"A child's learning is the function more of the characteristics of his classmates than those of the teacher." James Coleman, 1972
Showing posts with label nclb failure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nclb failure. Show all posts

Sunday, September 04, 2011

Georgia Superintendent Acknowledgement Signals Imminent End of NCLB Nightmare

The students, parent, teachers, principals, and now the superintendents are coming after you, Eli, Bill, and Arne, and the self-serving fools, charlatans, delusional racists, and edu-pirates of Wall Street.  There will be no spider hole you can hide in from the judgment of history.

Posted by Maureen Downey at Get Schooled, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution education blog.  ht to Bob Schaeffer:
By Jim Arnold
We’ve done it now. Eleven years we had to educate the public, to register our protests and do everything in our power to warn people what was coming, and we blew it. We knew the moment would eventually come and we hem-hawed, looked at the ground, kicked at the dirt with our shoes and failed to look the opposition in the eye and face them down. All of us saw this coming, but very few took a stand and now we – and our students – are paying the price. We could have been prophets but failed the test.
We allowed the proponents of NCLB to control the discussion from the beginning. They wrote the language, sent out the media notices and explanations, wrote the definitions of AYP, Highly Qualified and leaned heavily on the fact that none of us would dare protest anything to do with a name that implies we would be providing a high quality education for every single child in America. They were right. We chose not to speak out, not to fight against a system we knew from the beginning would set us all up for failure, and instead, in our best Dudley DoRight impersonations we set about to change the way we taught and measured and tested and graded and thought.
We knew from the outset that NCLB and its goal of 100 percent  – every child proficient in every area as determined by a single test on a single day each year – was patently, blatantly and insidiously absurd, but we took no concerted action. We knew Adequate Yearly Progress was a sham, and we literally and figuratively rolled over and tried our best to meet whatever impossible goals they set for us and our students. We knew that Federal law in NCLB was a violation of Federal law in IDEA but we went along with the insanity of testing Students with Disabilities based on chronological age rather than by IEP.
We learned very quickly and much to our chagrin that some student scores – usually the lowest ones – were counted not once, not twice, but often as many as three times, but we went along to get along. All of us were aware that Highly Qualified, for all the high rhetoric that went along with it, only served to make certification as much of a barrier as humanly possible for Special Education teachers regardless of degree or experience. It seems the teachers we needed most were subjected to the greatest roadblocks to reaching the nirvana of HiQ certification.
We tried our best to play the game but the game was rigged from the start. When the AMO’s were low it was pretty easy for most schools. When the AMO’s went up and more and more schools were labeled “failing” we looked around in a panic for help. Surely nobody believed a school deserved the failing label because two or three kids in a subgroup didn’t pass a test? Yes they did. Yes they still do.
We let them make the definitions and apply the labels, even when we realized the absurdity of it all.
We actually pretended to believe that it was important for us to make sure that every child was tested on those all important test days so none could escape the trauma we inflicted upon them. We even learned in some places to game the system and hold back those kids we feared might not pass the test or might raise those student numbers to create a subgroup in areas we really didn’t want to see a subgroup or, God help us, to cheat or to make sure that we could hold out two or three or four  of “those kids” on test days so their poor scores wouldn’t have a negative effect.
Oh sure, some of you stuck your necks out and said something to the effect of “NCLB forced us to take a closer look at ourselves, and we are better off for that” in spite of the fact that it was our students that were suffering the consequences. What balderdash. What hubris. Our kids were the ones whose education was stilted by our submission to the belief that one test could effectively distill and determine the depth and extent of an entire year of a child’s education. They are the ones whose time was wasted by “academic pep rallies” and “test prep” and by the subtle and insidious ways we told them the test was “important” and put pressure on them to “do their best because our school is counting on you.”
They were the ones that did without art and music and chorus and drama because we increased the amount of time they spent in ELA and Math. They were the ones that had time in their Social Studies and Science classes cut back more and more so schools could focus on the “really important areas” of ELA and Math. They were the ELL’s that couldn’t speak English but still had to take the test. Their teachers were the ones that were told “your grading of the children in your classes doesn’t count any more because standardization is more important to us that the individual grades you provide.” This told them in effect that their efforts at teaching were important but only if they taught using “this” methodology or “this” curriculum, then, when things started to go badly, they were the first to be blamed for the failure of public education. They were told to teach every child the same way with the same material but make sure to individualize while you’re at it. Hogwash.
After a couple of years of this insanity, the “NI” status began to take its toll. Someone somewhere invented the term “failing schools” and, unsurprisingly, the label stuck. Students were given the opportunity to transfer to more test-successful schools, but at a price. Schools that did not meet AYP standards, oddly enough, were often those with high minority populations and high poverty. Nobody seemed to notice the zip code effect that left predominantly white schools meeting AYP standards and minority schools caught by the “failing” label. Oh surely, we reasoned, our government would not want to put public education in a situation it could not win………..or would they?
I struggled with the rest of you as to why NCLB would go to such great lengths to make public education appear to be such a failure, to set up a system that would guarantee failure for practically every public school as we advanced toward that magical 100 percent level and provide no tangible rewards for success and such punitive actions for not meeting arbitrary goals. On top of all of that, I failed to recognize why our nation’s legislators so nimbly avoided even the discussion of reauthorization to change what everyone knew was a failed policy. One day it finally hit me.
They didn’t want to change the policy, because the policy was designed in theory and in fact not to aid education but to create an image of a failed public school system in order to further the implementation of vouchers and the diversion of public education funds to private schools
I am not usually a conspiracy theory guy, but this was no theory. These were cold hard facts slapping me in the face. We failed in our obligations to protect our students from one of the most destructive educational policies since “separate but equal.”  We did not educate the public on the myth and misdirection of Adequate Yearly Progress, and we allowed closet segregationists to direct the implementation of policies that we knew would result in our being the guys in the black hats responsible for “the failure of public education.”
Now we are paying the price. AYP is here to stay in one form or another, and the vast majority of our parents and public really believe the propaganda that it actually measures a school’s educational progress. If we try to convince them otherwise we are “making excuses.”
Vouchers – especially for private and charter schools exempt from the same restrictive, destructive policies we are forced to endure – are a part of every legislative session in almost every state. High stakes testing for all public education students is considered a necessary reality and teachers are leaving the profession in droves. Student test scores will soon determine teacher pay in some places even with no data to support the correlation. Students that do not graduate high school in four years are labeled as dropouts, even if they graduate in nine or 10 semesters.
Only first-time test takers are considered in the grading system for schools regardless of how many students ultimately pass the test. It will take years to undo the damage done to science, social studies, fine arts, foreign languages and other academic electives. Generations will not be enough to rid ourselves and our students of the testing mania neuroses created by our attempts to quantify the unquantifiable.
I hope the generation of teachers and administrators that follows has learned something from the failure of our generation to ward off those determined to destroy public education. We didn’t stand up to be counted, we didn’t stand in the schoolhouse door and tell them they couldn’t do that to our kids, and we didn’t educate the public about what a gigantic failure another one size fits all education policy would be. In the words of that great educator and philosopher Jimmy Buffet: “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.”
We have all been left behind.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

CRP Report: NCLB Increasing Segregation and Damaging Learning

Press Release from the Civil Rights Project at UCLA:

Contact:
Heinrich Mintrop: (415) 250-0156
Gail L. Sunderman: (571) 217-7004

Los Angeles—April 22, 2009—A new report from the Civil Rights Project at UCLA, a non-partisan research center which has been systematically studying the implementation of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) since its inception, finds that some of the basic assumptions of the law are not working and may well be making things worse. In this study, Why High Stakes Accountability Sounds Good but Doesn't Work-- And Why We Keep on Doing It Anyway, commissioned by the Civil Rights Project, Researchers Gail Sunderman and Heinrich Mintrop evaluate whether the accountability system endorsed by NCLB is likely to succeed or fail, and whether it is compatible with what researchers across the country have learned about the conditions needed for lasting school reforms.

The report finds that NCLB is failing on three fronts. First, there is little evidence that high stakes accountability under NCLB works. It has not improved student achievement and the sanctions have had limited effects in producing real improvement. The law also is not very good at accurately identifying schools needing improvement and far outstrips the ability of states to intervene effectively in the schools it sanctions. Third, the law has failed to connect in a meaningful way to the educators who must implement it -- they do not see the accountability goals as realistic and consider the sanctions to be misguided and counterproductive for improving schools.

The most important finding is the damage the NCLB is doing to our educational system. Under NCLB, the system "works" when education systems operate within only a basic skills framework and with low test rigor. The cost to our nation is revealed in an educational system stuck in low-level intellectual work.

Civil Rights Project Co-Director, Gary Orfield, concludes, "The new administration has a unique opportunity to address the serious structural problems of NCLB and to forge a more constructive and effective federal role. To persist in sound-bite educational politics that sound tough but have failed for a generation would be a tragic mistake. To claim that it would further the civil rights of children increasingly segregated in schools that have been officially branded and sanctioned as failures -- but not provided help that makes a real difference -- would be a blunder."

Even though the law is failing in some critical respects, the authors argue that we may maintain NCLB anyway because many derive secondary benefits from the system, specifically those who are politically and ideologically committed to NCLB and those deriving economic or political benefits from the law.

A copy of the full report can be found at the link below.

The Executive Summary and Foreword (by Gary Orfield) follow at the end of this press advisory. Copies of CRP's previously released NCLB reports may also be found on our Web site.

About the Authors:

Heinrich Mintrop, Ph.D. taught middle school and high school for over a decade in both the United States and Germany. He received a Ph.D. in education from Stanford University in 1996. He is currently an associate professor of education at the University of California, Berkeley. As a researcher, he explores issues of school improvement and accountability in both their academic and civic dimensions. He has recently published the book Schools on Probation: How Accountability Works (and Doesn't Work) at Teachers College Press. At UC Berkeley, he is involved in programs that prepare strong leaders for high-need urban schools.

Gail Sunderman, Ph.D. is a Senior Research Scientist at the George Washington University Center on Equity and Excellence in Education where she directs the Mid Atlantic Equity Center (MAEC). Prior to that, she directed a five-year study examining the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 for the CRP. She is co-author of the book, NCLB Meets School Realities: Lessons from the Field (with James S. Kim and Gary Orfield, 2005) and editor of Holding NCLB Accountable: Achieving Accountability, Equity, and School Reform, published in 2008. She is a former Fulbright Scholar to Afghanistan and received her Ph.D. in political science from the University of Chicago.


Download the Report: Why High Stakes Accountability Sounds Good but Doesn't Work-- And Why We Keep on Doing It Anyway (in PDF Format) What is pdf?

Download the Press Release: New Study by UCLA's Civil Rights Project: NCLB Ignores What We Know about School Change and Is Motivated by Politics (in PDF Format) What is pdf?

Bracey Offers to Tutor Sandy Kress on the NAEP Numbers

It is not unexpected to see the defenders of the testing factories to see sunshine in the headlights of the locomotive that is bearing down from the other end of the NCLB tunnel.

Here is little corrective from Jerry Bracey, posted at Assessment Reform Network listserv:
From: gerald bracey
Date: 4/28/2009 12:41:29 PM
To: Kelly Flynn
Subject: Re: NAEP?

Ms. Flynn,

You say that you are not a statistician. Clearly, neither is Mr. Kress. In fact, his own statement disproves his conclusion. He points to "big gains over the past 16 years." That cannot be a typo because there is no six year period--the period of the existence of NCLB up to the time of the latest testing--in the data. So he's giving NCLB credit for improving scores for a full 10 years when it did not exist.

Looking at the reading data, I see a one-point---one point!--gain for 17-year-olds between 2004 and 2008, a score that leave this age 4 points below their highest scores which occurred in the late 80's and early 90's.

I see a one-point--one point!--gain for 13 year olds, leaving them with precisely the same score as they had in 1992.

I see a one-point--one point!--gain for 9-year-olds. This is an all-time high, true. But most of the gain occurred between 1999 and 2004. As I have pointed out, NCLB came into existence only in 2002, experienced great implementation chaos early on--most states didn't even have their plans in to USDOE for the 2002-2003 school year, leaving only the fall of 2003 for NCLB to work its magic. Thus, most of the gains would have occurred during the Clinton administration, pre NCLB.

Looking at math, I see a one-point DECLINE for 17-year-olds from 2004 to 2008. This leaves them two points behind their all-time high in 1999.

Thirteen-year-olds show no change from 2004. Note that except for the extrapolated period between 1973 and 1978, scores for 13-year-olds had been rising since 1978.

Nine-year-olds show a 2-point gain. Again an all-time high, but for 9-year-olds math scores had been rising since 1982 and had risen 13 points by 1999. A jump occurs from 1999 to 2004, again, mostly occurring during the Clinton years for the reasons given above.

Bob Linn once observed that given the existing NAEP gains, it would take 166 years for 100% of the students to reach proficiency. We can see by the most recent data that Bob underestimated the duration needed.

It must also be remembered that while it is de rigueur currently to demean state standards, states had been raising their standards for some time, shortly after the appearance of A Nation At Risk. Such efforts render it tricky indeed to attribute any gains to NCLB

My statements are all predicated on data from the original format, but the conclusions would hold even if we used the revised format--the gains are tiny over the period considered. They are especially disappointing given the attention given to NCLB by the feds, the states and the media. I don't know why the USDOE didn't shift to the revised format reporting in 2004. Probably because it would have completely discredited Secretary Spellings' hyperbolic claims for the efficacy of NCLB at the time. Until I see some technical reports from disinterested parties, I'm treating it as statistical sleight of hand.

Actually, the national NAEP data are not all that meaningful because of the changing demographics of the nation. In 1975, 80% of 9-year-olds taking the test were white. In 2008, it was 58%. This leaves NAEP vulnerable to Simpson's paradox in which the who group shows one pattern, the subgroups a different one. The only ethnic subgroup to show stability is 17-year-old whites. All the others are up, some a lot, but they all started their rise well before they had to suffer under NCLB.

Incidentally, NAEP can be gamed. The easiest way is in terms of the percentage of students excluded from the sample for a variety of reasons.

Please feel free to share this in its entirety with Mr. Kress or, if you prefer, provide me an email and I will forward it.

Jerry Bracey

After 7 Years in the NCLB Pressure Cooker, Achievement Gaps Essentially Unchanged

The new NAEP numbers, as reported in the New York Times today:

The achievement gap between white and minority students has not narrowed in recent years, despite the focus of the No Child Left Behind law on improving the scores of blacks and Hispanics, according to results of a federal test considered to be the nation’s best measure of long-term trends in math and reading proficiency.

Between 2004 and last year, scores for young minority students increased, but so did those of white students, leaving the achievement gap stubbornly wide, despite President Bush’s frequent assertions that the No Child law was having a dramatic effect.

Although Black and Hispanic elementary, middle and high school students all scored much higher on the federal test than they did three decades ago, most of those gains were not made in recent years, but during the desegregation efforts of the 1970s and 1980s. That was well before the 2001 passage of the No Child law, the official description of which is “An Act to Close the Achievement Gap.”

“There’s not much indication that N.C.L.B. is causing the kind of change we were all hoping for,” said G. Gage Kingsbury, a testing expert who is a director at the Northwest Evaluation Association in Portland. “Trends after the law took effect mimic trends we were seeing before. But in terms of watershed change, that doesn’t seem to be happening.”

The results no doubt will stoke debate about how to rewrite the No Child law when the Obama administration brings it up for reauthorization later this year. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has said he would like to strengthen national academic standards, tighten requirements that high-quality teachers be distributed equally across schools in affluent and poor neighborhoods, and make other adjustments. “We still have a lot more work to do,” Mr. Duncan said of the latest scores. But the long-term assessment results could invigorate those who challenge the law’s accountability model itself.


Obama and Duncan could actually do something by pushing for the end of apartheid schools and by pushing to end poverty. But these guys don't have any bailouts for poor folks in poor communities, who are offered only one choice: more apartheid chain gangs run by corporations. No shame, no apology, no caring for the end of care, and if you are Margaret Spellings, you expect the Medal of Freedom.

Monday, February 02, 2009

"educational equity in a shambles"

Despite the unending lip service offered by NCLB advocates for closing achievement gaps, those gaps remain gaping. And in the process of NCLB's bombing of the public school system, the dying embers of the school integration movement have been snuffed out by a testocratic education policy that uses tests to sort children based on family income, discourages diversity by penalizing schools with weak test performers, and encourages the creation of urban chain gang charter schools such as KIPP that no middle class parent would consider for their own children.

The question now is whether or not the Obama team with call-me-Arne at the helm of ED will continue the Bush neo-eugenic policies that pay tax-dodging corporations and their foundations to create charter schools that segregate and intellectually sterilize those now deemed defective based on their test scores.

Here are clips from the press release on a new study of the resegregation phenomenon in schools by the Civil Rights Project:

Los Angeles—January 14, 2009—As the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday and the Inauguration of this nation's first African American President approach, the nation is in a celebratory mood about progress on race relations. The election of Barack Obama is a breakthrough that would have been unimaginable a half century ago and a triumph of the long movement for racial justice. But a new report from the Civil Rights Project, Reviving the Goal of an Integrated Society: A 21st Century Challenge, points out that it would be wrong to assume that our nation has now realized Dr. King's dream and created a society where race no longer matters. In fact, the report concludes the opposite: the U.S. continues to move backward toward increasing minority segregation in highly unequal schools; the job situation remains especially bleak for American blacks, and Latinos have a college completion rate that is shockingly low. At the same time, very little is being done to address large scale challenges such as continuing discrimination in the housing and home finance markets, among other differences across racial lines.

The report's author, Professor Gary Orfield, commented, "It would be a tragedy if the country assumed from the Obama election that the problems of race have been solved, when many inequalities are actually deepening. The lesson to take from this is that we have elected a brilliant president, who is the product of excellent integrated schools and colleges. We should work hard to extend such opportunities to and develop the talents of the millions of blacks and Latinos who still face isolation and denial of an equal chance. The outgoing administration has left the machinery of civil rights justice and educational equity in a shambles and strong leadership will be needed to restore it." . . . .

. . . . The report concludes that efforts to make separate schools equal, which have been the dominant approach since the federal government abandoned significant positive support for integration almost three decades ago, have failed. This failure includes No Child Left Behind, which was supposed to quickly equalize achievement across racial lines but has fallen far short. Instead, it is sanctioning scores of segregated minority schools without providing them enough help to make a difference. The report notes that too often the high hopes accompanying a racial change in leadershipÑwhen, for example, black or Latino mayors and school superintendents were first appointed--were often disappointed since the underlying racial barriers to opportunity were not addressed. Orfield, the report's author, calls on the incoming Obama Administration to "make the first serious commitment since President Johnson's Administration and build successfully integrated communities and schools wherever there are feasible opportunities." The report includes a discussion of a number of possible tools and techniques with the potential to extend past successes. Finally, the report calls on the new administration and Congress to review the evidence and provide the needed leadership, for example, to support integrated communities and to avoid the large-scale ghettoization of suburbia.

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Remember the Achievement Gap?

Text below is from the NEA Today, which has come out its hidey hole now that the big bad Bush is building a new security perimeter for his return to Texas. What a bunch of cowards. If this crew of self-serving bureaucrats had mobilized their 2 million members eight years ago, we would not have had this debacle to begin with.

But, instead, they played it safe, just as they are about to play it safe again as they cuddle up with the corporations to strangle the public schools with more tests and more money based on test scores.

What the charts show, of course, is that trading in the bigotry of low expectations for the racism of NCLB's impossible demands has done nothing to close the achievement gap.
. . . .Is it working? Or as President George W. Bush once asked, “Is our children learning?” We hear a lot about test-stressed students, curricula stripped down to make way for teaching to the test, and exasperated teachers leaving the profession. But NCLB supporters say if students do better in reading and math, and if low-income, minority students close the achievement gaps, that’s worth the agony.

And we do hear that in many schools, teachers are getting out of their silos and working together to help all children achieve.

What’s more, scores on state tests are definitely climbing.

So-is that proof of success?

No, it isn’t, according to leaders in the science of testing. Scores always rise when you put high stakes on a particular test, whether or not students actually know more. This phenomenon even has a name: Campbell’s Law.

Harvard University Professor Daniel Koretz, a leading test researcher, explains it with an analogy to polling before an election. Pollsters can’t call every voter. Instead, they choose a small sample. Let’s say a campaign polled 1,000 likely voters and poured all their energy into winning over just those voters, ignoring everyone else. They would probably see encouraging gains among the 1,000 voters-and then lose the election by a landslide.

Koretz says a math test works the same way: No test can cover all the skills from every angle that students should master, so the test is just a small sample. If you focus on teaching kids to correctly answer problems that use a particular question format and only cover a narrow range of skills, students will do better and better-that is, until someone asks them questions in a different way, or measures a different set of skills from the larger curriculum.

Koretz carried out an ingenious demonstration of this phenomenon in the 1980s in a school district he had to agree not to name. The stakes on test scores in that district were “laughably low compared with today’s,” he says, but teachers did feel pressure to get scores up.

When the district switched to a new test, Koretz says, “scores dropped like a rock.” But over the next four years, they rose steadily.

Now comes the clever part: Koretz gave students the old test, the one that no longer carried high stakes so teachers didn’t prep students to take it. Their scores plummeted. His conclusion: Four years of rising scores did not reflect real achievement, just teaching to a new test.

Research on scores on high-stakes tests in Kentucky and Texas also showed Campbell’s Law in action.

So to see whether NCLB is really boosting achievement, we can’t rely on high-stakes state tests. We need to look at scores on a test for which students don’t get prepped.

Luckily, there is one: the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). It’s given to large, random samples of students periodically, but there are no scores for individual schools so nobody’s career is at stake.
Last Update January 9 2:35 pm

I'm not sure the crack staff at NEA was doing with their charts, but here are a couple from NAEP that demonstrate the achievement gaps over time. For some odd reason the Age 9 chart would not upload, but it shows a very similar pattern. For more up-to-date comparisons from NAEP, go here.


Click chart to enlarge.

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Spellings Gets an Earful in Vegas

A newly-tinted and unusually well-fed Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, has nothing to show for her eight years of unceasing threats, sanctimonious sanctions, and unfunded mandates, except for the fact that public school systems of America are even more strapped for cash than they were eight years ago. She continues to spout her unrepentant bromides and to offer a 99.9% tin ear on everything NCLB.

While Paige and Spellings doled out billions since 2002 to the testing-technology complex and their crooked cronies of the textbook-tutoring industry, public schools have been melting down under the steam heat of impossible testing targets and sanctions designed by the enemies of public education. Nonetheless, Spellings continues even to the end, in a fashion that has made her a soulmate of the Simpleton Decider, to proclaim the virtues on the most disastrous education policy ever conceived at the national level. According to Spellings, NCLB has made it possible for school systems to better target their freeze-dried budgets.

Texas cannot reclaim this incompetent hag fast enough. It would seem the folks in Las Vegas agree:

The federal No Child Left Behind Act, an education law intended to improve student achievement, can also help public schools weather the tough economic climate, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said Tuesday.

The Clark County School District, for instance, is preparing for anticipated reductions of $120 million in state funding next year.

Armed with the student test data gathered by federal mandate, Spellings said, educators can go to lawmakers and say: "This is where we are, this is what we need, and this is who needs help."

Spellings, who was in Las Vegas to speak at the Federal Student Aid Conference at Bally's, said the economic crisis is forcing public schools to look carefully at how resources are allocated. Information on school performance can be used to set budget priorities.

"As discouraging as it can be, it's an opportunity to right the ship and make sure we're spending the money on the things that are absolutely essential."

. . . .

During a news conference, Spellings insisted that educators can use the information on school performance to set budget priorities "so we can be a lot smarter with the limited resources we have."

No Child Left Behind, enacted in 2001, calls for schools to have all students performing at grade level by 2014. The federal act is often criticized by those who see it as an unfunded mandate that places too much emphasis on testing and call it punitive for labeling under-performing schools as failures.

Spellings said Tuesday that she doesn't understand the criticism. She said the legislation was intended to create more awareness and force necessary change.

"It just says these are the facts ma'am," said Spellings, whose term ends with the Bush administration.

Spellings said she will continue to advocate for No Child Left Behind.

Spellings came under criticism Tuesday after speaking to the conference of financial aid advisers. Audience members criticized both student loan programs and her leadership. . . .


Tuesday, November 11, 2008

NCLB Failure Train Rolls Into Illinois High Schools

A clip from Carbondale's thesouthern:
. . . .Students at Carbondale Community High School District 165 consistently rank in the top third of the state and the school is recognized as one of the region's best. But for three straight years, the school failed to meet its AYP.

School administrators were proud to announce they did hit their AYP this year, but the success does not hide some serious problems, said CCHS 165 NCLB coordinator Virginia Appuhn.

"First of all, 230 high schools out of the 657 in the state met AYP; that's 35 percent," she said. "We've got 1,200 students (at CCHS); of 138 other schools in our (enrollment) range, only 31 met (AYP)."

Appuhn said part of the flaw of NCLB is in its use of subgroups, which represent sets of 45 or more students who fall into a minority such as special needs or low-income students. The failure of a subgroup to hit its AYP means an entire school fails.

This year's standard held that 62.5 percent of students at a given school had to meet or exceed minimum test scores or the school would fail. Next year the standard slides to 70 percent, then 77 before topping out at 100 percent in 2014. . . . .

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Study Published in Science Shows Massive California School Failures Imminent

Considering the crimes that have been committed by this Administration, it should come as no surprise that they would unblinkingly blow up the public schools for the sake of their school privatization agenda and corporate welfare schemes--all in the name of saving the poor and the brown, who were the first affected by this crime and who, of course, will be the last when the impossible proficiency goals are finally ditched by the new Administration.

For those with steel-reinforced skulls who still will not admit that massive failure is certain under the present regime, here is the latest piece of research that looks at the case of California. The research is published, by the way, in the September 26 issue of Science. From the NSF website:
Press Release 08-164
All Students Proficient on State Tests by 2014?

Analysis of California elementary school achievement data shows projected improvements in student performance will fall short of legislated benchmarks

Back to article | Note about images

Photo of student doing math.

One of the challenges of meeting adequate yearly progress (AYP) under No Child Left Behind is that schools, districts and states must report not only a rise in total scores, but also progress in the scores of subgroups of students, including minority students, English language learners (ELL) and students with disabilities.

Credit: © 2008 JupiterImages Corporation


Download the high-resolution JPG version of the image. (228 KB)

Use your mouse to right-click (or Ctrl-click on a Mac) the link above and choose the option that will save the file or target to your computer.

Chart projecting California student proficiency to 2014.

Researchers at the University of California, Riverside (UCR) used state assessment data reported for the school years 2002-2003 through 2006-2007 to project the growth in student proficiency through 2014. Data was drawn from more than 4,900 California elementary schools. The researchers used three different growth models (represented by the blue, grey and green lines) to project average annual growth in proficiency for mathematics (solid lines) and English language arts (dotted lines). Models are plotted out to 2014 to illustrate that the available data (through 2007) does not indicate the accelerated growth in proficiency required to meet legislated goals. California's benchmarks for adequate yearly progress (AYP) under No Child Left Behind are shown in the red lines. More information on this research appears in the Sept. 26, 2008, edition of Science magazine.

Credit: University of California, Riverside


Download the high-resolution JPG version of the image. (488 KB)

Use your mouse to right-click (or Ctrl-click on a Mac) the link above and choose the option that will save the file or target to your computer.

Cover of Science magazine.

The researchers' findings are published in the Sept. 26, 2008, issue of Science magazine.

Credit: Copyright AAAS 2008


Download the high-resolution JPG version of the image. (1.1 MB)

Monday, August 11, 2008

NCLB Juggernaut Continues to Plow Under Public Schools

Per the Bush Administration's plan and the enabling dopey Dems, states like Minnesota now have almost half their public schools listed as failures. From the Twin Cities Daily Planet:
Minnesota school officials announced Tuesday that nearly half of the state’s schools fell short of state education standards.

This clearly ridiculous finding is part of the federal No Child Left Behind law that requires states to test students in math, science and reading each year. Schools that don’t meet NCLB goals are publicly shamed and ultimately forced to reroute public money for poor children to private or public firms.

The benchmark for a passing grade rises each year. The process, called Adequate Yearly Progress, culminates in 2014 when every student must pass the test or the school will face punishment.

The result of this rising bar is that each year more schools fail. In 2005, 247 Minnesota schools did not meet AYP. In 2006, 483 came up short. Last year, 729 failed and this year 937 of the state’s 1,920 schools – nearly half – failed the tests.

Every educator in Minnesota would welcome an assessment that fairly evaluates student growth, but results such as these show that NCLB test results are meaningless. . . .