| « Common Standards: Size Isn't Everything | Backlash Blowback » |
Capitol Notebook
06/11/09
05:54:03 am, Categories: Announcements [A] ✏ Representative John Kline of Minnesota has emerged a leading contender for the Ranking Republican slot on the House Education and Labor Committee for the vacating Buck McKeon. The Hill newspaper states that: "Sources close to Boehner say that Kline is even-keeled and would be a good fit for the position."
✏ Growth models for measuring AYP have expanded and are likely to get even more play, either through ESEA reauthorization or if the Secretary exercises that same prerogative as Spellings did to approve new proposals. A lot of states are exploring this.
I have heard a few people tell me that internal figures at the Department show that only 8% (I have no idea of whether the number is accurate) of schools have gotten out of "needs improvement" status as a result of growth models.
I thought the ostensible reason (I have no illusions about the political reason) for growth models was to give schools credit for some longitudinal growth (short of AYP), not to reduce the number of schools compelled to undertake appropriate reforms.
Even Tennessee, with low standards and a definition of growth that is less than meets the eye, projected it would cut the number of schools in "needs improvement" status by 13%.
And in Pennsylvania, which just implemented its growth model this year (a variation of the Tennessee model) the percentage of schools that will get out of "needs improvement" this year is 28%. Philadelphia is the largest city, thus far, to be affected by the growth model pilot program. This has big implications in a state with some of the greatest inequities in the country. Do we really not want those 28% to improve?
More on this later.
✏ The GAO is circulating a draft report commissioned by Senator Feingold on the impact of NCLB, based only on interviews with teachers. Folks I know that have seen drafts of the report say it may not be up to GAO’s usual standards of objectivity. Would be interesting to know if they plan a follow up report to look at the views of administrators, parents, and civil rights/disability advocates (don’t hold your breath).
Trackback address for this post
Trackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location)
2 comments
Comment from: Scot [Visitor]
Growth models seem, well, obvious for the job. I just thought the measurement apparatus wasn't sufficient, i.e., vertical equating of tests not yet done. Which, if undertaken, could have it's own cottage industry, begetting its own political dimension, begetting its own obfuscation and eventual demise. What was I talking about again?
06/11/09 @ 07:52
With tests that are insensitive to instructional differences and with "proficiency" defined in terms of arbitrarily-set cut scores on the ungrounded measures, "growth models" are a cruel hoax on students, teachers, parents, and the citizenry. The unacccountables are racing over the top.
06/11/09 @ 10:41
This post has 566 feedbacks awaiting moderation...
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
