>> so what's going on in florida? since 2003 the state is required that third graders scoring at the lowest level on the fcat reading test be retained. i put required, well, required me not exactly the right word because there are a variety of exemptions mention in the policy. for example, limited english

proficient students who have received less than two years of instruction in english are exempted, as our moore's categories of special education students. students have the ability to demonstrate their proficiency on an approved alternative standardized test. they can demonstrate their proficiency through a portfolio that is aligned to the state content standards. as a result of these exemptions i think calling the policy test-based promotion is something of a misnomer. it would be more accurate to say a low test score changes the default decision that would be made for this student such that in an affirmative case needs to be made they are ready to be promoted to the fourth grade. the policy doesn't simply require that they retain. they receive additional services. they need to be given the opportunity to attend a summer reading camp, to be assigned a high-performing teacher, and to receive intensive reading interventions during that

retention year. that means when we studied the evidence on the effects of the program on retain students, those studies will reflect the full package, not just retention itself that retention and these additional requirements. despite the exemptions i mentioned earlier and the fact that roughly half of low performing third graders are actually given exemptions from the policy, this did amount to a major change in the approach to early grade retention in florida. the number of grade three students retained increased to nearly 22000 as the policy was implemented in 2003, up more than fourfold from the number and 2002. touches shot up 14% of third graders in florida, initial third graders were retained in 2003. as you can also see that number has fallen significantly in subsequent years, most of that reduction actually reflects a reduction in the number of

students failing to meet the promotion cut off. while it's difficult to attribute that definitively it's consistent with the idea that educators and students in florida have responded to the presence of the policy via improving their performance. so what happens to students in florida when they are retained? the most recent research on that question examines the policies ethics and students retained as third graders in 2003 for six subsequent years. here's what it shows. first of all their substantial short-term achievement gains in reading and math among retain students compared to their promoted peers when the students are tested at the same age. so for example, after two years, two years after the initial retention decision, retained student will be in the fourth grade, most of the promote students will be in the fifth grade. if we compare their performance when tested at that same age,

the retain students outperform their promoted peers at almost half of a standard deviation in reading and but about half that much in math. this amounts to more than a grade level equivalent in reading and about half of that amount in math. these are quite substantial positive apex despite the fact the retain students are a grade level beyond their promoted peers. these achievement effects, however, fadeout gradually over time and become statistically insignificant within five years. this is a common pattern, especially those in the early grades, to see achievement effects that are large initially but fadeout overtime. this is a common pattern even in many interventions that despite the fadeout of test score impacts have been shown to have substantial positive enduring effects on students long-term outcomes. indicates a retention i retention i think it's especially likely that you could expect to see positive long-term

effects because retain students despite the fadeout of the impact are still outperform their promoted peers in both reading and math when tested at the same grade level. so if we rather than compare students who are the same age compare students who are at the same grade level we find retain students doing much better than their promoted peers. another interesting consequence of the florida policy that's just emerged recently is that is very clear evidence that retain students are substantially less likely to be retained in later years. so as a result of this after five years to retain students are only .7 grade levels behind their promoted peers despite the fact the initial treatment of retention was a full level -- fold grade level behind. what you see is, comes in the first year when students are much less likely to be retained again in the third grade than

their promoted peers are to be retained in the fourth grade. but those effects continue for several years after the initial retention decision. this means one of the key consequences of the florida policy was to expedite the retention of many students who would otherwise have been retained in later years when those decisions were being made purely at the discretion of local educators. so what does this mean for policy? i think these results from florida paying a relatively encouraging picture, certainly much more encouraging picture than that which is available in the dominant observational literature on this topic. and i thing it means a few things for policy. first of all, and this is just to acknowledge that test-based promotion policies are not being presented by anyone on the panel today as a silver bullet solution and the only thing we need to do to address concerns about early grade reading skills, we need comprehensive

strategy. in my ear improving early grade learning skills is a priority that require states to a number of things including ensuring at risk students have access to high quality preschool programs, that they develop early identification systems and target struggling readers for early invention, and that they improve the general quality of instruction in the early grades. some of my research actually suggest tensions are especially likely to take their least effective teachers and the least experienced teachers and to place them in grades k. through to compress because of the presence of state testing systems in higher grades and the absence of early grades. at the top of patter i think will undermine efforts to address this situation. test-based promotion policies are no substitute for that kind of comprehensive strategy to reduce the number of struggling readers.

however, test their social policies i would suggest can be a useful component of such a comprehensive strategy. to the extent that states want to go in this direction i think you should keep in mind that these policies are most likely to succeed when they are accompanied by specific requirements for additional reading instruction and adequate funding to support the implementation of those requirements. the florida effexor we've observed reflect the complete package of the intervention, both retention and additional requirements, not just the effects of retention on its own. and comments and suggest retention shouldn't imply an exact replication of what came before. it didn't work the first time, try something different. test-based promotion policies also need to balance the desire to allow local educators to draw on their local knowledge of students abilities to get the discretion to make decisions that they think are in the best interest of the students. to balance that with the goal of

increased accountability and access to focus support. i think the research in florida suggests that retention can be useful more often than local educators often tend to think is the case. but obviously some measure of exemption need to be included in thinking about these policies i don't think we know exactly the right way to handle that situation yet. finally, because what kind of research would be if i didn't conclude with an enthusiastic call for more research? [laughter] i think we need to continue to study the effects of test-based promotion policies on the long run, as well as on the quality of instruction available to all early grade students. oftentimes the discussion of these policies focus is very narrowly on their consequences for retain students. obviously, that's something of great interest, but we also need to understand what's happening to the broader systems in which they're being implemented. so thanks for your attention and i look forward to the discussion.

[applause] >> okay. the panel will come up and without a break we will proceed. >> [inaudible conversations]

>> [inaudible conversations] >> i want you to know that we are researchers here. we are working on a little machine attached to the chair, and when all the panelists come up the machine will grab a mic and stick it on their lapel. and it will all happen at one time so we will say three minutes for more discussion. so you will be ready for that. so we have a great panel.

don't mr. cicilline agree with everything in the policy brief. people have their own juice out of work on this issue. i'm really please were able to get the quality of people we have on this bill. versus karen schimke whose early learning project manager for education commission of state simply be to troll in elementary school policy. and she is author of a terrific brief which can pick up the materials out there on letter said policies are next with russ whitehurst was a director brookings brown center for education policy and the former director of the city for education about education sciences. and in a previous life he did research on reading. so another appropriate reason for having him on the panel. been we have shane jimerson who is a professor university california santa barbara and the highly acclaimed and frequent honored research on education issues, has an amazing background that you can read about if you 15 minutes on the

material in your folder. and then finally mary laura bragg his director of state policy implementation foundation for excellence in education. we really intent on having someone from florida because florida hasn't so much in this area so we are glad she did, and be part of this topic our format will be each speaker was eight minutes for opening statement which they will get from the chair. and i'm going to ask questions and an audience will have a chance to ask questions. we will begin with karen schimke. >> good morning. i was interested in getting ready for this discussion. i was a mind of my own experience with reading proficiency. my twin sister and i were in the first great in a small rural town in western nebraska, and i don't think our teacher really understood that there were two of us. [laughter] so one night my mom pulled out a book and she says okay we're going to region it. probably october, first grade. so she handed me the book and i

read. i suspect it was dick, jane, spot. i was at the air. so i read. then she hands the book to caroline and caroline looks of the book and she said, i don't read. and i said i read for her. that was the end of caroline's journey to non-proficiency in reading. the absolute in. once my mother came down off the ceiling. so my mother was as concerned as any parent would be, and as all of the states are about having students read proficiently, proficiently by the end of third grade. and, frankly, in the journey up to the end of third grade we move along in the proficiency pathways. i think we are well aware of what happens to get you are not reading proficiency, proficiently four times more likely than their proficient peers to drop out at the end of high school. it's pretty clear that in a world where we need will prepared workers and adults that proficiency is key.

i think that states concerns about proficiency is especially relevant as what and an air of common standards and no child left behind and renewal of the sca. so they're trying to create a sense of urgency and clarity in reading proficiency they mean business. my conversation press coverage is around retention. wisely states have in general not had a single strategy, but have a package of comprehensive interlocking well-connected strategies, all of which are critical if we're going to be serious about third grade reading proficiency. and someone is talking about retention, at least to me, is sort of a sure hand way of talking about a whole package, a much broader package. we've heard about was some of the research says about retention, much of the research doesn't back it up. the opinions of its and

educators are mixed, so his research makes. in looking at several research and literature reviews, my take is that there are some differences in which groups of kids match of the groups of gibson research. there are differences at what point the research is done, and for certainly a non-researchers like myself and possibly some of you in this room -- >> oh, no. brookings audience is always researchers. >> to sort through all the stuff and all the white noise and say so what is this telling us? some research it certainly suggests that children repeat to improve their proficiency while others suggest it doesn't make much difference to any 2007 article in the journal of education for students risk it was reported there is no short-term benefit, substantial long-term risk, substantial costs to taxpayers because students of poverty and color are disproportionately represented. there's a question of equity. i think the questions that have

been raised are questions that certainly their everybody's consideration. what is the question of equity? children who are of color, who are boys and who are low economic status by very disproportionately represented among retain students. likewise, the question of cost and how much it cost to have a year of retention, cost both to the school district during that year, and caused later with delayed entry into the workforce. one of the thoughts i had, think about how they should proceed in this area was i begin to wonder whether children who are retained, in fact might have a higher possibility of either being bullied for being a bully. i found one study and the one study talks about not only retain children but over aged children. that is, children were entry into kindergarten is a as well as children who are retained and they found a fair difference

between the potential for bowling and being victims of bullying. it's an interesting article but it appears in the journal of applied school psychology, called the preliminary study of bullying and victim behavior in over grade student to another potential hidden cost of grade retention or delayed school entry. i called the office of the study to find out if there were other studies maybe i -- their work. and with a going to be any more studies? they would love to. guess what? it was about money, which is again a common experience. so grade retention is a costly strategy. i think far more costly than providing the kind of early intervention, early identification and prevention that is so critical, and in general far from state strategy to our emphasis has been on early identification and intervention but when we talk

about early identification. i think so often in this business would talk about in kindergarten, maybe in firstly, maybe even second grade we would talk about it in pre-k. so we would really be saying, certainly those of us who have worked in pre-k for a long time no that in the pre-k classroom, teachers know then when things are going to be problems for children. and they know not so much because the child is or isn't ready but we wouldn't expect a child to be reading in prekindergarten. rather they know because they can see a child manages the rest of the executive functions, how they manage waiting their turn, sitting still, being a part of the classroom discussion, working with other kids, interacting with their environment. so we are putting out, ecs will put out literary documents in the next bit and it's going to focus on what state policy should think about as a roadmap. it's going to have two

components, a section on systems and the section on classroom and school activities. systems is going to look at programs design and implementation, system oversight, ongoing assessment of both children and classrooms, and effective and immediate intervention. the piece having to do with classrooms in schools is going to look at redefined adult capacity, teachers, principals, superintendents, what they have to be like. what they have to be prepared to do in order to really provide instructional atmosphere that kids need. the second is a language, language and content reckless and engaging curriculum. and, finally, a partnership for families. i think we could spend his entire day talking about the role of families and partnership of families, as decisions are made about third grade leading proficiency. we take this concern states have and the schools and families have very, very seriously. states are making, taking steps,

taking action on this, and we think that's appropriate. i think the most important thing, however, is that this is about early comprehensive interlocking strategy. no single strategy could possibly lead to the kind of outcomes all by itself. thank you. >> thank you. very nice. [applause] >> your watch works and everything. thank you. russ whitehurst spent i'm pleased to be a. this is a topic that is important to me. i've been in the reading war for a large portion of my career. i want to first congratulate marty west on bringing a rigorous piece of research to this debate. it is, i think does raise the level of evidence that's relevant to what we are talking about. and i could spend my seven and half remaining minutes talking about research methodology, but i'll avoid the temptation.

>> a good decision. >> and try to kick it up a notch. what is this debate about? let's start with the fact that 25% of youth in this country do not graduate from high school. and let me describe to you in a conversation i overheard a few years ago. it was a young woman who would graduate with honors from high school here in the district of columbia. she'd gone to salisbury state college, and she was dropping out. i heard someone talking to her, why are you dropping out? i can't pass the courses there. so if 25% of students who don't have the skills to graduate from high school. we've got a lot of kids who are graduating from high school with a meaningless credential, and that it does not signify that they have acquired the skills that make them ready for the world of work or further

education. and so we have a system that isn't massively failing. -- that is massively failing. what are we to do about that? are we to promote students socially all the way through the system, or are we to give college degrees based on social promotion because people with a college diploma to those with not? those who did not have a diploma. i think not. and so the question is when is the system to be made accountable for giving students the skills that they need to succeed in life? nearly all the research, on the issue of grade retention and social promotion, has focused on the particular cohort of students who are affected by the policy. you saw that in marty's presentation of research today. you will see in the larger literature. the question is, for the

students who were retained, what is the consequence the next year and a year after? th's an important question. but i think the larger question is what is the effect on the system as a result of retaining the students. imagine for a moment the irs function in auditing your taxes. and i imagine that there's a new emphasis on offshore bank accounts, and we hear about that in the news. and a few people are caught, they have to pay a lot of back taxes, front-page stories about it, or questions about it. almost surely effective at is that people who have those offshore accounts are talking to their accounts and backing off of that tax strategy. imagine enforcement of driving while intoxicated laws, and you that on july 4, the police are going to be out in force and if

you're drunk, you're in serious trouble. we could do studies that look at the effect of these policies on the people directly impacted by the policies. that is, if you're caught drunk driving, what happens to you later on? the real question is what is the effect on people who are exposed through observation to this policy? there are hints in the slide that marty put up and a policy brief that the school systems in texas, and parents and kids, are responding to this policy as you and i would if we know we're doing something that was likely to have a negative impact. that is, they're doing better. children are less likely to fill the third grade than they were in the past. we don't know if this sort of policy is causally connected to that, but they're certainly a suggestion that it might be. i think we desperately need

research that looks not only at the impact on the treaty, but the impact on those who are coming along next. the impact on the whole system, on its ability to provide quality preparation and learning to read. i will say one of the things i learned from doing work in this area both as a researcher, as a federal official for many years, is that we really don't know yet how to accomplish this task well. if you look at reading scores on need, they have been essentially flat for 20 years. if you look at studies that examine the impact of accountability systems, you will see sizable impacts on math and suggesting that once people in schools and teachers are a terrible result in math, they do things and know how to get kids better, and you find a little to no effect on reading. you take the federal reading

first intervention which was a massive federal attempt to inject scientific base instruction in reading in the beginning grades and a large federal a violation of that for which i was responsible, found no impact on reading skills. and so we can expect some impact i think from well implemented school retention policies, coupled with early identification and better intervention. but i would say we still have a ways to go in understanding how to take children who start school, and by starting school i'm in kindergarten or even pre-k, substantially behind the skills and abilities predict later reading, letter and sound recognition. we still don't understand well how to engineer curriculum and

provide instruction that is regularly and predictably going to get those children on grade level iv in the third grade. and so my view of retention is an important pressure point on the system. i'm convinced that it can produce at least short-term positive benefits for kids as part of a broader intervention policy. but i also think we have a ways to go in terms of understand how to get this task accomplished and i think what we've learned from presentations today is a piece of a very important puzzle that we've got to solve the nations interest as soon as possible. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> shane jimerson. thanks so much coming all the way from california. >> and thank you. i want to express a shared thank

you to the brookings institute for inviting me to participate in these important discussions regarding reading and retention policy and practice with a particular emphasis on what's best for kids. and i say that because i've spent my career investigating and advocating for what's best for kids. so i want to begin with that as a preface to just buy a show of hands, more engaging participatory activity, by a show fans how much of us are engaged in scholarship to help children learn at school, by a show of hands? how many of you engage in scholarship? could become an editor or director involved at the school level developing policies help children learn? at the school of? that some folks are. fantastic and how many of us are directly involved with educating children at school at least once a week? fantastic. all right, and i know there's many others that come from various backgrounds and have various motivations to be here,

but just for the sake in the spirit of voting how many are going to refuse to vote no matter what questions i asked? [laughter] it's a trick question. i appreciate your honesty. all right. i'm here today as i am compelled to continue to advocate for children to emphasize the importance of using science to inform policy and practice to advance all the social and cognitive confidence of children. during the past 20 years i have carefully reviewed over 100 study examining grade retention that have been completed during the past 100 years. this includes all of able published studies as well as many reports and thesis projects which are not ultimately published in journals or books in such. in addition to hundreds of studies regarding specific intervention strategy, i've also conducted numerous investigations and studies and analyses directly related as

well as publish a meta-analysis of studies examining outcomes associate with grade retention. thus i should these comments that i prepared based on the klutzes of these experiences. because each of us on the panel, as ron has pointed out has only about 480 seconds, i will simply make three brief points for your further consideration. again, a question. how many of you have already read at least five of the previous meta-analyses examined the effectiveness of grade retention, just by a show of hands? fantastic. that's a good place to start. all right. the first point the empirical evidence fail to support the effectiveness of grade retention. among over 1000 analyses of achievements and adjustments outcomes during the past 100 years there are few that revealed significant positive effects associate with grade retention. in the handout that is provided to you see the summer of -- we don't have time to explain the

meta-analytic process and such but note that none of those results in any of those meta-analyses revealed a significant positive effect. okay. you can look at it. it's right there. i'm not making this a. whereas short-term gains during the repeated year and possibly the following year are occasionally documented as has been noted, long-term effects of middle school and high school are either neutral, and/or deleterious. for the more grade retention has emerged as one of the most powerful predictors of high school dropouts. in addition to part of the discussion today is to focus on reading and retention, does it is notable if you look carefully on that hand out the negative effects for readings are among the highest in two of the three meta-analysis detailed in and out. again, over 1000 analyses from over 75 years of research

specifically captured in those meta-analyses. the negative effects on reading actually boarded significant in the sense you are upwards of 4.5, in terms of the effect factor. related to this first point regarding the lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of grade retention, the recent analyses of the florida context as has been noted and flayed grade retention and several other and. we supported interventions. in particular, for instance, summer school, intensive reading intervention and high quality teachers, as well as other processes that are part of that florida promotion legislation. these other processes are also linked to effective intervention -- intervention strategy to assessment, progress monitor, parent involvement it and whereas other scholars have completed a analyses to examine the relative effects of summer school and retention when used with the same student, for instance, in chicago, colleagues

or done in each of the analyses that i've personally reviewed addressing the florida context have not. why is this important? because the previous analyses that did include both reveal the summer school yielded a fable in fact where as the retention did not. this idea of toppling them and making the case for retention blogs is not well found within the empirical literature, the statement that the analyses of the florida context can flayed grade retention and several other empirically supported intervention. moreover, as related to the first point, the florida legislature refers to a comprehensive program for student progression to this is their section 1825 it has a bunch of subsections. conference of programs for student progression were as many of the other components include in this comments a program our empirically-based and laudable. the retention component is contraindicated. is anyone familiar with a 2009

book that reviews 800 meta-analyses and includes a rank order of 138 specific factors associated with student achievement? anyone? okay. it includes factors of multiple levels, students homes, teaching, curriculum, school. this is the book you're actually. the comprehensive review reveals five factors associated with negative effects of the 138. retention is one of those five. retention is placed at number 136 of the 138. followed by, what you like to guess what number 137 and 138 our? i think we'd all agree that number 137, television and number 138 mobility our associate with deleterious effects of student achievement. okay, retention was number 136 fall by television and mobility. considering the research, the evidence clearly indicates that we must move beyond grade

retention and social promotion. by a show of hands how much are you aware of supported interventions to help children learn at school to promote reading, math, science, social skills? fantastic. the second point, there are numerous and extensive studies that document effective interventions specifically facilitating development in areas such as reading mathematics, behavior adjustment, some of the core elements that are often based for retention decisions. education professionals must focus on intervention that build upon the strengths of students and target their needs. attending to the empirical evidence, informing targeted intervention with specific challenges within specific context. these include individual, classroom, and school district level strategies. you can see the handout, i've listed several of them and reading interventions and summer school and ongoing formative evaluation are just some of these but those are just four

examples. okay, i'm to the third point. one more participation question. how many of you are confident the current establish policies will promote student learning and success in school? who's competent the policies are there to make this happen? all right, one person. very good. the third point is policies that emphasize specific evidence-based interventions to promote the academic success of students are essential to meet achievement standards. about 15 years ago secretary of education richard riley highlighted that as quote taken responsibility for ending social promotion means ensuring that students have the opportunity and assistance they need to meet the challenging standards in the eight years prior to that decision being made and in some instances with certain policy. indeed, it is imperative that policymakers, educators and others focus on the important question, the question is not to retain or not to retain. the question is not to retain or

promote. the question is how to promote social and cognitive confidence of the students. more specifically, given the individual and contextual consideration upon identifying individual needs, what specific evidence-based strategies will be implemented and monitored in an effort to address the means and to facilitate the development and academic success of the student. as a highlighted today in my brief comment, considering the collective evidence is imperative that we move beyond grade retention and social promotion, instead we must implement policies and practices predicated on empirical evidence linked to promoting learning outcomes. thank you for participating in considering these three points. [applause] >> thank you. and other than that, how did you like the policy brief? [laughter] mary laura bragg. >> i don't get introduction?

>> i already introduced you. what do you want me to say? mary laura bragg, a famous person from florida. [laughter] >> that i am the cleanup hitter. thank you for the opportunity to be a part of this discussion. i was on the team that wrote florida's policy, 1008.25 come as you pointed out, and i was the person responsible for implementing it in the florida. i am a high school district teacher and i've witnessed firsthand the vacant stare of a 10th grader when the student is asked to read out loud or discuss something that they have read. i've been a recipient of victims of social promotions. our foundation, the foundation for excellence in education, has worked with many of the states that have in the past year worked to tackle this problem of k-3, free k-3 reading. the foundation today, was not

around when governor bush and the florida legislature began crafting this policy. but we did craft it around three points of research that existed in the early 2000. that 75% of students reading poorly at nine years old would continue to struggle throughout their adult lives. that 80% of kids identified with a specific learning disability are struggling readers of simply because they have not learned how to read. and the work that was published in the 2000 national reading panel report. so the policy we created is pretty simple. our law requires prevention and intervention k-3, retention for third graders who are not ready to handle the text required of them in fourth grade and beyond, and an additional intervention for retained third graders. so three basic parts. schools must begin notifying

parents in kindergarten if their child has a reading deficiency and is therefore at risk of retention in third grade. schools must build individual reading plans for the students aimed at removing that deficiency, and we notice in the first 30 days of kindergarten i can talk about what we do literacy wise in pre-k, but can say that for the discussion did. third graders in florida who scored the lowest level on our state has are retained unle they meet a good cause extension. one of things i would point out from the brief is that any student on any special education student in florida can take the state test subject to the policy. so there are a significant number of students with disabilities who are subject to the policy, the only ones who are accepted or if they don't take the state test or if they spend president retained. and if you're retained to get intensive in addition to our approach work. i saw in the four years that i

was in charge of the policy and went back to teaching after i left the department, a sea change in reading instruction in gates -- in great k-3. i will give you some examples on impact of human behavior that we saw. for several years before been active this policy, our assessment office had a pot of about $2 million we have a lot of students in florida, $2 million for recent diagnostics, k-3 reading diagnostic assessments. districts could purchase basically receive those tasks for free. it was a state appropriation. and every year, maybe a quarter, a quarter of that money was drawn down in the first two years of the policy that money was gone by september. that is human behavior changing. we also before the policy would get periodic requests and districts for professional development, random profession development in reading it in the first two years of this policy

the requests were tenfold. they were specific. we want professional development on hold group and small group instruction. we want it on data-driven instruction. we want on specific interventions aimed at specific deficiencies. and the number of calls and e-mails we got from parents asking for help and the number of calls and e-mails from community groups asking how they could help skyrocketed. the data that include in your package shows the impact of the policy. retentions increased at first, that they declined because the number of students reading at the lowest level on our state test declined. the other thing i would like to show, well, there's a chart in your handout, that the retentions in kindergarten, first and second grade decrease because it was a k-3 policy but our goal was not -- [inaudible] our goal was good, strong

initial instruction in grades k-3. as an intervention as a way to stop retention but the last resort of retention was retention as a last resort was the goal. to me, when he principle realizes that he is four years to ensure a child is ready to move onto fourth grade, and that the parents of these children will know enough in the first 30 grades of -- that's first 30 days of kindergarten, the school organize around reading. we saw the best teachers in elementary school move to k., one into. a sea change in making sure that schools organize around what they need to organize around, it's kind of a shame to me that the threat of retention is what got elementary schools doing what their primary focus is, which is to teach kids how to read.

our nape data shows the last chart in your package shows that even in 2011, our policy is to working. we have more kids worry a great levels, and fourth grade, even in that chart is broken down into subgroups and every subgroup outperforms the national average. also to speak to african-american and hispanic students. the number of florida third graders scoring at the lowest level have declined by 41%. the percentage of african-american and hispanic students scored at that level has declined by 37 and 46%, respectively. regarding, one less thing about special ed. we looked at 300 of our lowest performing title i schools from 2003-'04, to 2009-10, and we found the percentage of third graders identified with the specific learning disability was cut in half. and that time period. and the percentage of first

graders who identify with a specific learning disability was cut by 75% that was huge. i think that if you fund your priorities first to get to costs, and i would say we have spent a lot of time but by the costs of retention and nothing about the cost of dropouts and the cost to the country in health care and lost earnings and students who drop out, i think that that is an important point that if you fund your priorities first, then you can prevent the additional cost of retention in later grades. so thank you. [applause] >> very good. thank you. great panel. i'm going to try to deal with three things. i heard there are people in jon stewart like to be gone by lunch so we are going to deal with these in an expeditious fashion.

racial discrimination assessment plans and then will do with this research issue about when the witch doctors to screen which is what you just in on this panel here. let's talk first that racial discrimination. my understanding is the recent study from department of education says it is a disproportionate impact on blacks and hispanics. however, if you adjust for achievement scores, the disparate impact disappears. so you have more black and hispanic kids retained, but if you match on their test performance, then it's the kids are the lowest test performance and since blacks and hispanics have lower test performance, more like to be retained the >> i'm not sure we can agree with everything that you said or establish it at the national level. so we know that black and hispanic kids are disproportionately likely to be retained at the national level. that comes out of some data

collected by the office of civil rights and the department of education just recently. we can't take that same data and do the type of adjustment for achievement that you have mentioned. what we can do is look in florida what's happened to black and hispanic students we see similar patterns, them being more likely to be retained, but if you control for their outdoor reading scores, then they aren't less slightly less to be retained. you don't see. but i'm not sure that we can establish that as a fact on a national basis. >> does anybody think this is racially disproportionate and unfairly so? >> in terms of why it happens or that it happens? >> let's leave though why a site. we don't like it policy. if it under discriminates against any group, but especially the very groups that

have the most trouble in our society, blacks and hispanics. so if this policy of grade retention were to unfairly retain kids, on something other than a readable than a test score, then we should be opposed to the polls to pick something the first thing want to establish is is there evidence that this policy is unfair to any groups? >> when you say unfair that's a loaded question. but is a disproportional used? yes. >> is it effective? >> no. are we exposing a certain unrepresented disproportionate to his advanced population of our youth to this particular demonstrated ineffective shoji? yes, that's the anti-to the question. >> the answer is yes, because you think the policy hurts everybody who was subjected -- >> i didn't say that. you said it hurts everybody was subjected to it.

but again we were looking at the population statistics the type of analysis we've all completed, there have been some data on individuals longitudinally over time but in general i'm speaking about interventions which is the same as if you do at reading intervention. rarely arguing of the single individual. you are typically look at the 100, 200 or 1000 the again i don't want to be put in a position where i've been suggested to say that every single child -- >> i withdraw that. what i meant was this policy, according to your review of literature, and a lot of other people, not just you that feels this way, that retention in general has some harmful effects but not that it harms every single individual kid, but on average and it doesn't benefits and has harmful effects. so even if you have more blacks and hispanics subjected to the policy, which is definitely the case. that is true. i don't think anyone denies that. and because the policy does not

help them and heard some kid, it's likely to disproportionate negative impact on the. that's your position, right? >> yes. >> but that's not because anybody intends for more black kids and more hispanic kids to be hurt in some way. it's because they made a mistake in their judgment about the effectiveness of the policy. so we come back to the main question which we will return to in a minute about what the evidence shows. so the assessment plan, i'm aware of a lot of situations where assessments are lousy. how serious is the assessment problem here? can really identify kids who don't read well, and can identify kids who do read well? at the test useful? even if we have good test, not everybody necessary uses them. do we have to caution states or school systems about the approach they take? and i assume it would not be just tested it would be other

elements as florida has like teaching evaluations and what did you call, a portfolio of evidence about whether the kid should be promoted? cohabited problem is assessment your? >> is not a problem. there are a variety of tests of reading skills. i can show you correlations between reading skills at the end of first grade and 10th grade performance, single, strongest critics of 10th grade performance. florida has a good assessment system, among the best in this area. so when you're talking about the classification of individual students and whether a student just on one side of the promotion versus retention line has been reliably identified, that is a different issue. there's era around the cut point, but in general the assessments are good and they can certainly discriminate between good readers and poor readers. and let me say in response to

your previous question that the discrimination here is a provision of education to minority and disadvantaged kids, that is of low quality and leaves been damaged for life. i think we need to focus on that as the discrimination that we all should be ashamed of and do something about. >> i just want to say a word on assessments. assessments say in first grade are different than assessments in kindergarten or in prekindergarten. one of the things and talking to a colleague do is pretty much an expert in assessments recently, he highlighted the fact that it's not only which assessments are used evidence-based nationally norm and so forth, but when they're given and where they are given. and that assessments to very young children that are given before they have had a chance to acclimate to the environment, that is too early in the the

kindergarten or first grade are going to be less reliable. and what the candidate is over identify kids with needs, maybe that's not bad because it gives them service, but the truth is it me waste service dollars. >> so there's agreement on the panel and no one is disagreeing so far that we do have an assessment instruments and the states could design a very reasonable way to identify poor readers. so leaving aside the issue of whether they should be retained or what should happen we can identify them and we can't have a program. we all agree on that, yes? >> one comment, i think assessment them and thank you, i think florida has a very strong assessment system as well. the key is the next step. what the teachers do with the information that they get and the need for really good professional development for teachers to understand what the data around that student shows. and then how to attack that deficiency that is there. that is key because assessment

by itself is not going -- >> i think a lot of testimony people agree that the tests that identify poor reader is not necessarily a diagnostic test it is not necessary useful to plan a program intervention for a kid? but all in interested now is we can identify poor readers it gets special treatment for them. that is not a big issue. i suspect it might be an issue in some cases because states and localities might not do it exactly right but anyway we can do that. final question now, so this is the one about the witch doctors pick this happens all the time and social science. and i think want to try to reach some resolution on this. we have a stark difference year, some, shane is saying you should not retain. not every kid but on average and the absence it produces positive impacts is nil and is based on over 100 years worth of research and meta-analysis and so forth,

and then the policy brief him and marty claims that the florida evidence shows it can be part of a plan. so first before i ask a question i wanted to see if we can reach some kind of agreement here that i think there may be more agreement than meets the eye. we are all in agreement i think that if a school system really wants to attack this problem, of insufficient reading or by early grades, that they need a multiple part strategy him and that should include preschool education, diagnosis, lots of extra reading and so forth. so there's a lot of agreement about how to do this, okay? now, the position on the policy brief is as part of that multiple part plan, that retention make sense, and shane is saying that goes in the face of a lot of evidence. so what's the resolution here? how can we resolve this difference for always be your not going to be three or four, 500 studies on meta-analysis.

this happens when you go to policymakers. researchers don't agree so what's a policymakers supposed to do? what's the answer? >> can i try and analogy? thinking on my feet, this may not work out. i'm not an epidemiologist, but my guess is that coronary bypass surgery is strongly negatively predicted of health outcomes. if i compare people of a coronary bypass operation to everyone else in the population. my guess is that that still holds true even if you match the people you're comparing based on the cholesterol level, based on some measure of their heart strength. my guess is that if you did a meta-analysis of that relationship, it might even be 136 out of 138 of the many relationships we can study in this type of meta-analytic way. that doesn't mean -- that means

you should do everything possible to avoid the situation in which you might use coronary bypass surgery and you might be exposed to it as an individual, but that does not count you that for those people are exposed to it, that it causes their worst health outcome. and in order to answer that question we would have to set up some sort of a situation where a researcher could take people who are equally likely to be exposed to the intervention that we're interested in, some of which he did it and some of which don't as a result essentially a chance. we can't randomly assigned students to be retained or not to be retained, but we can take advantage of the situation that i discuss created by these test phase promotion policies to compare students who are exactly similar, save for the fact that they scored one point differently on the state reading test.

and that provides unusually strong opportunities to make causal inferences. and none of the other research that's reviewed in these studies comes anywhere close to that level of rigor. and so in my view we should pay attention to the highest quality evidence which includes studies of chicago and florida, and not turn to the larger, older and in many cases outdated literature. and cannot -- the only other point i would make is that -- >> don't leave this one because shane is, i'm sure wanting to respond. so shane, respond. >> there's a lot of elements, and with all due respect the idea that we're going to embrace and isolation that is christian isolation -- the articles published have gone much further in acknowledging the fact that

it's not looking at, it's not looking at retention throughout, throughout this article we refer to the treatment under florida's policy as retention if only for the sake of brevity. understanding that, it's conflated with so many other elements that it's just shameful to pretend that it systematically examined retention. now, to be fair, i acknowledge and embrace, and, frankly, most of the analysis i've completed have been regression analyses utilizing longitudinal studies protective longitudinal studies, granted they are not experimental random design which we both know is not going to happen and is not plausible, but, so i applaud the initiative and it's not to say that marty is the first is was not to put them on the spot but i applaud the initiative of those who have utilized the regression discontinuity analysis in an

effort to obtain samples that are able to be examined subsequently. so i applaud that. however, i take issue with the ongoing rhetoric about isolating, isolating causal effects and then suggesting that it links to retention because it simply doesn't and that's, it's too strident, too myopic and is fallacious. it simply does not reflect what is happening in those analyses. ..

>> using the same precise analyses that you folks have with the exception that the florida context evidently, and this is an issue for further research -- although i'm a bit, i'm much more ambivalent about the need for further research, i suppose having been at this for 20 years, i'm at the point where how about we do 100 years of research before continuing to advocate for further research -- my point, we haven't been historically been attending to it. i'm not willing to dismiss that literature that is very multidisciplinarian in nature, an array of statistical procedures when, in fact, we always need to look forward and advance the science, always need to look at those analyses that are being done. but those are some of the key elements that i believe distinguish our perspective -- >> someone is dying to say something, i'm going to give russ the last word and let him -- >> one of the things i learned

as the director of the institute of education and science is where we had the responsibility for vetting research and what works in education is pay no attention to metaanalysis because garbage in is garbage out. what you need to do is look at the method logical quality of particular studies and determine what can be reasonably concluded from them. >> exactly. >> frankly, 98% of the research and education that has been conducted over the past 100 years does not meet a methodlogical standard that allows any reasonable conclusions about what works. so i would certainly privilege in terms of conclusions about policy the strongest methodlogical research rather than the mass of research that's been conducted. i think what we can conclude here is that the florida policy

which had many elements had at least for a few years a positive impact on can kids in florida -- on kids in florida. and probably a systemic impact on the behavior of the system and the people responsible for getting kids to learn. whether a policy with the same label would have a similar effect in north carolina, i don't know. it would depend on the details, and that's why we very much need additional research d research tied to particular policies. it's very hard to make conclusions about metaananalytic conclusions about what's likely to be the impact of a particular policy that has seven different elements that differ from the elements that have been used in the other particular research. so, again, there are always differences among researchers. it's hard to, hard to resolve those differences unless you just believe me.

[laughter] >> and by the way -- >> met me see if i can -- let me see if i can summarize one thing that i think picks up on a very important point you made that russ clearly agrees with, and that is you cannot single out any element of the florida policy and say this caused the effect. it's the whole thing. [inaudible conversations] >> analyses to examine that, it is possible, it hasn't been done -- >> that's right. >> yes. so -- i'm not agreeing -- >> let me finish the point. >> okay. >> i'm sure the audience is wanting to know what kind of resolution here, and from the florida study we could not conclude, okay? anybody disagrees, say so right now. we cannot conclude that grade retention per se is an effective policy. what we can conclude is that grade retention as part of a broader policy can have positive effects. the whole thing taken together. you couldn't single out any one element, correct? isn't that what you're -- >> within that context, that's

what the analyses have yielded, although i would take the position if you implemented the reading interventions without the retention policy that i would, based on the historical evidence looking at the effectiveness of direct reading instruction, monitoring, formative assessment, that you would yield these effects. >> this i know for sure, we will never be able to answer that question -- now, unless you're dying, we've got to get to the audience. >> i am dying here. i agree with a lot of what russ said. [laughter] in terms of metaanalyses, the best metaanalysis is going to systematically document which studies have high quality based on what parameters in a very similar way to what's been done clearinghouse. in the sense that you review a lot of studies, and you end up identifying what are their control parameters, what is the degree, and every -- each of the high quality metaanalyses i have seen actually report that information in addition to the effect side because within a

metaanalysis, you would need to be able to look at that level of detail. we agree that we can't look at a single study in isolation, but we ought to be able to look at the relative strength -- >> i was wrong, you get the last word. make it quick. >> um, i don't think we should try to separate the pieces and parts of the policy. the pieces and parts of the policy are prevention, intervention and retention, and based on student performance in florida, it has made a huge difference. >> go ahead. >> and if i, perhaps -- >> that was very shorkts thank you. [laughter] >> and if i had put the title together for today's session, it would not have been retention, it would have been third grade reading proficiency for the same reason that mary said, they're inseparable. the second thing i want to say is that 23 you look at the document -- if you look at the document in your folder about all of thetates and you look at state policy, you seed a wide array of things where a state will have a, b, c, d, some other

state will have d, e, f, g, most have not been studied. >> okay. questions from the audience. someone's going come armed, give you a microphone -- come around, give you a microphone. let's have a succinct question and succinct answers. right here in front. tell us your name and ask the question. >> i'm missy worthheim. you might wonder why i'm here. my mother was a pioneer child psychologist interested in the brain. i want to ask you about the linda mood bell system. if that was available in schools early on, and i say because my granddaughter did it, and it made an enormous difference, what would that cost? and is there a way to do it? >> um -- >> are you familiar with it? >> i am, but it's been ten years since i was at the state level.

but in a broader context, we, um, we put out requirements as to what had to be in a good reading program, and we left, we left the purchase and the decision to use that up to the district. that gets kind of to what marty said about prime district ability to make decisions based on the needs of their kids. but from a state policy perspective, we were very specific about research-based programs and not market research. because every program that came out in the beginning of the 2000s had a stamp that said reading first approved, and there was no such a thing. so i am familiar with many of the programs, but cost wise i can't speak to. >> question two right in the back will on your right.

>> [inaudible] for children who are victims of violence and bullying and they attended intensive summer programs and class should the schools and the state be more compassionate on them, and what do can -- what do you recommend? >> let's have a quick answer. what are we going to do about bullying? catch the bullies and throw 'em off a cliff. [laughter] >> teach them how to read. >> teach them how to read. that's it, that'll solve the bullying. next question all the way over here on the left. >> yes, thank you. miriam rowland. one question about the florida study, is there anything in the study or any other research that gives us the answer to accent

retention, or is there any evidence that retention, in fact, made a significant contribution to those outcomes? >> relative to the full package? >> teaching and intervention and all the other things that florida was doing that sounded really great. >> yeah. so it's not something we can address definitively for the reasons we just discussed. we don't have data, for example, on take-up of summer school to the extent of which students were being assigned to highly-effective teachers. many of the additional requirements were expanded to all kids in the grade, so, for example, one of the requirements was that they have one consecutive, what is it, 90-minute-a-day reading period. so some of those were later expanded to all students, so they shouldn't be something that's different for retained and promoted students. but it's hard to separate it all out. one of the things we do look at is the effects in reading and in

math. in all of the additional interventions, we're targeted towards reading specifically, yet we still see some benefits in math. so that makes me think that there may be some independent effective retention itself, but there's no way to say for sure. >> so the answer to your question, no. [laughter] right there in the back on the left. right there, yes. >> hi. tom schultz with the chief state school officers. i have a quick comment and then a question. >> okay. >> among the things that can be done in terms of enhancing reading proficiency, it seems that retention is one of the most expensive things you can do. to illustrate the data from florida, it costs more than $10,000 per child whereas in terms of their pre-k program, they're currently spending less than $2500 per child. and it seems to me the problem is the cost of that is hidden. it doesn't get debated in terms of is this a good way for us to

spend public dollars when we increase the percentage of kids who are retained. the question is, looking at the data that mary provided, the concern that i have in spite of this ambitious effort in florida, over the past seven years -- according to this data -- there's been relatively little progress in reducing the percentage of third grade readers at the lowest level. you're kind of between 18 and 20% for the last seven years. where the schools have been going at it as hard as they could go. so what would people on the panel recommend, what next has to be done? what else has to be done beyond what's been done in florida? >> great question. >> thank you. >> one thing that i would say just to go back, we have a fair amount of literature and research now on the impact of high quality pre-kindergarten. and florida has had a pre-kindergarten program for commit a number of years -- for quite a number of years. like the rest of the states around the country, the quality

varies. lots of kids are in other kinds of childcare settings, we've talked about mediocre settings and so forth. so if you look at the work the national institute of early education research and so forth, there's a mountain of evidence on pre-k and what implications it has for future school success -- >> and you're saying that shows pre-k, high quality pre-k can make a difference? >> it can make a huge difference and lifelong difference. >> so the answer to his question is more and higher quality pre-k. >> could i -- >> go ahead, yeah. >> -- jump in? i think what we've learned now from 15 or 20 years of a full bore effort in terms of learning about what it takes to get kids to be able to read is that we know for the first time how to systematically get children to break the reading code. and so the problem of chirp not being -- of children not being able to sound out the word on

the page because they don't know the alphabet let earth, they don't know what sounds they make, we don't yet know how to get all teachers to do it, but we know how to to do it. where things fall apart, and i think this was the lesson of reading first, where things fall apart is when we get to reading comprehension. >> yeah. >> it depends on knowledge of the world. a lot of content knowledge, a lot of vocabulary knowledge. and we're not going to get kids to acquire that knowledge based entirely on, you know, three hours a day and a good quality pre-k program. it's going to take a broad level early intervention to give kids -- and continuing series of interventions -- to give kids in disadvantaged circumstances that knowledge. and absent that knowledge, they're going to have a lot of trouble reading. so it is pre-k, and it is pre-pre-k, and it is family-related programs, and it

is continuous. and, you know, i think rather than focusing on high quality pre-k as a rubric, we should focus on what's happening in pre-k programs, specific interventions that are most likely to help children cross this crucial -- >> full disclosure here, i gave russ $10 to make that speech because on october 2nd in this very room, we are going to release the next im about the future of children that is exactly addressed to the issue you just mentioned, so, yes, mary laura. >> i'd like to make a comment to your comment. i, first of all, pre-k, our pre-k program has only been in place since 2005, so we are just seeing -- '05-'06, so we're just seeing those students in third and fourth grade, and there's not enough data to draw conclusions. we, too, are hopeful that it will make a difference. but i would disagree that we haven't seen a decrease in, a steady decrease in the percent

of students reading at the lowest level. we've seen many kids move from the next to the lowest level to grade level and above. so i think that i will continue to say that it has definitely made a difference. and to wrap in the point about our retention policy, is it unfair in terms of race, i would say that our -- the numbers show that our african-american and hispanic students have benefited the most from this policy. for whatever reason they were struggling readers, they have benefited from intervention and retention. and, yes, they were more likely to be summit to the policy -- subject to the policy, but they were also more in need of the interventions that they received. >> one more question. on the right here. couple rows up. thank you. >> hi. i'm isa guernsey, director at

the new america foundation. i wallet to say for airing -- i want to say thanks for airing a lot of this. i'm frustrated, and i think probably others in here too are, with the enall-- inability to dl with the conflation issue. the fact that this is a package of prevention and intervention, and the fact we keep calling it retention as the answer. and one of the things i'm wondering is whether there's any -- maybe now it's just theoretical, but anything to just the simple threat of retention that is adding to the ability for the interventions to work. and if that is what people think might be happening here, is there a less costly threat to using, less costly to children, perhaps, if, in fact, we're seeing in some other research negative impact of that. so, thank you. >> this is an interesting question, and in russ

articulating the threat or motivation component of it, i think this warrants further consideration. notably, i don't know the precise answer to your question, but i have a reflection. it's that there have been multiple studies historically that are looked at children's perception of grade retention as a stressful life experience. and there's been multiple studies that have been done that ultimately when they look at a list of stressful life experiences, children historically -- prior to the florida-chicago context -- had already been indicating that when they report their perception of grade retention and 20 other life experiences, that grade retention has been as stressful from a child's perspective by sixth grade as going blind and the death of a parent. okay? and for those of you who would like to know how stressful it is from a child's perspective to go to the dentist, that's usually about 19th or 20th on this list.

so relatively speaking, grade retention being as stressful for children. so in terms of mow motivation from a child's perspective, i sort of see it that children haver if seed this -- we focus a lot of energy today on the achievement component, and we're not talking so much about the social-emotional consequences, the long-term implications associate with the that which i believe are equally important as we look at the development at a child over the time so that we're not promoting simply the academic achievement. >> cain? >> clearly, one of the issues that that's come up is that the question of retention, sort of heightened awareness made everybody sort of serious about this achieved urgency. there's got to be more than one way to achieve urgency, so i think one of the challenges for all of us in whatever roles we have in life is to say, is setting targets. does public commentary on how we've done on the targets help

with urgency, so on and so on, and we need to come up with an array of ways rather than thinking a threat is the only one. >> yes. >> two things. my husband, who i know is not watching, refers to himself as an academic redshirt. he was retained later in elementary school and living with me while this was going on he said if this had only happened to me earlier, um, but the other, the other point i would make, again, is back to human behavior. the increase of parents, the number of parents who, you know, teachers always say we wish we had parent engagement until parents get engaged -- [laughter] the fact that parents of kindergarteners were saying i want to know what it is i can do, i want to know what you're doing for my child, and that was not happening in the beginning of third grade. that was happen in keu7ber garten. and the thought that a parent would not find out until the end

of third braid that their child had a reading difficulty, that's educational malpractice. they should know as soon as we know, and in some instances, pre-k. so to your issue of the threat of retention, i understand -- i certainly understand having had to deal with it at a high school level, the threat and the impact it has, um, socially. i, again, will bring up what is the impact of self-esteem on a high school dropout, and i think that that warrants as much consideration in this conversation. >> well, please, join me in thanking the panel. [applause] if you haven't got enough about literacy, come back on october 2nd. thank you, you've been a great audience. [inaudible conversations]

>> today, the alliance for health reform looks at the availability of dental insurance coverage in the u.s. you can see it live starting at 12:15 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> all this week on c-span2, q&a on the u.s. military. today an interview with world carroll, editor of military.com, a web site that provides information and support to current and former service members and their families. he talks about military issues and the costs of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. that's at 7 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> this weekend on american history tv, 75 years since amelia earhart's failed attempt to circumnavigate the globe, former u.s. flight surgeon and aircraft crash investigator dr. white wallenborn, shares his

findings on her life and disappearance. also this weekend more on "the contenders," key political figures who ran for president and lost but changed political history. >> i draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and i say segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever. [cheers and applause] >> this sunday, former alabama governor george wallace. american history tv this weekend on c-span3. >> german chancellor angela merkel is in canada for meetings with canadian prime minister stephen harper. they discussed the eurozone debt crisis and negotiations for canada-european union trade deal. the two leaders spoke to reporters at a joint news conference for 25 minutes. >> good morning.

[speaking french] >> translator: madam chancellor, allow me to begin by welcoming you very warmly on behalf of all canadian. you welcomed me to germany on a number of occasions, and we are very happy to be able to welcome you here in our turn. >> canada in 2010. you read, of course, the g8 in huntsville and the g20 in toronto, but we are particularly pleased to welcome you here in the nation's capital on your first bilateral visit to canada, the first such visit to ottawa by a german chancellor in a decade. germany is, of course, a close ally, partner and friend of canada. and to the ties of national interest may be added those of family. over three million canadians trace their roots to germany. [speaking french] >> translator: i have to say,

madam chancellor, that over the years i have frequently had the opportunity to appreciate the wisdom and leadership that you have brought to the g8, to the g20 and to other meetings among international leaders. >> you and i, angela, joined these various international forums at almost exactly the same time, and i've always been impressed not only by the quality of your contributions, but also the respect that you command there everyone around the table. our discussions last night and today with our officials have been frank and useful. trade and investment between canada and germany is strong. our countries are both firm advocates for the open markets that create job growth and long-term prosperity for our citizens. however, there is room to expand our economic relationship directly and undirectly through -- and indirectly through wider trade with europe. [speaking french] >> translator: that is why canada is determined to conclude

a comprehensive economic and trade agreement between canada and european union. madam chancellor, we very much want to thank you for the support, the ongoing support that you give to that, to this historic agreement, an agreement that will make it possible for canada to access over 500 million consumers, consumers who make up the largest market in the world. >> we remain firmly committed to concluding a canada-european union comprehensive economic trade agreement. your ongoing support has been vital to the great progress that has been made so far, and i know we will continue to work together to achieve this important milestone. something, by the way, which will serve as a very encouraging sign to both our economies and to the wider global economy. [speaking french] >> translator: i know that for both our countries the global

economy remains the top priority. >> successful economic be situation and the ongoing efforts to restore stability in europe. and let me just say this, that we in canada appreciate your steadfast resolve in confronting these financial and economic challenges and in finding solutions. and in particular we support your concern with not just finding any solution, but finding good and sustainable solutions to these problems. [speaking french] >> translator: i have also appreciated our exchange of views on international issues. particularly on the situation in syria. >> particularly syria, have also featured prominently in our discussions and, again, this is an area where germany under your leadership plays a vital and constructive role. angela, canada and germany are certain friends in a very uncertain world. your visit here is a testament

to the strength of that relationship, a relationship that i personally and canadians generally greatly value. [speaking french] >> translator: once again, i wish you a very warm welcome. >> translator: thank you very much. i gladly came here to canada on this, my first bilateral visit, after having, obviously, been able to enjoy canadian hospitality during summit meetings. this visit aligns very close and friendly relations between the republic of germany and canada. i said this before quite repeatedly, they are so good that one has to be careful not to lose sight of them and to nurture them and to look after them. so i'm very grateful for your hospitality, for the very warm welcome, particularly for the hospitality that you extended to us yesterday night and where we had this very good talk in four

hours. and it showed again that both on multilateral and bilateral issues there's a high degree of agreement between us. and that this is also an alliance that the relations between canada and germany are much closer not only on the political level, but also on a perm level. yesterday, for example, on the -- during the reception that ambassador gave, i was able to meet a number of people who day by day do their bit to render canadian/german relations even closer, and i must say that we owe a debt of gratitude to the citizens on both sides of the atlantic who do that. canada is a country that, um, holds great fascination for many, many germans. we know that you are 30 times as big as the federal republic of germany, and, um, whoever wishes to appreciate the sheer beauty of nature and vast spaces,

obviously, will find this more here than in germany, although germany, too, is a beautiful country. i don't want to sort of actually say bad things about my country when i'm abroad. but in this what is in a way rather insecure world, we, as the prime minister stated, discussed a number of issues of great interest to both of us, fee issues loomed large on the agenda first, and the comprehensive economic trade agreement. we feel very much committed to this. we want a speedy conclusion of this agreement. it will be an agreement o. e.u. with canada that is on the broadest possible base. it's probably the broadest, um, trade agreement that the e.u. has ever concluded from recognition of personal qualifications to regulatory cooperation to drawing down terrorists. there are a number of outstanding issues out there, but once i come back -- i go

back to germany, i will see to it that these negotiations come to a speedy conclusion. because at a time where there is lack of growth in the world, we -- canada and germany -- are convinced that free trade is one of the best engines of growth that we can have. protectionism is one of the greatest dangers to growth. as regards growth globally. secondly, my visit to halifax this afternoon will underline that there is a very close, um, canadian-german cooperation in the scientific area. almost all universities, but also almost all of the big research institutions, for example, the helmand association, but also the -- [inaudible] association work together with canadian institutions here in this particular respect in marine research, and, third, the business representatives, um, with whom we will have lunch presently come to -- [inaudible] extend from the area of natural

resources, commodities. canada, as we all know, is one of the biggest suppliers of resources. so in the next decades to come we trust that we will cooperate very closely in this particular area, that we will embark on a joint path of extraction of these raw materials. we know canada to be a fair partner in trading, so we think we can make good investments, and we all learn, after all, that the supply with commodities has become a strategically important issue for many, many governments in the world. and this is why we are so happy to have this close cooperation with a country that is so rich in natural resources as canada is. we also talked about, obviously, economic issues such as, for example, coping with the euro crisis. we said we want to -- we're after a sustainable, long-term solution. we think we ought to overcome a debt crisis here. it is a crisis of debts, a crisis of lack of competitiveness in a number of

european countries. but what is also important is the question when we created or when this currency union was created, um, there was not really a reliable framework created at the same time. we have committed to bring this about. we know that in a common currency area there has to be more responsibility shared politically. i also underline that in many of these issues we feel we're on the right track, although, obviously, time is pressing, and we are very much aware of this. on the whole, thank you very much, prime minister. it is a very interesting visit for me, a visit with a friend, a visit with friends. so thank you very much for your gracious hospitality. i think it's a very, very good contribution to our, to development of our bilateral relations and, obviously, a visit when i come here, i immediately extend an invitation to the prime minister, you know, an open door for you always. thank you very much.

[speaking french] >> translator: when i call your name, if you could, please, raise your hand, and the microphone will come to you. [speaking french] >> translator: good morning. mr. harper, your stated goal for 2012 is -- 2012 is the deadline for the signature of the free trade agreement with the e.u., but the fact that so far you have refused to assist germany and the e.u. for the rescue fund, can that be a barrier to the achievement of a free trade agreement for 2012? everybody has spoken of an elephant in the room, this

refusal to assist the european union. so will it be a barrier? and have you, have you taken the elephant out of the room, as it were, during your discussions with chancellor merkel? have you changed your position? [speaking french] >> translator: the quick answer is, no. those issues are unrelated. we have every confidence in our european partners. we believe that they have the capacity and the will to take up their own challenges. the two issues are not connected. we both need to increase our trade. the increase in trade and growth is essential to europe as it is to canada. and as i have just said, this is

an excellent sign for the global economy that during a time of trade negotiations and challenges with the wto, for example, it's essential that major economies come together. so we are simply complying with the guidelines we've set down. >> these are unrelated matters. we have, as i've said before, complete confidence in our ability of our european friends that they have the means and the will to address their issues. both of our countries, both of our economies need increased trade. it is essential for growth, it is essential for growth on both sides of the atlantic. this is an important agreement that we're negotiating. we have the goal of having an ambitious agreement that will not only set a high standard for agreements between major

economies going forward, but will also provide a sign, a signal to the global economy that major developed countries are able to move forward on the trade agenda. so this is important for both of us. we've set an ambitious timetable to achieve that. negotiations are going well, and i'm confident that we will successfully conclude. [speaking german] >> translator: it would be very wrong if one were to link the question of the comprehensive trade agreement with the question of the saving of the euro. i mean, the question is how can we create more growth for the euro area, and our experience is whenever we had a trade agreement, free trade agreements with other countries, that has given a boost to growth. so we would actually be doing ourselves a very great disservice if we were thinking along those lines. secondly, there can be no doubt at all about the imf, particularly in the troika mission playing a very important role in europe just now.

and the imf does not only have to deal with the question of money, but also, obviously, it is in an advisory capacity, and canada is on the board, is also exerting it influence there and is helping us in this way. so, um, the question as to competitiveness, that is how do the countries of the european union, generally around the industrialized countries, have to position themselves so they can be competitive with regard to the matching economies, and that is the issue, and that is where we have a large degree of agreement. [inaudible] >> prime minister, is it your hope or is it your firm and strong conviction that europeans are able to solve their current crisis by the means they have chosen so far, or do you have, do you have any further advice to the europeans? [speaking german]

>> translator: and a question addressed to you, madam chancellor, as to the euro crisis. in your talks with the prime minister, did you gain the impression that you were able to say something few to him that actually gave a boost to his, to the credibility of the europeans being able to solve this crisis that he didn't probably know beforehand? he will probably be in a better position to tell you that whether i've been able to do that, to give him a sense of security. >> look, we all know europe has taken a number of very important steps. we know there are additional things that have to be done. the chancellor and i discussed these things in great detail, and i'm not going to comment on, publicly on how europe addresses the particulars of those issues. you know, i have great confidence in the chancellor's leadership. we have great confidence in our european friends. and in my discussions not just with chancellor merkel, but with all of our european partners my

experience is the vast number of them are seized with the scale of the challenge and with the range of options that have to be considered. and, you know, any advice that i have to give on particulars i'll, obviously, give private ri. but where -- privately. but where europe remains a very important part of the global economy and where we have a great confidence and a great and frank dialogue with europe on these things as they go forward. [speaking german] >> translator: let me just say the following. there are a number of areas where we, that we are working on right now and a number of places in the world where one deals with the questions of the euro area, the troika report on greece that we have to wait for is one issue. then the question what sort of rescue programs are on the agenda right now that have to be dealt with now, that is also a

question that we, um, addressed. and another question that is of interest, to what extent is there actually the will and the determination among the member states of the european union to also promote the necessary political processes that are necessary to insure a better cooperation long term? because the currency union was, and we are at one in saying, created without the foundation for a political union orifice call union, whatever term you may choose, was already in place. and the fiscal compact is a first step in the right direction. we've made quite considerable headway there. but everyone outside of europe is saying this is not sufficient in order to make progress, and i agree with this, um, so we're thinking about how to enhance this, for example, through further rights of intervention, um, with regard to states that are not fulfilling the stability criteria, how one can further develop and enhance that and, also, um, we need a certain degree of solidarity in europe.

we have to learn, um, to use the monies that we're already giving these days into structural funds and to use those monies much more efficiently in the future. because what we've learned is that not all of the money that was given really, um, gave a boost to competitiveness of those countries and really improved that. if you look at the real estate crisis, um, in spain it has a lot to do with, um, misallocation of monies, and we have to draw the right conclusions from that. that, too, is something that we talked about, whether this was new to the prime minister, i was not really able to assess, but he listened to me in a very interested way, and this is what, after all, friendly discussions are all about. >> mike branchfield, cp. >> good after -- good morning. question for both of you, just wanted to get your reaction to comments that the european central bank chief has made very recently about the need to do whatever it takes to save the euro. i'm wondering if both of you can

comment on the lengths, what that means and the lengths we need to go to. and is just to follow up with the chancellor, you mentioned your enthusiasm for canada's natural resources and wanting germany to be involved there. do you have any concerns or any thoughts on the high levels of carbon emissions that are created by the extraction of canadian resources? and the criticism that has been leveled about that and that particular discussion? [speaking german] >> translator: well, the, um, head of the european central bank, the president of the european central bank, what he said is something that we repeated time and again, actually, since the beginning of the greece, greek difficulties, um, more than two years ago, that we feel committed to do everything we can in order to maintain the common currency. so the european central bank although it is, of course, independent, um, is completely

in line with what we've said all along. and the results of the meeting of the central bank and their decisions and also it actually shows that the european central bank thinks that political action as regards conditionality is simply a precondition for a positive, um, development in the euro area, and this being shaped in a positive way. as for the co2 development, we talked about all of them, and we are also in the context of new directives that the european union is going to launch. we'll come back to that. we were as one in saying that the question as to which particular extraction actually gives rise to what level of co2 needs to be worked out, um, scientifically, and that is something to which we feel committed, and we obviously think that we need to do everything we can to reduce co2 emissions, um, as best we can. but we are also familiar with

the problems that are there with respect to the -- [inaudible] it doesn't mean, however, that any other extraction of natural gas is free of co2 emissions. one has to give a solid scientific foundation to this, and germany will come out strongly in favor of this. .. the willingness, you know, including at times of urgency and stress, her desire to not

just eyeing any solution, but to find correct and good solutions. matches any solution thrown on the table to deal with the problems of today, the chancellor has mentioned issues, fundamental issues of fundamentalist, i would add moral hazard. these are things that has to be taken into account. so i appreciate, i did appreciate that leadership. i think it is essential. [speaking in german] >> translator: as i said a number of times, the chancellor and other european leaders half on a number of occasions shown their determination to keep the hero essential to their vision of a common european market. at the same time obviously there are pressures to find solutions, and i appreciate the fact that

chancellor merkel is seeking not just any solution but a good solution. it can be all too easy and to pressure to apply bad solutions did you say someone has done something to but the problems are genuine. they are problems and the long-term, sentimental problems, competitiveness problems. and i very much appreciate the leadership shown by chancellor merkel in seeking good, long-term sustainable solutions to the crisis. >> one question on global finance on the global financial and economic crisis. what could be specifically the

canadian contribution to bring this to solution? and secondly come you said on the euro, there could be more in dimension rights, these of the those states that are not abiding by the rules. could you give us examples? [speaking in german] >> translator: well, i think that is quite ambitious time plan for the comprehensive trade agreement between the e.u. and canada is, for example, one example to give a boost to the global economy. i think with the decisions taken during g8 and g20 which very much, which went a long way towards promoting fiscal consolidation under the canadian presidency go along way towards getting a boost to the global economy. and i think canada is an example for how one can actually emerge from the crisis in a robust way. you have a free trade system. you have a sound policy and jeff

quite as strict rules as to the banking sector. and if you look at the last economic crisis, the global economic crisis, candidate has weathered this quite well, so there's something we can learn. canada is not only counseling something to others that they themselves are not doing at home. it is tested and proven. that's important to me. and then i would like to point to what i said previous occasions in the german, i said also if i had been the only one doing the fiscal compact at the time and actually drawing this, if i had the only say, i would have liked a stronger intervention rights. also vis-à-vis for example, a country that does not abide by the rules, the commission might directly also intervene in budgetary law, and that is something we have to talk about and we have to talk about we after all agreed on certain roles them and part of the problem with the euro is that

some credibility was impaired because quite often we said we would do certain things and then didn't do them. this credibility has to be regained because it's most important boon we have, these are the investors. we need investors from outside europe, europe in and of itself will not be able to prevail with just european investors we will not be able to finance debt just with european investors, and this will depend on our reliability of our credibility. this is why we need to talk about this in the autumn. [speaking in german] >> translator: if i might add something, the problems can be very real. but it's there important that we focus on growth and job creation.

a comprehensive economic and trade agreement will be very important in that. >> appreciate all the debt about the crises. they are very real in europe, but we can't lose sight of the necessity of continue to focus on the creation of jobs and growth. and canada, e.u. trade agreement is one of the most important things we can do in that regard and that's why we will continue to pursue to a successful conclusion. thank you. >> today, the alliance for health reform looks at the availability of dental insurance coverage in the u.s. you can see it live starting at 12:15 p.m. eastern on c-span.

>> all this week on c-span2, q&a on u.s. military. today, an interview with ward carroll, editor of military.com, a website provides information and support to current and former service members and their families. he talks about military issues and the cost of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. that's at 7 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. this weekend on american history tv, 75 years since the amelia earhart's failed attempt to circumnavigate the globe. former u.s. air force flight surgeon and aircraft crash investigator, shares his findings on her life and disappearance. also this weekend, more from the contenders. our series that looks at key political figures who ran for president and lost the changed political history. >> i draw the line in the dust and possibly ghana before the seed of tyranny, and i say

segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever. >> this sunday, former alabama governor george wallace. american history tv this weekend on c-span3. >> which is more important? well -- wealth or honor? >> on or spent it is not a said four years ago, the economy, stupid. it's a kind of nation we are. it's whether we still possess the determination to deal with many questions, including economic questions, but certainly not limited to them. all things do not flow from wealth or poverty. i know this firsthand, and so do you. all things flow from doing what is right. >> look at what's happened. we have the lowest combined rate of unemployment inflation and home mortgages in 28 years.

>> look at what happened. 10 million new jobs, over half of them highway jobs. 10 million workers getting the raise they deserve with a minimum wage law. >> c-span has aired every minute of every major party convention since 1984, and that we are in the countdown to this year's conventions. you can watch live gavel to gavel coverage every minute of the republican and democratic national conventions live on c-span. c-span radio and streamed online at c-span.org all starting monday august 27. >> in 2010, the supreme court ruled 54 allowing unlimited spent on political campaigns by corporations or unions. commonly referred to as the citizens united decision. the center for american progress host a forum looking at how corporate america is influencing judicial decisions on ace state level.

this is an hour. >> [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon. thank you all for coming. i'm andrew blotky, the director of legal progress here at the center for american progress, and it's my pleasure to welcome you all this morning, this afternoon. hard as it might actually be to believe, we will take a break for the next hour or so for presidential politics, and talk about the third equal branch of government. but in doing so we are not shifting away from the economic issues that really face all americans in all communities across the country every day. in fact, quite the opposite.

whether you are an employee who has been injured on the job or a consumer with a credit card, or a mother whose child was injured by a defective product that she bought, or one of the millions of americans who have had the house foreclosed on, you turn to state court for protection. indeed, 95% of all litigation in this country happens in state court. but, unfortunately, in 39 states in the union, 39 states and union holding some form of election for state court, it might not be possible for americans to truly get a fair day in court. following the citizens united decision judges are increasingly having to choose between siding with special interests, unlimited sums on elections or decide for the law. today we are releasing to reports that highlight the influence of corporate campaign cash and the influence it is having on the american justice system. we detail how soaring costs additional elections some $230 million has been spent on

court campaigns in just the last 10 years. has led to state supreme court decisions that favor corporate litigants over individuals seeking to hold them accountable. we've seen a trend where corporate campaign money has resulted in increasingly conservative pro-corporate and consumer decisions in a very short time period. in an accompanying report highlights referenda on the ballot in three states that could make the process by which these judges are chosen even more political than is already the case. ultimately, though i think u.s. supreme court's, sandra day o'connor said it best. we all expect judges to be accountable for the law rather than to political supporters or special interest. but elected judges in many ways are compelled to solicit money for their election campaign, whether or not these contributions actually tilt the scale of justice, three of four americans believe the campaign contributions affect courtroom decisions. this crisis of confidence in the

impartiality of the judiciary israel and growing. -- is real and growing. made worse by the supreme court 2010 citizens united decision is the topic of today's discussion. we have with us today pre-people who know well and personally the effects that campaign money can have on actual governing and judging. today will discuss with him to undo the idea that corporations are people and affects the campaign cash is having on courtrooms across the country. so justice james nelson, directly to my right, is the just on one end of the supreme court he was appointed to the court in 1993, and prior work in private practice and serve as an attorney but he served as a force within and united states army from 1966-1969, and graduated from university of idaho and the george washington university law school. justice nelson wrote a widely no dissent challenging montana's

campaign finance law after citizens united, a decision the u.s. supreme court justices soon reversed or decline the opportunity reconsider citizens united without comment. just a for all for dias, farthest in the rectum is a former justice on the supreme court he was appointed to keep his seat later that year and after several state supreme courts held lawsuit damages were unconstitutional, karl rove and deny states u.s. chamber of commerce, excusing, mastermind a campaign to unseat judges who stood in with tort reform tort reform, including justice diaz, even prosecuting him on false criminal charges but he was acquitted of all charges. the steward beckham historic his store was a choice in john grisham's book, the f.u. though his story could not become more and for much of increasing politicalization of the third branch of the nfc. you graduate from university mississippi law school and currently works in private