NC wants the best schools in the nation. Is its plan up to the task? – Carolina Journal

Analysis of North Carolina’s “Achieving Educational Excellence” Plan in the Context of Sustainable Development Goal 4

Executive Summary

North Carolina’s new five-year strategic plan, “Achieving Educational Excellence,” aims to elevate the state’s public schools to national leadership. However, an analysis of the plan reveals a significant misalignment with the principles of Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which emphasizes inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning opportunities for all. The plan’s expansive scope, featuring over 100 actions and eight thematic pillars, lacks a sufficient focus on core academic proficiency, thereby undermining its potential to achieve meaningful and effective learning outcomes as stipulated in SDG 4.

Alignment with SDG 4: Quality Education

The fundamental objective of any educational framework should be the advancement of SDG 4. This goal, particularly Target 4.1, calls for ensuring all children complete a quality primary and secondary education that leads to relevant and effective learning outcomes. While the North Carolina plan is comprehensive, its structure presents challenges to achieving this target.

• Complexity and Scope: The plan includes eight thematic goals, over 100 specific actions, and numerous success metrics. This complexity risks diluting focus and resources away from the primary mission of improving foundational learning.
• Lack of Core Metric Focus: A critical deficiency is the absence of specific, measurable targets for foundational literacy and numeracy, which are central to SDG Target 4.6. Without these targets, the plan’s contribution to quality education remains ambiguous.

Critical Gaps in Measuring Core Learning Outcomes

The most direct measures of student proficiency and progress towards SDG 4 in North Carolina are the End-of-Grade (EOG) and End-of-Course (EOC) examinations. These assessments evaluate whether students are performing at grade level and are prepared for college and careers, directly reflecting the “effective learning outcomes” component of SDG Target 4.1. The plan’s failure to prioritize these metrics is a primary concern.

1. Absence of Proficiency Targets: The document does not establish clear, time-bound goals for improving student scores on EOG and EOC exams, which are the state’s most reliable indicators of academic achievement.
2. Misaligned Success Metrics: The plan emphasizes metrics such as graduation rates and AP exam performance. While important, these can be misleading and do not serve as direct proxies for the universal, equitable, and quality education envisioned by SDG 4.
3. Contrasting State-Level Strategy: In contrast, South Carolina has established an unambiguous vision aligned with SDG 4 principles by setting a clear goal of ensuring at least 75% of students perform at or above grade level by 2030.

Analysis of Prioritized Metrics and Their Limitations

The metrics selected for emphasis within the “Achieving Educational Excellence” plan require careful scrutiny, as they may not accurately represent progress toward providing a quality education for all students.

• High School Graduation Rates: Reports indicate that while North Carolina’s graduation rate has increased, student proficiency has remained stagnant or declined. This growing gap suggests that an increase in graduates does not necessarily correlate with an increase in quality learning outcomes (SDG 4.1) or the acquisition of relevant skills for employment (SDG 4.4).
• Advanced Placement (AP) Exam Scores: There is evidence suggesting a trend of score inflation in AP exams nationally. Over-reliance on this metric could mask fundamental deficiencies in the educational system and create a misleading perception of success in achieving SDG 4.

Recommendations for Realigning with SDG 4

The description of the plan as a “living, evolving framework” presents an opportunity to refine its focus and strengthen its alignment with global education standards. The following recommendations are proposed to ensure the plan effectively contributes to achieving SDG 4:

1. Simplify the Strategic Framework: The plan should be streamlined to concentrate on actions that directly impact core academic outcomes. This focus is essential for ensuring that all learners acquire foundational literacy and numeracy skills (SDG Target 4.6).
2. Establish Core Proficiency Targets: The plan must incorporate specific, ambitious, and measurable goals for EOG and EOC test results. These metrics should serve as the primary indicators of success in delivering quality education.
3. Prioritize Meaningful Outcomes: Shift emphasis from metrics that can be misleading to direct measures of student learning and proficiency. This ensures accountability and a genuine commitment to improving educational quality for every student.
4. Enhance Monitoring and Accountability: The entities established to track progress must be mandated to focus on core proficiency metrics, ensuring that the state’s educational roadmap is firmly anchored in the principles of providing a quality, equitable, and effective education for all.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 4: Quality Education

• The entire article is centered on the quality of public education in North Carolina. It critiques the state’s strategic plan, “Achieving Educational Excellence,” for its lack of focus on core academic outcomes. The discussion revolves around ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education, which is the central mission of SDG 4. The article’s main argument is that to improve the education system, there must be a clear focus on meaningful academic results, such as student proficiency in reading and math, which aligns directly with the goal of providing quality education.

Specific Targets Identified

Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.

• The article directly addresses this target by focusing on the learning outcomes of students in primary and secondary education. It highlights the use of End-of-Grade (EOG) exams for grades 3–8 and End-of-Course (EOC) exams for high school to measure if students are performing at grade level. The critique that the state’s plan lacks specific goals for these test results indicates a concern about the effectiveness and quality of the education being provided. The mention of the high school graduation rate is also directly related to the completion of secondary education.

Target 4.4: By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship.

• This target is relevant through the article’s discussion of “college- and career-ready” standards. The EOG and EOC exams measure not just grade-level performance but also this higher standard. Furthermore, the plan’s goals to boost AP (Advanced Placement) and ACT exam scores are aimed at preparing high school students for higher education and future careers, which falls under the umbrella of acquiring relevant skills for employment and future opportunities.

Target 4.6: By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults, both men and women, achieve literacy and numeracy.

• The article strongly emphasizes the importance of fundamental academic skills. The author states, “raising early literacy and math scores must be our north star.” This directly connects to the goal of achieving literacy and numeracy. The critique of the state’s plan is that it does not sufficiently prioritize improving student proficiency in reading and math, which are the foundational components of this target.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

Indicator 4.1.1: Proportion of children and young people (a) in grades 2/3; (b) at the end of primary; and (c) at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in (i) reading and (ii) mathematics, by sex.

• The article explicitly mentions several metrics that serve as direct measures for this indicator. These include:
  • End-of-Grade (EOG) exams in grades 3–8: These tests measure how many students are “performing at grade level in reading and math.”
  • End-of-Course (EOC) exams in high school: These serve the same purpose for secondary education subjects.
  • National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): The article notes that the state plan aims to boost performance on this national test, which assesses student proficiency.

Implied Indicator for Target 4.4: Performance on college-readiness assessments.

• While not a formal UN indicator, the article implies the use of specific metrics to measure progress toward having relevant skills for higher education and careers. These include:
  • “College- and career-ready” standard: This is a specific proficiency level measured by the EOG and EOC exams.
  • AP (Advanced Placement) exam scores: The plan’s goal to boost these scores is a direct measure of high-level academic achievement for college preparation.
  • ACT exam scores: This is another standardized test mentioned in the article used for college admissions, indicating readiness for higher education.

Summary of Findings

Source: carolinajournal.com