CAT Tracks for February 11, 2010

CAT Tracks for February 11, 2010

I'll give Indiana credit...

...they are giving up the impossible dream.

When President George W. Bush launched his assault on public education and its practitioners, he set out an unattainable goal...to take every student across this great land - despite their genetic make-up and/or socio-economic status - and render them EQUAL by the year 2014. (BTW...wasn't it convenient that in laying out his "impossible dream" that Dubya would establish the "date of fruition" BEYOND any possible end of his term in office. The better to blame someone else by...)

Yes, according to the mandate established by NCLB, EVERY child - 100% - shall "meet or exceed" state educational standards in math and reading as measured by a once-a-year standardized test...administered in the 3rd, 8th, and 11th Grades. (Actually, the 11th Grade was not "mandated"...it just happened!) Yes, indeedy, thou shalt leave no child behind!!!

During the "early years", voices cried out in the wilderness...objecting to the "impossible dream". However, no quarter was given...one size shall fit all!

During the "sunset years", when a President's thoughts turn to legacy, the kindly King George allowed his Lord of Education, Margaret Spellings, to offer a "Door #2" to a select group of ten states...an alternative manner of determining if one were making suitable progress down the yellow brick road.

This alternative was called the "growth model". Instead of comparing "apples and oranges" - i.e. this year's students to last year's students - the "growth model" was designed to test the SAME students at the beginning of the year and the end of the year...and determined how much they had learned during the year. The measure of success would be whether the student "improved" by a year or more after being held captive and tortured by the teacher during the past school year.

On the surface, this would appear to be exceedingly fair. I mean...you had the students for a year, you claim to be a teacher, did you teach them a year's worth of material?

And, even this old dinosaur will admit that it's a helluva lot more fair than demanding that a teacher take students who may be two, four, or six years behind their classmates and "healing them" in the course of a school year.

Unfortunately, it's never as simple as it seems...

As we debate whether to tie teacher pay to student performance ("value added"), a closer inspection is warranted:

What about the teachers who do NOT teach math or reading? Since we don't test their subjects...are they not eligible for performance pay or tenure?

As for the math and reading teachers...which students?...how many students? I mean...I would venture a guess that said math or reading teacher, when you look at the scores of the 20-30 students in the classroom...that some "grew" by a year or two, some did not, and some may have even regressed! In short, is the teacher GREAT because Tom's math/reading skills have improved by three grade levels, OKAY because Dick's math/reading skills have improved by one grade level in one school year, or FIRED because Harry's math/reading skills stayed at the 7th Grade level even though he just passed 8th Grade Language Arts? What about Sally...whose parents divorced this year? What about Sussie...who got pregnant over the summer? What about Sarah...who suffered a concussion and was hospitalized for a month when she fell from the top of pyramid during cheerleader practice?

What about the math or reading teachers who do NOT teach students at the critical "testing years"...3rd, 8th, and 11th Grade? Exempted like the non-math/reading teachers? Or...is their pay/tenure tied to the performance of the "testing-year teachers"? If tied to the performance of others, I can see the lawsuits...as the 7th Grade mathematic's teacher sues the 8th Grade teacher for "unteaching" all the knowledge previously bestowed!!!

I could go on, but I think you catch my drift...

I shall end with a question:
What's behind Door #3?

DISCLAIMER: It appears from the article that Indiana has considered part of the problem identified above...that Indiana may, in fact, test every child EVERY YEAR. One might ask whether this will expand the "test-prep/testing craze" to EVERY YEAR instead of "just" 3rd, 8th, and 11th Grades, but...that's a discussion for another time!

From the courier-journal.com Website...

Link to Original Story
Indiana launches new way to measure student academic progress
By Ken Kusmer
The Associated Press
INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Department of Education will track each student's academic growth instead of focusing on standardized tests to measure their progress and that of their schools, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett announced Wednesday.
The Indiana Growth Model will help school districts identify which teachers and teaching methods are most effective at improving all students' performances.
Bennett said many schools now concentrate on getting “bubble” students who are close to passing annual state tests over that hurdle, instead of spending more time and resources on those who score very low.
The state expects all students to grow, no matter where they start.
“Every student is entitled to one year of growth in one year of instruction,” Bennett said at a news conference in his Statehouse office.
Under the new system each student's yearly academic growth will be calculated by comparing their progress to others who began at similar levels of achievement, Bennett said.
The model will record each student's scores on the annual Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress-Plus tests and summarize the yearly progress of that student and their school and school corporation based on those results.
A low-achieving student with high growth could conceivably show better progress than a high-achieving student who grows little, Bennett said.
“This is a new way of keeping score,” Bennett said, adding that it was something educators have sought for many years.
"It will allow us to change our focus on how we work with kids," he said. "Indiana ... will have the most comprehensive look at student growth in the United States."
The new model, for instance, would show schools where 90 percent of students pass state tests but are outperformed by other schools when it comes to how much learning "growth" those students showed in the year. Conversely, it would also highlight a school that had 50 percent of students passing state tests but where nearly all of those students made more learning growth than their peers around the state.
Department of Education spokeswoman Lauren Auld said the model will initially measure math and English progress because those are the two areas students are tested on yearly in grades 3-8 under ISTEP.
Frank Bush, executive director of the Indiana School Boards Association, said his group supports any measure that will help students and build skills. He called for a broader measurement tool that not only shows how a student fares in math and English but identifies deficiencies so educators can intervene early.
Nate Schellenberger, president of the Indiana State Teachers Association that represents nearly 50,000 education employees across the state, said a growth model is a good concept as long as it improves learning and is not used against teachers.
He said a student's progress should be measured using multiple tests and other factors, such as teacher input -- not a single standardized annual exam.
Under a state law, Indiana classifies schools in five categories based primarily on year-over-year passing marks on statewide ISTEP tests for grades 3 through 10. The categories are exemplary progress, commendable progress, academic progress, academic watch and academic probation.

The Indianapolis Star contributed to this story.