Reenvisioning American Education Reform: How and Why Whole Community Environment Matters for Whole-Child Development

• In Event: Centering Whole-Child Development in Global Education Reform: How National Education Policies Work (or Not) for Quality and Equity

Abstract

Objectives
The issue of who should be accountable for what and how has been contentious in the history of educational accountability. In light of school accountability policy changes over the past two decades—shifts from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), this paper attempts to address two research questions. First, how have the American education standards and policies changed across 50 states to improve whole child education, including academic, socioemotional, and health outcomes? Second, what are the key conditions of learning environment that drive or inhibit whole-child development, across families, communities, and schools? The goal of this study is to inform evidence-based systemic reform policies toward whole-child development in the U.S. context.


Theoretical Framework and Perspectives
We draw upon the ecological systems framework of human development (Bronfenbrenner, 1976; Comer et al., 1996), the Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child (WSCC) model and community school model (ASCD, 2019; Maier et al., 2017). While prior research on school accountability policies focused on academic learning standards and high-stakes testing, there is a paucity of research on the impact of new educational standards that incorporate non-academic measures of student learning, including socioemotional and physical development (Lee & Lee, 2020). Without adequate resources and capacity, however, state accountability measures that focus on standards alone cannot help improve racial and socioeconomic equity (Lee & Wong, 2004). We need systematic research to examine cross-state relationships between new learning standards for accountability, educational resources and learning environment, and student outcomes.


Data & Methods
This paper involves critical review and synthesis of state-level education standards and accountability policies; data sources include the Council of Chief State Officers (CCSO), Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), and Society of Health and Physical Educators (SHAPE). To illustrate the cross-state variations, we reviewed the profiles of three selected states: Massachusetts, New York, and Mississippi. For academic proficiency measures, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data are used. For socioemotional and physical well-being and learning environment measures, the National Survey of Children’s Health (NSCH) data are used. Through path analysis, this study examines the direction and strength of relationships among the aforementioned measures. This study is correlational in nature, and thus we rely primarily on theory and prior research to guide our analysis of the relationships.


Findings and Implications
This study finds substantial interstate variations in child development outcomes as well as systemwide learning environment. Figure 2 show the path diagram of relationships between student demographics, government expenditures, learning standards, community environment, and child development measures Above and beyond the effects of demographic factors, the states with more protective and nurturing environment would produce better results—healthy, good, and smart students. The case study demonstrates the challenges of structural poverty and racial inequalities but at the same time the power of government policies and resources to overcome and transform them. First, educational reform requires the realignment of school accountability measures with the broader educational goals. Second, systemic reform requires cross-sector partnerships and wrap-around services for improving whole-child development.

Authors

• Jaekyung Lee, University at Buffalo - SUNY
  Presenting Author

• Mengchen Su, University of Minnesota
  Presenting Author