An editorial in the Oklahoman, addressing Oklahoma's poor showing in per pupil expenditure based on the latest US Census Bureau's report, brought out suspect arguements as it tries to refute Oklahoman's support of the HOPE campaign (SQ 744).
In an effort to address perceived short-comings, Oklahoma is compared to Utah whose students do better on the NAEP, despite warnings by NAEP officials for states not to compare results if states have their own state standards.
Utah's students are recognized by the writer as being "predominately white and more affluent" than Oklahoma's students. For years, the impact of poverty on kids has been a strong indicator of success. In comparing kids from the USA to other countries, America's public schools are bashed for not being competitive. But when you take out the scores of students in poverty, our kids come out on top.
No one is saying you ignore those in poverty, but to ignore the role poverty plays in students lives is irresponsible.
Another "fact" is that common education receives 35% of the Oklahoma budget. What the article fails to mention is that common ed use to receive 39% of the budget as its share continues to decrease.
Oklahoma is supposedly working very hard and will do better "when the economy recovers and revenues permit." Oklahoma is an oil state. The revenues coming in were incredible. Because Oklahoma had so much growth revenue, the legislature, thinking the revenue would last forever, cut taxes. They learned nothing about oil revenue, tax cuts and the impact on revenues occurring in the 1980's. For Oklahoma, our revenue problems, with a shortfall of $2B, are largely self-imposed.
The piece even states "[t]he claim that the Legislature enacted tax cuts at the expense of schools is unfounded...." Is it really? The state has a shortfall of a couple of billion, and it's not at the expense of schools? Not only schools but everything else.
Addressing salaries for the Oklahoman has always been about merit pay and the salary schedule. When presented with ways to enhance teacher pay, they balk at the possibilities and always return to the same old arguments.
Paying teachers to be competitive with other states and other professions gives Oklahoma the opportunity to recruit and retain people. However, when we aren't competitive, we end up with teacher shortages the legislature addresses by passing a variety of ways to become a teacher. We don't have a teacher shortage in our state. We have a number of graduates with education degrees who are in other professions because the pay and benefits are so low.
As more information is made available showing the legislature's embarrassingly low commitment to kids and our future, you will continue to see responses that try to white-wash the truth. Sadly, all Oklahomans are impacted by the "white-wash" and our state will have a difficult time competing and growing in its second century if the truth is not told.
Showing posts with label Testing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Testing. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Monday, July 13, 2009
2009 RA Sights & Sounds--Dennis Van Roekel's Keynote Address
"And contrary to what our opponents might say... NEA welcomes a national conversation about how to transform our school system... better ways to measure student learning... to improve the practice of our profession... to attract bright and talented students into teaching... and to confront the problems that plague poor and minority children in struggling schools."--NEA President Dennis Van Roekel's keynote address on July 3.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
New Report on Charter Schools and Student Achievement
Charter Schools Found Not To Have Raised Student Achievement Significantly
The Washington Times (6/16, Billups) reports, "Even as the president has touted the growth of charter schools and his education secretary has decried state caps on their numbers, a new study from Stanford University has found that the nation's charter schools have not significantly raised student achievement when compared with traditional public schools. The study of collective reading and math progress in 2,403 charter schools in 15 states and cities, including the District of Columbia was released Monday by researchers at Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO)." Findings "showed that almost half of the charter schools produced results similar to those from comparable public schools, and schools producing worse results than the traditional schools outnumbered those with better numbers by more than 2 to 1."
The Washington Times (6/16, Billups) reports, "Even as the president has touted the growth of charter schools and his education secretary has decried state caps on their numbers, a new study from Stanford University has found that the nation's charter schools have not significantly raised student achievement when compared with traditional public schools. The study of collective reading and math progress in 2,403 charter schools in 15 states and cities, including the District of Columbia was released Monday by researchers at Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO)." Findings "showed that almost half of the charter schools produced results similar to those from comparable public schools, and schools producing worse results than the traditional schools outnumbered those with better numbers by more than 2 to 1."
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Not on the Test--Tom Chapin
Since it's test time, here is Tom Chapin to put everthing into perspective with the best song and video. Tom can be found here.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Arne Duncan and the HELP Committee
On January 13th, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP-which includes Senator Coburn) held a hearing to consider the nomination of Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education. Here is a summary of that hearing.
The hearing was chaired by Senator Harkin (D-IA) in the absence of Senator Kennedy (D-MA). Also in attendance at the hearing were Senators Mikulski (D-MD), Reed (D-RI), Sanders (I-VT), Murray (D-WA), Enzi (R-WY), Alexander (R-TN), Coburn (R-OK), Roberts (R-KS), Burr (R-NC), Isakson (R-GA), Murkowski (R-AK), and Hatch (R-UT).
Opening Statements Superintendent Duncan was introduced by Senator Durbin (D-IL), who cited Duncan’s success in raising test scores and decreasing dropout rates and in working closely with the business community and unions. Senator Enzi, ranking Member on the Committee, made an opening statement in which he expressed his pleasure at Duncan’s “support for merit pay and charter schools.”
In his opening statement, Superintendent Duncan cited three “deeply held beliefs:”
1. Every child from every background can be successful.
2. When we fail to educate children, we “perpetuate poverty and social failure.”
3. Children have only one chance to be educated – we cannot wait because they cannot wait.
He spoke about wanting to focus on things that are practical, pragmatic, and innovative. His statement focused on the themes of recognizing and rewarding excellence, challenging the status quo, elevating the teaching profession, and scaling up what works. In his written statement submitted to the committee, Duncan stated with regard to NCLB, "I have seen the law's power and its limitations. I agree with the president-elect that we should neither bury NCLB nor praise it without reservation."
Questions and Answers
· Teacher Incentive Fund/Pay-for performance – Senator Alexander asked about Duncan’s views on the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF). Senator Burr asked about expanding pay-for-performance programs. Duncan stated that he is a big fan of TIF, calling it “one of the best things Secretary Spellings did.” He mentioned that he received TIF funds in Chicago and thought it was a highly successful program that rewards talent and helps to attract and keep great teachers where they are needed most. His goal is to reward excellent teachers. He wants to support and potentially expand TIF. Duncan indicated he had a teacher advisory council in Chicago that helped shaped the program and spoke positively about his partnership with the union. He also wants to look for other ways to support teachers and attract them to high-need areas, including career ladders.
· Teach for America – Senator Harkin expressed strong support for Teach for America (TFA). He stated that a “high percentage of Teach for America alumnae stay in teaching and become excellent teachers.” He indicated that TFA needs more money than Congress currently provides ($14 million). Harkin asked Duncan about his familiarity with Wendy Kopp, the head of TFA, and his views on the program. Duncan stated that he is a huge fan of Wendy, calling her “one of a breed of educational entrepreneurs that includes Jonathan Schnur (Executive Director of New Leaders for Schools)” who are “changing the face of public education.” He expressed his strong support for TFA and talked about the partnership Chicago schools had with the program. He called it a “pipeline of talent” and indicated that many TFA alumni are principals in Chicago schools and many are among his advisors. He would like to scale up TFA quickly.
· Teacher retention – Senator Mikulski asked why so many teachers leave the profession after only a few years and what can be done to retain quality teachers. Duncan talked about the need to support new teachers, including through induction and mentoring programs. He also indicated his support for career ladders. Duncan indicated that teaching is an art, not a science, and that it takes 10-15 years to develop excellent teachers.
· Teacher compensation – Senator Roberts indicated that the main reason teachers leave the profession is the need for more money. Duncan did not provide a response to this statement as no question was asked.
· Teacher preparation – In response to a question from Senator Reed, Duncan indicated his desire to work with institutions of higher education to make sure that teachers are prepared. He also stated his support for teacher residency programs. In addition, he stated support for alternative licensure programs.
· Early childhood education – Senators Harkin and Sanders asked questions about early childhood education and the need to ensure that children come to school ready to learn In his responses, Duncan cited the Obama “zero to five” plan and his goals for improving the quality of and access to early childhood programs. Duncan indicated that there is nothing more important than getting kids ready to learn and that early childhood programs need to be much more than glorified babysitting. Duncan also indicated support for a goal of moving to universal access to quality child care.
· Higher education – Senator Murray and Senator Sanders asked about access to and affordability of higher education. Duncan responded that we need to reduce barriers to higher education, including simplifying the federal financial aid application. He also indicated his support for increasing the Pell Grant award, and the American Opportunity Tax Credit. He also stated support for loan forgiveness, cautioning that there has to be mutual responsibility and those who receive loan forgiveness must give back to the community.
Senator Burr asked about higher education matriculation rates and how long the government should have to pay for students to attend higher education. Duncan responded that he did not have a specific answer but would want to look for ways to support people who are trying to take advantage of the opportunity of higher education, including those who may need to take longer to complete their education.
· 21st Century skills – In response to a question from Senator Murray about preparing students for the jobs of tomorrow, Duncan highlighted the disconnect between the business community and education and his hopes for bridging those gaps. He stated his concern about the need to prepare students for 21st Century skills and gave the example of nursing, which cannot be outsourced.
· IDEA special education – Senator Roberts asked about IDEA funding, indicating that IDEA is currently the “biggest unfunded mandate foisted on schools.” Roberts indicated his strong support for increasing the federal share of IDEA costs. Duncan spoke about living on “the other side of the unfunded mandate” and the high price that mandate has had in Chicago’s schools.
· Highly qualified teachers/Special education --- Senator Coburn raised concerns about the impact of the definition of “highly qualified teacher” on special educators and the loss of teachers due to this problem. Senator Isakson later followed up with a similar question. In response, Duncan indicated that we need to take another look at things that are impractical and we need to be more pragmatic.
· Assessments for students with disabilities – Senator Isakson raised the issue of assessing students with disabilities and his belief that the IEP should determine the type of assessment. In response Duncan stated, “I tend to agree with you. We need to be practical.” He further added, “For English Language Learners, we need assessments that test knowledge. If we give an assessment they cannot read, what good is it?”
Senator Harkin raised the “one percent” and “two percent” rules, which limit the number of students with disabilities who can be tested with alternative assessments and count toward AYP. Harkin was concerned that these rules “leave as many as 30% of students with disabilities not counted.” Duncan stated that he “philosophically agrees” with the Senator.
· Adequate Yearly Progress – Senator Isakson raised concerns about judging schools on the failure of one subgroup. Duncan indicated his support for disaggregated data and growth models, but that it is too blunt an instrument to measure a school because of one student in one subgroup.
· Charter schools -- In response to a question from Senator Alexander, Duncan indicated that he is a great supporter of charter schools. However, he believes in holding charter schools accountable and does not believe that just anyone should be able to open a charter school. In Chicago, he stated that charters were successful because they had “rigorous strict standards up front.” In short, he supports creating schools in any format that works.
· Community schools – Senator Sanders asked about the provision of health services in schools. Duncan responded that schools should be community centers and provide services to the whole community. They should be open for 12 hours, not 6, to allow access for working parents.
· Dropout/Graduation rates – Senator Burr asked about the dropout rate problem. Duncan responded that the U.S. hasn’t so much fallen behind other countries as other countries have surpassed us. He stated that we do not need to look overseas to find good models for reducing dropout rates. He wants to “shine a light” on excellent programs in the United States and scale up what is working.
· Physical education – Senator Harkin spoke about the importance of physical education programs and the problems of childhood obesity. Duncan agreed, noting that his wife is a PE teacher.
· Challenges in rural areas – Senator Murkowski mentioned the challenges of education in a vast rural state like Alaska, and invited Duncan to visit Alaska to see these challenges first hand. She asked about a focus on middle school. Duncan indicated that there is “no magic bullet” as to which grade levels are most important and reiterated his themes of being practical, pragmatic, and focusing on what works.
Closing Statement
Senator Harkin closed the hearing by indicating his hope and expectation that Duncan would be confirmed unanimously by the full Senate.
The hearing was chaired by Senator Harkin (D-IA) in the absence of Senator Kennedy (D-MA). Also in attendance at the hearing were Senators Mikulski (D-MD), Reed (D-RI), Sanders (I-VT), Murray (D-WA), Enzi (R-WY), Alexander (R-TN), Coburn (R-OK), Roberts (R-KS), Burr (R-NC), Isakson (R-GA), Murkowski (R-AK), and Hatch (R-UT).
Opening Statements Superintendent Duncan was introduced by Senator Durbin (D-IL), who cited Duncan’s success in raising test scores and decreasing dropout rates and in working closely with the business community and unions. Senator Enzi, ranking Member on the Committee, made an opening statement in which he expressed his pleasure at Duncan’s “support for merit pay and charter schools.”
In his opening statement, Superintendent Duncan cited three “deeply held beliefs:”
1. Every child from every background can be successful.
2. When we fail to educate children, we “perpetuate poverty and social failure.”
3. Children have only one chance to be educated – we cannot wait because they cannot wait.
He spoke about wanting to focus on things that are practical, pragmatic, and innovative. His statement focused on the themes of recognizing and rewarding excellence, challenging the status quo, elevating the teaching profession, and scaling up what works. In his written statement submitted to the committee, Duncan stated with regard to NCLB, "I have seen the law's power and its limitations. I agree with the president-elect that we should neither bury NCLB nor praise it without reservation."
Questions and Answers
· Teacher Incentive Fund/Pay-for performance – Senator Alexander asked about Duncan’s views on the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF). Senator Burr asked about expanding pay-for-performance programs. Duncan stated that he is a big fan of TIF, calling it “one of the best things Secretary Spellings did.” He mentioned that he received TIF funds in Chicago and thought it was a highly successful program that rewards talent and helps to attract and keep great teachers where they are needed most. His goal is to reward excellent teachers. He wants to support and potentially expand TIF. Duncan indicated he had a teacher advisory council in Chicago that helped shaped the program and spoke positively about his partnership with the union. He also wants to look for other ways to support teachers and attract them to high-need areas, including career ladders.
· Teach for America – Senator Harkin expressed strong support for Teach for America (TFA). He stated that a “high percentage of Teach for America alumnae stay in teaching and become excellent teachers.” He indicated that TFA needs more money than Congress currently provides ($14 million). Harkin asked Duncan about his familiarity with Wendy Kopp, the head of TFA, and his views on the program. Duncan stated that he is a huge fan of Wendy, calling her “one of a breed of educational entrepreneurs that includes Jonathan Schnur (Executive Director of New Leaders for Schools)” who are “changing the face of public education.” He expressed his strong support for TFA and talked about the partnership Chicago schools had with the program. He called it a “pipeline of talent” and indicated that many TFA alumni are principals in Chicago schools and many are among his advisors. He would like to scale up TFA quickly.
· Teacher retention – Senator Mikulski asked why so many teachers leave the profession after only a few years and what can be done to retain quality teachers. Duncan talked about the need to support new teachers, including through induction and mentoring programs. He also indicated his support for career ladders. Duncan indicated that teaching is an art, not a science, and that it takes 10-15 years to develop excellent teachers.
· Teacher compensation – Senator Roberts indicated that the main reason teachers leave the profession is the need for more money. Duncan did not provide a response to this statement as no question was asked.
· Teacher preparation – In response to a question from Senator Reed, Duncan indicated his desire to work with institutions of higher education to make sure that teachers are prepared. He also stated his support for teacher residency programs. In addition, he stated support for alternative licensure programs.
· Early childhood education – Senators Harkin and Sanders asked questions about early childhood education and the need to ensure that children come to school ready to learn In his responses, Duncan cited the Obama “zero to five” plan and his goals for improving the quality of and access to early childhood programs. Duncan indicated that there is nothing more important than getting kids ready to learn and that early childhood programs need to be much more than glorified babysitting. Duncan also indicated support for a goal of moving to universal access to quality child care.
· Higher education – Senator Murray and Senator Sanders asked about access to and affordability of higher education. Duncan responded that we need to reduce barriers to higher education, including simplifying the federal financial aid application. He also indicated his support for increasing the Pell Grant award, and the American Opportunity Tax Credit. He also stated support for loan forgiveness, cautioning that there has to be mutual responsibility and those who receive loan forgiveness must give back to the community.
Senator Burr asked about higher education matriculation rates and how long the government should have to pay for students to attend higher education. Duncan responded that he did not have a specific answer but would want to look for ways to support people who are trying to take advantage of the opportunity of higher education, including those who may need to take longer to complete their education.
· 21st Century skills – In response to a question from Senator Murray about preparing students for the jobs of tomorrow, Duncan highlighted the disconnect between the business community and education and his hopes for bridging those gaps. He stated his concern about the need to prepare students for 21st Century skills and gave the example of nursing, which cannot be outsourced.
· IDEA special education – Senator Roberts asked about IDEA funding, indicating that IDEA is currently the “biggest unfunded mandate foisted on schools.” Roberts indicated his strong support for increasing the federal share of IDEA costs. Duncan spoke about living on “the other side of the unfunded mandate” and the high price that mandate has had in Chicago’s schools.
· Highly qualified teachers/Special education --- Senator Coburn raised concerns about the impact of the definition of “highly qualified teacher” on special educators and the loss of teachers due to this problem. Senator Isakson later followed up with a similar question. In response, Duncan indicated that we need to take another look at things that are impractical and we need to be more pragmatic.
· Assessments for students with disabilities – Senator Isakson raised the issue of assessing students with disabilities and his belief that the IEP should determine the type of assessment. In response Duncan stated, “I tend to agree with you. We need to be practical.” He further added, “For English Language Learners, we need assessments that test knowledge. If we give an assessment they cannot read, what good is it?”
Senator Harkin raised the “one percent” and “two percent” rules, which limit the number of students with disabilities who can be tested with alternative assessments and count toward AYP. Harkin was concerned that these rules “leave as many as 30% of students with disabilities not counted.” Duncan stated that he “philosophically agrees” with the Senator.
· Adequate Yearly Progress – Senator Isakson raised concerns about judging schools on the failure of one subgroup. Duncan indicated his support for disaggregated data and growth models, but that it is too blunt an instrument to measure a school because of one student in one subgroup.
· Charter schools -- In response to a question from Senator Alexander, Duncan indicated that he is a great supporter of charter schools. However, he believes in holding charter schools accountable and does not believe that just anyone should be able to open a charter school. In Chicago, he stated that charters were successful because they had “rigorous strict standards up front.” In short, he supports creating schools in any format that works.
· Community schools – Senator Sanders asked about the provision of health services in schools. Duncan responded that schools should be community centers and provide services to the whole community. They should be open for 12 hours, not 6, to allow access for working parents.
· Dropout/Graduation rates – Senator Burr asked about the dropout rate problem. Duncan responded that the U.S. hasn’t so much fallen behind other countries as other countries have surpassed us. He stated that we do not need to look overseas to find good models for reducing dropout rates. He wants to “shine a light” on excellent programs in the United States and scale up what is working.
· Physical education – Senator Harkin spoke about the importance of physical education programs and the problems of childhood obesity. Duncan agreed, noting that his wife is a PE teacher.
· Challenges in rural areas – Senator Murkowski mentioned the challenges of education in a vast rural state like Alaska, and invited Duncan to visit Alaska to see these challenges first hand. She asked about a focus on middle school. Duncan indicated that there is “no magic bullet” as to which grade levels are most important and reiterated his themes of being practical, pragmatic, and focusing on what works.
Closing Statement
Senator Harkin closed the hearing by indicating his hope and expectation that Duncan would be confirmed unanimously by the full Senate.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Poverty And Minority Students Seen As Major Challenges To Some Oklahoma Districts.
Another example of the challenges facing educators who teach kids in poverty. This issue isn't going to go away.
The AP (1/13) reports that "poverty and a growing population of minority students, including non-English speaking Hispanics, are presenting major challenges to public schools in Oklahoma City and Tulsa, a state school official said Monday." According to State Superintendent of Public Instruction Sandy Garrett, in both districts, "more than 80 percent of students in both districts qualify for free or reduced lunches because of their families' low income levels." Garrett joined "Higher Education Chancellor Glen Johnson "to present performance reviews of their systems" to the budget panel. During the presentation, Garrett "stressed her preference for expanding the school year and the school day to improve the education of Oklahoma students." She told the panel that "excessive testing to meet state and federal mandates is leaving little time for teachers to teach, suggesting that some testing chores in some subjects could be handled at the local level."
The AP (1/13) reports that "poverty and a growing population of minority students, including non-English speaking Hispanics, are presenting major challenges to public schools in Oklahoma City and Tulsa, a state school official said Monday." According to State Superintendent of Public Instruction Sandy Garrett, in both districts, "more than 80 percent of students in both districts qualify for free or reduced lunches because of their families' low income levels." Garrett joined "Higher Education Chancellor Glen Johnson "to present performance reviews of their systems" to the budget panel. During the presentation, Garrett "stressed her preference for expanding the school year and the school day to improve the education of Oklahoma students." She told the panel that "excessive testing to meet state and federal mandates is leaving little time for teachers to teach, suggesting that some testing chores in some subjects could be handled at the local level."
Saturday, January 03, 2009
School counselors bogged down by achievement tests
From the Tulsa World:
OKLAHOMA CITY — School counselors are spending more of their time coordinating achievement tests at the expense of their primary mission, State Superintendent Sandy Garrett says.Many counselors across the state now devote about 40 percent of their time scheduling student achievement tests mandated by federal and state law and working with instructional teachers to make sure all testing requirements are met.
OKLAHOMA CITY — School counselors are spending more of their time coordinating achievement tests at the expense of their primary mission, State Superintendent Sandy Garrett says.Many counselors across the state now devote about 40 percent of their time scheduling student achievement tests mandated by federal and state law and working with instructional teachers to make sure all testing requirements are met.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Presidential Politics--Education
The latest in the race for the presidency:
Education Week: Candidates Are at Odds Over K-12 (Alyson Klein and David Hoff, News, National)
“Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, who last week secured enough delegates to claim the Democratic nomination, both express support for the NCLB law’s goals and its use of testing to measure schools’ success. But Sen. McCain would promote market forces as a way to spur school improvement, and would likely seek to freeze education spending as part of a review of the effectiveness of federal programs. Sen. Obama, meanwhile, promises to search for new ways of assessing students and to invest significantly in efforts to improve teacher quality.”
Education Week: Candidates Are at Odds Over K-12 (Alyson Klein and David Hoff, News, National)
“Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, who last week secured enough delegates to claim the Democratic nomination, both express support for the NCLB law’s goals and its use of testing to measure schools’ success. But Sen. McCain would promote market forces as a way to spur school improvement, and would likely seek to freeze education spending as part of a review of the effectiveness of federal programs. Sen. Obama, meanwhile, promises to search for new ways of assessing students and to invest significantly in efforts to improve teacher quality.”
Friday, February 29, 2008
NCLB's Impact on History & Literature
A recent survey indicated that our teens don't know their history or literature. Are you smarter than the average teen? If you'd like to find out, take this quiz. If you turn out smarter than the average teen, thank the NCLB law. It seems to make those who haven't experienced the law a whole lot smarter.
Survey Finds Teenagers Ignorant on Basic History and Literature Questions
By SAM DILLON
Published: February 27, 2008
Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.
The survey results, released on Tuesday, demonstrate that a significant proportion of teenagers live in “stunning ignorance” of history and literature, said the group that commissioned it, Common Core.
The organization describes itself as a new research and advocacy organization that will press for more teaching of the liberal arts in public schools.
The group says President Bush’s education law, No Child Left Behind, has impoverished public school curriculums by holding schools accountable for student scores on annual tests in reading and mathematics, but in no other subjects.
Politically, the group’s leaders are strange bedfellows. Its founding board includes Antonia Cortese, executive vice president of the AFT, a union that is a powerful force in the Democratic Party, and Diane Ravitch, an education professor at New York University who was assistant education secretary under the first President George Bush.
Its executive director is Lynne Munson, former deputy chairwoman of the National Endowement for the Humanities, and former special assistant to Vice President Dick Cheney’s wife, Lynne.
“We’re a truly diverse group,” Mrs. Munson said. “We almost certainly vote differently, and we have varying opinions about different aspects of educational reform. But when it comes to concern that all of America’s children receive a comprehensive liberal arts and science education, we all agree.”
In the survey, 1,200 17-year-olds were called in January and asked to answer 33 multiple-choice questions about history and literature that were read aloud to them. The questions were drawn from a test that the federal government administered in 1986.
About a quarter of the teenagers were unable to correctly identify Hitler as Germany’s chancellor in World War II, instead identifying him as a munitions maker, an Austrian premier and the German kaiser.
On literature, the teenagers fared even worse. Four in 10 could pick the name of Ralph Ellison’s novel about a young man’s growing up in the South and moving to Harlem, “Invisible Man,” from a list of titles. About half knew that in the Bible Job is known for his patience in suffering. About as many said he was known for his skill as a builder, his prowess in battle or his prophetic abilities.
The history question that proved easiest asked the respondents to identify the man who declared, “I have a dream.” Ninety-seven percent correctly picked the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
About 8 in 10, a higher percentage than on any other literature question, knew that Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird” is about two children affected by the conflict in their community when their father defends a black man in court.
In a joint introduction to their report, Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch did not directly blame the No Child law for the dismal results but said it had led schools to focus too narrowly on reading and math, crowding time out of the school day for history, literature and other subjects.
“The nation’s education system has become obsessed with testing and basic skills because of the requirements of federal law, and that is not healthy,” Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch said.
“You can be supportive of N.C.L.B. and also support strengthening the teaching of history and literature,” a spokeswoman for the Education Department, Samara Yudof, said. “It’s good to talk about expanding the curriculum, but if you can’t read, you can’t read anything at all.”
A string of studies have documented the curriculum’s narrowing since Mr. Bush signed the law in January 2002.
Last week, the Center on Education Policy, a research group in Washington that has studied the law, estimated that based on its own survey that 62 percent of school systems had added an average of three hours of math or reading instruction a week at the expense of time for social studies, art and other subjects.
The Bush administration and some business and civil rights groups warn against weakening the law, saying students need reading and math skills to succeed in other subjects.
Survey Finds Teenagers Ignorant on Basic History and Literature Questions
By SAM DILLON
Published: February 27, 2008
Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.
The survey results, released on Tuesday, demonstrate that a significant proportion of teenagers live in “stunning ignorance” of history and literature, said the group that commissioned it, Common Core.
The organization describes itself as a new research and advocacy organization that will press for more teaching of the liberal arts in public schools.
The group says President Bush’s education law, No Child Left Behind, has impoverished public school curriculums by holding schools accountable for student scores on annual tests in reading and mathematics, but in no other subjects.
Politically, the group’s leaders are strange bedfellows. Its founding board includes Antonia Cortese, executive vice president of the AFT, a union that is a powerful force in the Democratic Party, and Diane Ravitch, an education professor at New York University who was assistant education secretary under the first President George Bush.
Its executive director is Lynne Munson, former deputy chairwoman of the National Endowement for the Humanities, and former special assistant to Vice President Dick Cheney’s wife, Lynne.
“We’re a truly diverse group,” Mrs. Munson said. “We almost certainly vote differently, and we have varying opinions about different aspects of educational reform. But when it comes to concern that all of America’s children receive a comprehensive liberal arts and science education, we all agree.”
In the survey, 1,200 17-year-olds were called in January and asked to answer 33 multiple-choice questions about history and literature that were read aloud to them. The questions were drawn from a test that the federal government administered in 1986.
About a quarter of the teenagers were unable to correctly identify Hitler as Germany’s chancellor in World War II, instead identifying him as a munitions maker, an Austrian premier and the German kaiser.
On literature, the teenagers fared even worse. Four in 10 could pick the name of Ralph Ellison’s novel about a young man’s growing up in the South and moving to Harlem, “Invisible Man,” from a list of titles. About half knew that in the Bible Job is known for his patience in suffering. About as many said he was known for his skill as a builder, his prowess in battle or his prophetic abilities.
The history question that proved easiest asked the respondents to identify the man who declared, “I have a dream.” Ninety-seven percent correctly picked the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
About 8 in 10, a higher percentage than on any other literature question, knew that Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird” is about two children affected by the conflict in their community when their father defends a black man in court.
In a joint introduction to their report, Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch did not directly blame the No Child law for the dismal results but said it had led schools to focus too narrowly on reading and math, crowding time out of the school day for history, literature and other subjects.
“The nation’s education system has become obsessed with testing and basic skills because of the requirements of federal law, and that is not healthy,” Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch said.
“You can be supportive of N.C.L.B. and also support strengthening the teaching of history and literature,” a spokeswoman for the Education Department, Samara Yudof, said. “It’s good to talk about expanding the curriculum, but if you can’t read, you can’t read anything at all.”
A string of studies have documented the curriculum’s narrowing since Mr. Bush signed the law in January 2002.
Last week, the Center on Education Policy, a research group in Washington that has studied the law, estimated that based on its own survey that 62 percent of school systems had added an average of three hours of math or reading instruction a week at the expense of time for social studies, art and other subjects.
The Bush administration and some business and civil rights groups warn against weakening the law, saying students need reading and math skills to succeed in other subjects.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Assessment Myths
Here is a tremendous article by Rick Stiggins called "5 Assessment Myths and their Consequences." It was published in the October 17th, issue of Education Week . Free registration is required to link the article. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/10/17/08stiggins.h27.html?levelId=1000&rale2=KQE5d7nM%2FXAYPsVRXwnFWYRqIIX2bhy1%2BKNA5buLAWGoKt77XHI2terRpWBSgktL4bXgTCDsilHh%0Aob52KBEQEHZPvKeXsUoms55h6%2BeCIZ7h%2F9BFEakU7ZHII%2Fmu01CUEpLNhfZ%2FY5RTSAFMoROfwTsH%0AAsyDLJnT9czpjKHi7khQUPRB5iYdt0pxOsrU1t9PkEEBnZAuR7ceTnyd6uq8golhAxRxKdCsbI3k%0AvdZwiOnh%2F9BFEakU7ZHII%2Fmu01CUHmJjRV5x7AFamDWRd8S0wX%2BzP%2FBzdWD7Ptzgo%2FrzvN9Sx1oO%0A0Ju7%2F2Twsh11eqcWQDbhdyCbm2tUjbMEZlYFY1boRy8zQyHPBYQS9iUu68vJBu46PQ9Tq1SNswRm%0AVgVjVuhHLzNDIc%2FmmzKgimoSrpMYpxLy9k1FPtzgo%2FrzvN96hhJKC1j5Df6tTBEFOWBIv8Q7jS6U%0AKXWKLJ5OrOr%2FlohpTs300jgeuuOGMmE%2BrWkIZcWiuYy%2BeKfFHkg%2B%2FE3tzcUD2Wd8dOa9kgMcbABC%0AKGMNEUj8wcZm%2BnsBifvnsAYr2To8vuY7HhnQ%2BjiH%2F%2FvmnOHtrKwDgAu0bav9swg5o4OkZUa0Aom1%0AoLQUpvl0Esh%2BzZ3hy3N8wIrmM0VN7WMr.
Monday, October 01, 2007
NCLB Reauthorization Action
Urge Senators to Co-sponsor Bills on Common-Sense Assessment Systems
Two critical bills have been introduced in the Senate that would make a real difference in improving assessment systems and offering meaningful accountability.
Urge your Senators to sign on as co-sponsors to the Improving Student Testing Act of 2007 (S. 2053), sponsored by Senator Russ Feingold (WI) and Patrick Leahy (VT). Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Ken Salazar (D-CO) have also introduced the No Child Left Behind Reform Act (S. 1194).
Both bills would make significant, meaningful changes to measurement of student performance and school success, including by allowing states to use growth models and multiple measures and ending the over-reliance upon two standardized tests given one day out of the year.
Both bills have NEA's support, but they need the additional sponsorship of your Senators.
CONTACT YOUR SENATORS TODAY
Tell your Senators to cosponsor the Improving Student Testing Act and the No Child Left Behind Reform Act.
Two critical bills have been introduced in the Senate that would make a real difference in improving assessment systems and offering meaningful accountability.
Urge your Senators to sign on as co-sponsors to the Improving Student Testing Act of 2007 (S. 2053), sponsored by Senator Russ Feingold (WI) and Patrick Leahy (VT). Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Ken Salazar (D-CO) have also introduced the No Child Left Behind Reform Act (S. 1194).
Both bills would make significant, meaningful changes to measurement of student performance and school success, including by allowing states to use growth models and multiple measures and ending the over-reliance upon two standardized tests given one day out of the year.
Both bills have NEA's support, but they need the additional sponsorship of your Senators.
CONTACT YOUR SENATORS TODAY
Tell your Senators to cosponsor the Improving Student Testing Act and the No Child Left Behind Reform Act.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Flawed Research-NCLB Standardized Testing
LEXINGTON ‘PORTFOLIOS’ REPORT OF LITTLE VALUE TO POLICY MAKERS
Report’s support of NCLB standardized testing rife with glaring weaknesses and faulty generalizations.
EAST LANSING, Mich.—A Lexington Institute report released earlier this month argues that the current standardized testing system should be retained and criticizes the use of multiple measures, particularly portfolios, to assess school performance. A review of that report, however, finds it is ill-founded and of little value as research or for policy development.
The Lexington report, “Portfolios – A Backward Step in School Accountability,” was reviewed for the Think Twice project by William Mathis of the University of Vermont.
The report appears to have been written in anticipation of a “discussion draft” concerning NCLB changes, released by the leadership of the House Education Committee. The draft proposes changes that would allow states to use a broad list of “multiple indicators” – for example graduation rates and percent of students taking advanced courses – to assess education outcomes rather than depend so heavily upon standardized test scores.
As Mathis notes, the House Committee’s summary contains a broad list of various multiple indicators, but portfolio assessment is not on the list. He explains that given the absence of portfolio assessment from the list, it is troubling that the Lexington report offers portfolios as the most notable of what it calls “multiple measures” and then erroneously generalizes findings about portfolios to argue against adopting any instruments other than standardized tests. Further, the report ignores a body of research with findings that present portfolios in a more favorable light.
Mathis writes that the report more closely resembles political propaganda than a research report. It provides no new data, examines only two studies done 13 years ago and includes only results favorable to the report’s conclusions. He concludes that the report’s failure to discuss contradictory research undermines its conclusions, and its attempt “to generalize all multiple measures from this questionable base completely discredits (the report).”
Find the complete review by William Mathis as well as a link to the Lexington Institute report at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Report’s support of NCLB standardized testing rife with glaring weaknesses and faulty generalizations.
EAST LANSING, Mich.—A Lexington Institute report released earlier this month argues that the current standardized testing system should be retained and criticizes the use of multiple measures, particularly portfolios, to assess school performance. A review of that report, however, finds it is ill-founded and of little value as research or for policy development.
The Lexington report, “Portfolios – A Backward Step in School Accountability,” was reviewed for the Think Twice project by William Mathis of the University of Vermont.
The report appears to have been written in anticipation of a “discussion draft” concerning NCLB changes, released by the leadership of the House Education Committee. The draft proposes changes that would allow states to use a broad list of “multiple indicators” – for example graduation rates and percent of students taking advanced courses – to assess education outcomes rather than depend so heavily upon standardized test scores.
As Mathis notes, the House Committee’s summary contains a broad list of various multiple indicators, but portfolio assessment is not on the list. He explains that given the absence of portfolio assessment from the list, it is troubling that the Lexington report offers portfolios as the most notable of what it calls “multiple measures” and then erroneously generalizes findings about portfolios to argue against adopting any instruments other than standardized tests. Further, the report ignores a body of research with findings that present portfolios in a more favorable light.
Mathis writes that the report more closely resembles political propaganda than a research report. It provides no new data, examines only two studies done 13 years ago and includes only results favorable to the report’s conclusions. He concludes that the report’s failure to discuss contradictory research undermines its conclusions, and its attempt “to generalize all multiple measures from this questionable base completely discredits (the report).”
Find the complete review by William Mathis as well as a link to the Lexington Institute report at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
More on the Aspen Report
This is a column that really gets to the heart of NCLB issues and the Aspen Report:
Stop Leaving Children Behind (EdNews.org, Column, Internet)A few weeks ago the Aspen Institute issued a report suggesting that what the country needs is more of the same: tougher standards, harsher penalties, more private ownership of public schools. No major publication questioned whether or not tougher standards have been scientifically proven to raise test scores…
Stop Leaving Children Behind (EdNews.org, Column, Internet)A few weeks ago the Aspen Institute issued a report suggesting that what the country needs is more of the same: tougher standards, harsher penalties, more private ownership of public schools. No major publication questioned whether or not tougher standards have been scientifically proven to raise test scores…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
