States redefine student progress

[proud2BlibKansan]

Education Department to allow changes in performance measurement

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Tinkering again with enforcement of the No Child Left Behind education law, the government plans to let some states fundamentally change how they measure yearly student progress.

In an experiment that's been months in the making, up to 10 states will be allowed to measure not just how students are performing, but how that performance is changing over time.

Currently, schools are judged based only on how today's students compare to last year's students in math and reading -- such as fourth-graders in 2005 versus fourth-graders in 2004.

Many state leaders don't like the current system of comparing two different years of kids because it doesn't recognize changes in the population or growth by individual students.

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings was announcing the "growth model" policy on Friday to a gathering of state school chiefs in Richmond, Virginia, The Associated Press learned.

more . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/18/student.progress.ap/index.html

[evlbstrd]

1. Inflexible flexibility?

"The department has not chosen the 10 states that will be part of the experiment. In practical terms, many states won't qualify because they don't have the kind of data systems to track individual students across grades. And others may not find the change helpful.

To start, states that gain approval to measure student growth will also be required to chart progress the old way, comparing this year's students with last year's. The Education Department wants to see that data to help determine whether charting growth is a fair, accurate measure."

Maybe this is a good thing. But, with no way to track individual progress and the lack of federal funding, will this really make any difference?

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. It is a difference in philosophy

concerning WHAT we should measure and report. Do we measure individual kids and what they have learned OR do we measure entire groups (i.e. school districts and individual schools)? Do we base school progress on the individual scores or on the group scores?

We DO have the ability to measure individual kids. It is more expensive, though.

The system now calls for us to measure this year's 3rd grade scores against last year's 3rd grade scores. Since these are two entirely different groups of kids, many educators don't feel this is a valid measurement. And many 'experts' agree.

Here's the rub - looking at school groups as a whole is said to be a better and cheaper way to measure each teacher's instructional skills. But that totally ignores the impact of transition, second language learners and kids with disabilities. Right now, we are seeing teachers not wanting any 'special' kids in their classes because of this test score pressure. If we move to a model where we look at each kid's individual progress, we are not as concerned with teacher competence. It is also a more fair measurement, IMO.

I believe we should be more concerned with what individual kids learn that how whole classrooms or schools perform on tests. There are far better ways to measure teacher competence than by looking at test scores.

[evlbstrd]

3. Since I'm coming from a relatively uninformed perspective,

I can understand the diffferences. The level of funding and the limited scope of the "experiment" are what bother me.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. You are on the right track

To tie funding to student performance (when we question how to measure it) is completely wrong.

I have been asking for years how in the world any system can be expected to improve when you withdraw resources. That just makes no sense. Yet, that is what NCLB does.

[evlbstrd]

5. Okay, I feel less ignorant now.

I gotta get off of here and scout out rental housing. Know anyone who'd like to buy my house?

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Yeah I would love to buy it

But I already have one and that's my limit.

Sorry you have to sell. That must be hard.

[evlbstrd]

7. Yeah.

Twenty years. Raised my kids up in it. But, better that than foreclosure. And I need to downsize, anyway.