On The Front Lines Of Education: Q&A With Marc Morial

Marc H. Morial, the president and CEO of the National Urban League, has worked for decades to improve educational opportunities for students of color and low-income students. This week marked the four-year anniversary of passage of the bipartisan Every Student Succeeds Act, and the time was right for a check in with him to see how well the law is working to fulfill its promise of an equitable education for every student.

Here’s my recent exchange with Marc. As you can see from his comments, there are pockets of positive change happening around the country, but there’s still much more work to do to support our country’s low-performing schools.  

Jim Cowen: As one of our country's foremost civil rights leaders, what do you mean when you say "education equity?”

Marc Morial: The National Urban League defines educational equity as an ongoing process that removes the historical barriers that people of color and other historically disadvantaged communities have faced in attaining a high-quality education. We believe equity will be achieved when our education system provides each and every student with the necessary resources to reach their full potential and to be ready for college work and life. When we say education equity, we are referring to the goal of seeing each and every student well prepared to succeed and thrive.

As long as policymakers continue to exacerbate inequities by investing less in those with the greatest need and fewest assets, then for many urban students and communities, access to high-quality public education remains an unrealized and distant dream.

The National Urban League launched The Equity and Excellence Project (EEP) in 2010. The EEP explicitly supports local, state, and national advocacy, engagement, and education reform efforts throughout the Urban League Affiliate Movement and with local, state, and national partners.

Cowen: How do you and the National Urban League see opportunities to advance your vision for what education can be in America through the Every Student Succeeds Act and how the law is carried out?

Morial: The Every Student Succeeds Act presents us with a unique moment in education. As we moved out of the No Child Left Behind era, states wanted more flexibility to meet the needs of their local contexts. There has long been a federal role in education policy and oversight, yet under ESSA, this role has shifted in ways that make civil rights organizations wary.

The Every Student Succeeds Act offers guardrails that are supposed to protect the most vulnerable students by requiring the collection and reporting of data on all student performance that can be disaggregated by subgroup, or can be reported by the performance of particular student groups — all leading to consequential action on the part of the state. By making these data plainly available, families and advocates are better prepared to hold states, districts, and schools accountable for student performance.

History has taught us however, that guardrails only operate effectively when there is sufficient and meaningful oversight. We are watching carefully to ensure that civil rights data collection and oversight remain central.

The landmark 2016 election marked a shift in conversations about race, socioeconomic status, immigration, and the systemic impact of these social markers on the experiences of people across the nation. With education at the forefront, advocates and stakeholders alike are looking critically at what states have and have not committed to do for students and how they are going to do it. As in most things, specifics matter and too many of the state plans under ESSA are very light on specifics, especially as relates to how best to eliminate disparities and inequities by delivering a high-quality education to all students.

The National Urban League continues to ask:

• Are states and districts using this increased autonomy as an opportunity to advance equity for all children?
• Are states and districts interpreting the law in ways that advance equity and excellence?
• Are states honoring the language and the civil rights commitment of the law by implementing it in a way that is consistent with the bipartisan agreement that made ESSA possible?

Urban League Affiliate leaders stand poised with advocates and local stakeholders to empower their communities with knowledge, analysis, and critical information about ESSA and about education reform and innovation more generally. Our Affiliate leaders act as critical friends in their states and communities — pushing leaders to do more and to help schools better realize the promise of public education where they are on the right track and to be vocal and steadfast when policies, investments, and strategies undermine equity and excellence at scale. Our local leaders and their partners, including parents and caregivers are on the ground and work diligently to ensure that there is meaningful public engagement during the planning and implementation of ESSA at the state, district, and school levels.

Cowen: The law has a "transparency requirement" that opens the door for per-pupil spending data to be made available to parents and communities. What is the significance of this component when it comes to providing equitable options in America's schools? 

Morial: The law's transparency requirement is a significant one because it offers the opportunity for school leaders, parents, students, and advocates to see precisely how resources are distributed to schools within a school district. If there are inequities in per-pupil expenditures within a school district, principals and parents can push school district and state education officials to make changes so that the funding is distributed more fairly and to greater, more precise, impact. Congress intended for this transparency requirement to empower stakeholders to hold states and districts accountable for ensuring that funding and resources get to the students that need them the most. 

Cowen: The Urban League produced a report earlier this year—Standards of Equity and Excellence: A Lens on ESSA State Plans– that closely looked at how well equity is addressed under state plans each state crafted as required by ESSA. What did you find?

Morial: Very broadly, our report was simply a way to identify and rate the commitments made by the 37 states in which the Urban League operates, based on our priorities. I need to be clear that we only rated the state plans, not their implementation, nor the commitments that underlie the plans or stated goals. That work is ongoing and will be the focus of our work over the next few years.

We evaluated the state plans against 12 equity indicators of standards including: early childhood learning, supports for struggling schools, and resource equity.

Our report found that nine states (Colorado, Ohio, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Kentucky, Illinois and Rhode Island) were rated excellent, or offered a strong foundation for equity and needed refinement in only a few areas.

The bulk of states (20), were rated sufficient, or were adequately attentive to equity, but still had several areas deserving of attention and urgent actions from policymakers and advocates. Eight states (Virginia, Florida, Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, Kansas, Michigan and California) were rated poor, or had missed significant opportunities to further advance equity.

Cowen: While state plans provide important guardrails to states, when it comes to school improvement under ESSA, much of the hard work is done at the district level. How well are states and districts doing when it comes to improving America's schools?

Morial: When we talk about how states and districts are doing, it is important to recognize the timeline of ESSA. Even though it was passed in December of 2015, state implementation plans were not approved until last fall, and even then, you still had some states not being approved until spring of this year. States haven't had much time to start implementing and therefore we don't have enough data to do a thorough analysis of how states and districts are (or are not) implementing the law or their plans under the law. In addition, the Education Department extended the deadline for states to meet the per-pupil spending reporting requirement through December 2019. According to Edunomics, just over 17 states have complied. This means that school leaders, parents, and advocates still don't have the information they need to advocate for fairer funding systems.

Ultimately, we don't want to over- or under-identify struggling schools: we want the schools that need support to get robust, high-quality supports and resources. In the education equity conversation, we often say a child’s zip code should not determine the quality of their education, but what seems to still be true is that zip codes remain overly determinative in how much support a school (and therefore a child in that school) will receive.

Two examples of equity in state plans I’d like to shine a light on are school discipline and college and career-ready standards. In the National Urban League’s report on state plans, we found that all 37 plans we analyzed were at least sufficient in addressing discipline disparities. Specifically, 31 plans addressed how the state will reduce exclusionary discipline practices, including investments in positive behavioral supports and interventions, while 6 plans went above and beyond and included a school climate indicator (such as chronic absenteeism or school discipline) in their accountability system. Louisiana is one of these exemplar states that used an innovative approach to reducing school discipline disparities: they include school discipline as an additional school improvement criteria. As a result, schools with discipline rates that are double the national average will get identified as needing targeted support and intervention.

Additionally, our report found that many states prioritized access and success in college and career-ready courses – 29 of the 37 states we analyzed were ranked “excellent” and made the most of opportunities to advance equity in this area. These plans include a college and career readiness indicator based on student outcomes (such as success on coursework, attainment of credentials, earning college credit, etc.), not just student access.

However, we remain concerned that quite a few states have fallen short in developing strong systems of school accountability. In fact, 12 states do not include individual groups of students in their school ratings, which can mask performance of those groups of students and limits their access to the resources and supports they need to succeed. In addition, when it comes to school improvement, just 6 states set strong criteria for identifying schools where individual groups of students are not performing well, again making it hard to identify the schools where all students and vulnerable groups of students are struggling.

An important component of improving schools is the involvement of community members and stakeholders. Civil rights and equity groups fought so that states would meaningfully consult and engage with a broad range of education stakeholders. In our analysis, 35 ESSA state plans received an excellent or sufficient rating for promoting meaningful engagement and consultation of parents, families, and communities in their development and implementation of their ESSA plans. 

Of those, 22 received an excellent rating for developing their plans in consultation with a diverse group of stakeholders including civil rights groups, parents, and community based organizations representing underserved communities and also included a plan for continued engagement. 

We were also pleased that many Urban League affiliates had a seat at the table in planning and implementation decisions. Esther Bush, Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh CEO, advocated for changes to promote equity in the Pennsylvania state plan, which had high “n” size number – the minimum student population size required to trigger federal reporting requirements. She and other advocates fought for this number to decrease and the state listened to them and lowered the “n”size. The Pittsburgh work is but one example of strong stakeholder partnership and advocacy, which is something we are constantly trying to improve and build via the critically important leadership and work of our local Presidents and CEOs.

Cowen: When you travel throughout the country and speak with families of color and families with few resources, what do you hear from them about their aspirations for their children? Do they have access to the schools and education necessary to help them meet these dreams?

Morial: Anecdotally, it is encouraging that despite the numerous challenges that the nation faces, there is no shortage of motivation for pursuit of the American dream. Families want opportunity and success for their children and are fighting tooth and nail to make those dreams a reality despite a long and deep-seated history of marginalization and disfranchisement. While suffering and inequity remain, our affiliate movement is doing what it can to help families bridge the gaps they may face, particularly in the pursuit of higher education and workforce development.

Recently, we conducted a survey of affiliate leaders and found they recognize the potential for ESSA to be a powerful tool in support of educational equity and improving outcomes for students of color. They also recognize that within their states, there is a clear lack of consistency in implementation of the law and unevenness in the implementation of the plans. Several affiliate leaders mentioned that ESSA sets high expectations but that resources to meet those expectations are limited. Resources include not only funding, but wrap-around services, non-exclusionary discipline strategies, high-level coursework, and access to effective and diverse teachers.

Cowen: The ESSA law technically did sunset on Dec. 10, although in practical terms it does not change anything for states or districts until Congress makes changes. You have said you would like to see Congress reauthorize the law. Why is that?

Morial: ESSA is far from perfect and represents an experiment in greater state control and a lighter federal hand. It is not at all clear that this has been a successful experiment and so we look forward to opportunities during the reauthorization process to develop stronger and clearer civil rights protections, deeper engagement of stakeholders, and the allocation of additional resources that move us ever closer to equity and excellence at scale.

The reauthorization process enables Congress to exercise its oversight authority over the law. It is an opportunity to assess what has worked well and what needs to be amended in order to better serve students, schools, and communities. As we begin to see the data on school improvement, promising practices are emerging and that is encouraging. States are innovating and sharing in a way that we had not seen before, but in that same vein, we’ve seen some states fall short of the mark with few clear and timely remedies.

Too many states still see this as a compliance-driven exercise as opposed to an opportunity to adopt ESSA’s flexibility to create new solutions to persistent problems. The limitations at the Education Department and the lack of federal enforcement have only served to perpetuate this syndrome of complacency in some states and, arguably, have resulted in noncompliance in others. Without proper oversight, we fear that progress made will be lost. Reauthorization is an opportunity to hold public hearings and to bring all stakeholders to account for their efforts to implement the law, while codifying what’s been working well and setting up guardrails to prevent harm and unintended consequences.