different people. In fact, it might be an underlying question driving the development of a field of Catholic education. In this post, though, I'd like to consider what makes Catholic education catholic - that is, universal.

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops is clear on the responsibility of the Catholic community to educate all its youth in In Support of Catholic Elementary and Secondary Schools and Renewing Our Commitment to Catholic Elementary and Secondary Schools in the Third Millennium:

"...Catholic schools afford the fullest and best opportunity to realize the fourfold purpose of Christian education, namely to provide an atmosphere in which the Gospel message is proclaimed, community in Christ is experienced, service to our sisters and brothers is the norm, and thanksgiving and worship of our God is cultivated."

They are also clear that it is the responsibility of the entire Catholic church to ensure that Catholic schools are available, accessible, and affordable. However, data collected by Fr. John Huber and published in the March 2007 issue of Catholic Education confirm previous assertions (Baker & Riordan, 1998, 1999; Riordan, 2000) that students currently enrolled in Catholic schools are not reflective of the demographics of the Catholic community at large. That is, there is a disproportionate number of students from high income families represented in today's Catholic schools. Further, when of parents of students currently enrolled in parochial K-8 schools who were not intending to send their children to Catholic High School were asked why not, 51.4% indicated that the tuition was too high.

This research represents only one way in which Catholic schools might not be serving all Catholic youth in the United States. Other ways to consider this issue might be to examine data by cultural or ethnic background, special education needs, or geography. What appears to be the bottom line, though, is that some Catholic schools are not "catholic" in the generic sense of the word.

What is to be done?

Huber makes several recommendations, some of which echo the common call for Catholic schools and the Catholic community to find ways for a Catholic education to be more affordable. However, Huber also identifies the need for families to prayerfully consider whether or not a Catholic High School is the right choice for their children. This recommendation underscores the emphasis of the US Conference of Bishops on the responsibility of the community (in this case, including families) to ensure that Catholic schools are available, accessible, and affordable to all students. While the cost of Catholic schools is prohibitive to many families and creative solutions to funding Catholic schools are needed (see the responses to Huber's article in Catholic Education by Jeff Boetticher), it is important to consider, as Robert Kroll does in his response to the same article, that Catholic education is a ministry of the Church.

Such consideration has implications for Catholic families (How important is it for us to send our students to Catholic schools? Of what value is it to us?) and Catholic schools alike. For their part, Catholic schools should focus on what the value of Catholic education really is. In addition to academics (which may or may not be comparable to or better than those in a local public school), what else does the Catholic school offer?

The answers to these questions beg for research, both into the motivations, needs, values and priorities of families, and into the added value of Catholic schools and the roles that they can - and do - play in developing the Church of tomorrow.