NCLB and standardized testing

[Scurvy]

Your assumptions about 3rd graders passing is wrong. Yes, they should pass but they won't pass at the same rates and the blend of kids is always going to be different so that effects the outcome as well. You could have one class of 3rd graders with outstanding students, no kids with learning disabilities and have them score 98% proficient then the next year might have some really great students but a higher concentration of kids that have learning difficulties of some form or another and only pass 87% of the kids. Does that mean the school went downhill, NO, it means that it is a different class of kids.

What they need to do is look at the progress EACH CHILD makes from year to year to really determine of a school is doing their job. If you take a 1st grader that can't read at the beginning of 1st grade and bring her up to read chapter books by the end of first grade-that is progress. Take that same girl in 2nd grade and she hasn't progressed past the basic chapter books by the end of 2nd grade, that is not progress vs what NCLB does do is take a class of 1st graders that can all read basic chapter books at the start of 1st grade and still can only read basic chapter books by the end of 1st grade but they already have a baseline that is enough to pass the test, is that progress-NO but then the next year they get a group of kids that can't read at the beginning of school and take them up to reading basic chapter books, except 4 kids that can't read at all because they have a learning disability. The class scores lower as a whole then the class before them and they are labeled "not showing progress" yet they are the only class that really DID show progress. THIS is what is wrong with NCLB.

Very well said.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

I'm a special ed teacher and I think this law is complete nonsense. Especially with increasing use of RTI (Response to Intervention), the kids who are receiving services are going to be the ones who are traditionally not performing at grade level. I have taught kids with dyslexia so bad that they would sometimes not even be able to write their name properly- and these were otherwise intelligent kids! These were kids who made tremendous gains in reading and we did intense reading instruction everyday with a research based program, but they are still not going to be reading at grade level.

The kicker? The state expects my kids to learn more in a year than kids who are neurotypical. We only expect neurotypical kids to gain one grade level in a year. For a kids who is in special ed who is not performing at grade level,we expect them to gain more than that even though reserach has shown that they need more time and more exposure to process the same information. A gifted kid needs to be exposed to a concept between 9 and 15 times, neurotypical about 27 times, and a kid in special ed over 40 times.

100% is also unrealistic. One of my professors travelled around to the schools and helped with testing, school psychology stuff, etc. He told us stories about kids who were intelligent but did not score proficient on the exams because they were sick that week, one had a grandma die in the middle of exams, etc. But those scores were counted the same as the kids who did not know the material. The cardinal rule of assessment in education is that you never base educational decisions on one test. But that is exactly what the law is doing.

Every student can learn, but not in the same way, and not on the same day. WE had our district meeting today and found out that thanks to the county reassessing, we have significant budget cuts. The target for AYP is a moving target. We are expected to a lot more with a lot less and nobody wants to hear the reasons why this may not be feasible.

When I teach gen ed I "teach to the test" but not in the way people are thinking. I specifically design my classroom assessments to include released items from the test and to follow the same format as the test so that the kids are already used to it.

Sorry, I'm rambling but I spent the afternoon in meetings about this and am incredibly frustrated. This does not mean that I will not do my best to make sure that every single one of my kids makes AYP. Of course, my room is different. None of my kids take the regular assessment (they all take the alternate.)

 

[dicar123]

As a sub, the biggest problem I saw was with pull-outs for special services. In a half day kindergarten class, I saw several children being pulled out 2-3 times to work with different specialists. These kids have enough trouble keeping up with what is going on in class! I can't imagine that such disjointed instruction is helpful.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

It is because they are receiving the services they need. For instance, when I taught resource instruction I was a pull out teacher. I mostly did math and reading, giving them the specific interventions they need. OT, PT, and Speech also play a huge role in a child's academic progress, but you may not know it if you don't see it played out in the classroom everyday.

I'll give you a great example: kids with speech impediments often have a much harder time spelling. As part of our reading intervention we used last year, every lesson had a dictation part. The program was all about teaching the very specific rules of decoding and letter combinations, so the dictation were words they should be able to spell phonetically depending on their level. A child with a speech impediment would spell it the way they would say it- even if I was the one pronouncing it! They were spelling correctly for how they said it, but because they were saying it wrong they were spelling it wrong.

Care is taken to make sure that the times we pull out are times that are helpful. But these services really do make a difference for kids and are needed.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

The other issue is that states place specific limits on the percentage of kids that can receive services and take the alternate exam. This sounds great on paper, but you run into problems at smaller and urban schools. Where I taught last year we had such low numbers of students that just the few we had put us over our numbers. This is not a case of the school qualifying students who should not be by any means- many of the students we taught several of the kids in the family because of genetic conditions that were passed down to the kids.

All it takes is one family with a medical condition that gets passed onto multiple children to put you over your numbers. We also know that in schools with higher populations below the poverty line, you are going to have more kids who need services because of the interplay between environment and genetics. There are many reasons a school could have more special ed kids than what the law says is a allowable, and believe me, nobody wants it, there is no prize for having more sped kids in your district. It hurts you. But the law doesn't care why, it just cares that there are.

 

[IDoDis]

Most of the schools out here that didn't make AYP was because the special ed population didn't make make the expected progress. If one sub-category doesn't make expected progress, then the whole school is deemed "Not Met". If kids in special ed can meet the standards, then they don't need to be in special ed for academics. It's such a stupid law.

Now take a student in special ed, is also an English Language Learner, gets free lunch, and is a minority (Hispanic, African American, etc.). That child's test score gets counted for each sub-category along with the "all students" category, so his failing score counts 4 times against the school!!! Yet, the gifted child's score only counts once because gifted education is not considered a separate category.

My school did make AYP this year, but we had less than 25 students in special ed, so these student's scores didn't count. Each category (bilingual, low socio-economics, minority, special ed, etc...) has to have at least 25 students take the test and those students had to have been at the school since the first day of that school year in order for those scores to be counted.

That's why some smaller schools can make AYP -- their categories don't have enough students for those scores to count.

 

[pirateofthecarolinas]

I'm not a fan of NCLB but I do feel that both of my sons with LDs have received more intervention because of the the program. On the flip side, my AL daughter probably has suffered due to all of the intervention being focused on children that are behind.

When I hear speeches, I know that Education is next on the agenda to be overhauled. My DH said last night that he couldn't wait until our children were out of school because he fears what is coming. It could be better, but I really have my doubts. Teachers will have even less say so in their own classrooms. I imagine a day when every lesson is totally scripted.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

Most of the schools out here that didn't make AYP was because the special ed population didn't make make the expected progress. If one sub-category doesn't make expected progress, then the whole school is deemed "Not Met". If kids in special ed can meet the standards, then they don't need to be in special ed for academics. It's such a stupid law.

Now take a student in special ed, is also an English Language Learner, gets free lunch, and is a minority (Hispanic, African American, etc.). That child's test score gets counted for each sub-category along with the "all students" category, so his failing score counts 4 times against the school!!! Yet, the gifted child's score only counts once because gifted education is not considered a separate category.

My school did make AYP this year, but we had less than 25 students in special ed, so these student's scores didn't count. Each category (bilingual, low socio-economics, minority, special ed, etc...) has to have at least 25 students take the test and those students had to have been at the school since the first day of that school year in order for those scores to be counted.

That's why some smaller schools can make AYP -- their categories don't have enough students for those scores to count.

I agree with you that counting a student four times is appalling. Especially since you're not categorizing the advanced kids the same way. If the hispanic, poor, disabled, ell and special ed kid gets categorized 4 times, then the caucasian, middle class, able bodied, english speaking, gifted kid should be counted four times as well. I still don't think you throw the baby out with the bathwater-there are obvious flaws in the system, as with any large system, and people should be specific in their need for reform.

Your assumptions about 3rd graders passing is wrong. Yes, they should pass but they won't pass at the same rates and the blend of kids is always going to be different so that effects the outcome as well. You could have one class of 3rd graders with outstanding students, no kids with learning disabilities and have them score 98% proficient then the next year might have some really great students but a higher concentration of kids that have learning difficulties of some form or another and only pass 87% of the kids. Does that mean the school went downhill, NO, it means that it is a different class of kids.

What they need to do is look at the progress EACH CHILD makes from year to year to really determine of a school is doing their job. If you take a 1st grader that can't read at the beginning of 1st grade and bring her up to read chapter books by the end of first grade-that is progress. Take that same girl in 2nd grade and she hasn't progressed past the basic chapter books by the end of 2nd grade, that is not progress vs what NCLB does do is take a class of 1st graders that can all read basic chapter books at the start of 1st grade and still can only read basic chapter books by the end of 1st grade but they already have a baseline that is enough to pass the test, is that progress-NO but then the next year they get a group of kids that can't read at the beginning of school and take them up to reading basic chapter books, except 4 kids that can't read at all because they have a learning disability. The class scores lower as a whole then the class before them and they are labeled "not showing progress" yet they are the only class that really DID show progress. THIS is what is wrong with NCLB.

I don't think it's practical to follow every child, from a purely informational point of view. Who's going to maintain and oversee those databases? Who would create the program that tracks and follows the millions of children. Especially since the most at-risk kids are the ones that tend to bounce all over the system anyway. Short of putting a RFID chip in the kid, there's no way to accurately track them.

Also, school systems that are successful tend to be successful outside of the makeup of the student body. They have systems in place that successfully deal with a changing student body. We had a large influx of hispanic ELL kids a few years ago, and the county recognized it and quickly instituted several programs designed to mainstream those kids (and their parents) as quickly as possible. It showed up on the AYP's a few times during the first few years, but now it doesn't negatively affect the numbers because the system is working efficiently to bring the ELL learners up to proficiency.

Again, I think the focus on the county and the school systems, rather than the individual child, is important. Those counties that abuse the federal NCLB funds can't hide it, because you're seeing it in a lack of improvement with those kids the funds are designed to help.

I do heartily agree that special ed students, who cannot ever achieve mainstream proficiency due to mental deficits, should absolutely not be part of the mix. Those kids can't be "left behind" because they should not be in the race to begin with.

The other groups I think absolutely can achieve at mainstream levels.

 

[Kathi OD]

I do know that. This year our special ed kids and the ESL kids all made proficiency. I know it can be done. I've seen it.

I'd like to know in what school district, and school this occured. Even in the best of schools, not all students, let alone those in Special Ed or LEP, will score at proficient levels.

 

[patsfan101]

Interestingly, we've had our kids at a very expensive and supposedly prestigious private school, and the quality of teaching there was NOT up to par with the best public schools here. I think it's because they didn't need to test, didn't disclose how kids were doing on what tests they did do, and would not disclose the teacher's qualifications (which we eventually discovered were terribly lacking).

Not an unusual phenomenon.

Public schools pay more, have more demanding/challenging students, and demand more stringent certification requirements than private schools do. Therefore they tend to get the energetic, creative teachers. The quality of teaching is NOT reflective of NCLB legislation. Good teaching comes from teachers that have time to collaborate and are supported by good administration.

Yup, you guessed it - I am a public school teacher, so my views are a little slanted, but come from over 20 yrs experience in the field.

It is this mess of the education system that NCLB has created that makes me very apprehensive of the healthcare over-haul. Putting policies in place that are politically based in education is bad enough - politically based health care decisions seems down-right disasterous!!

Addendum:
Every state has their own test. NCLB is a federal law that is not federally funded nor is it federally normed. In Massachusetts, our students continually score very high on the NEAP (National Education Assessment Program), but our NCLB numbers are not great because our state test, MCAS, is among the most difficult.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

I'd like to know in what school district, and school this occured. Even in the best of schools, not all students, let alone those in Special Ed or LEP, will score at proficient levels.

http://public.doe.k12.ga.us/ayp2008/participation.asp?SchoolID=644-0173-c-1-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0

basically the breakdown for the SWD is 89.3% for meets or exceeds, 80% for the economically disadvantaged, and there were not enough ELL in this elementary school to measure.

The county we now live in had 100% ayp for all schools:

http://www.hometowntimes.com/cumminghome/news50000/schools/all-forsyth-county-schools-and-district-make-adequ.shtml

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

Every state has their own test. NCLB is a federal law that is not federally funded nor is it federally normed. In Massachusetts, our students continually score very high on the NEAP (National Education Assessment Program), but our NCLB numbers are not great because our state test, MCAS, is among the most difficult.

See, this is what I think the biggest problem is. If my kids weren't taking the ITBS, which is a national test, I'd have no idea how to compare them to other kids in the US, which is who they'll be compared to when they get to college eventually.

If your MCAS is much more difficult than the CRCT, how can we really know?

Again, I think there needs to be accountability and transparency when it comes to education (one reason I disliked private schools so much-they had neither) and until somebody presents something better than NCLB, I still think it's better than nothing-if we remove all accountability and transparency, and go by the "honor" system, I think things will get worse, not better...

I also won't discuss health care issues in this thread, it will turn it "P" and there goes the thread.

 

[MM27]

As a sub, the biggest problem I saw was with pull-outs for special services. In a half day kindergarten class, I saw several children being pulled out 2-3 times to work with different specialists. These kids have enough trouble keeping up with what is going on in class! I can't imagine that such disjointed instruction is helpful.

My district no longer does pull outs for Title 1 (basic skills). We now do what is called Push In. The Title 1 teachers come into the classroom and work with the kids in the normal setting. It works great, but they are only there for a limited amount of time. I teach math and science to two classes and the Title 1 math teacher comes to my room twice a week for one period for each class. The rest of the time, I'm on my own. Last year I had 8 kids in one class that were eligible for Title 1 services for math alone.

What bothers me is the kids that need to be in the classroom, but are pulled out for non-essentials like instrumental music. I understand that music is important, but when you can't add and subtract, math is probably not the best to be pulled from. My school also has, get this, a juggling club. Yes, kids were leaving math and reading class to go juggle for a period. I finally put my foot down and said my students will NOT be leaving to go do this. When I was a new teacher I didn't think I should be so vocal, but now I don't care who I offend. I am responsible for their test scores. I am the one that gets called into the principal's office after the scores come back to "explain" my students' scores. I'll be damned if I let them leave during my instruction to go throw some balls in the air.

http://www.hometowntimes.com/cumminghome/news50000/schools/all-forsyth-county-schools-and-district-make-adequ.shtml

100% of the schools met AYP, but that doesn't mean that every child was proficient. I didn't see in that article what the percentages were for a school to pass.

Another problem with NCLB is that every state makes up their own test to determine proficiency. NJ has one of the hardest tests. Take kids from some of those states that have a high percentage of kids passing and have them take the NJ test and see if they are still proficient.

Here's an interesting article about state testing and comparing state results (Georgia and South Carolina)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/30/notebook/main2867441.shtml

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

My district no longer does pull outs for Title 1 (basic skills). We now do what is called Push In. The Title 1 teachers come into the classroom and work with the kids in the normal setting. It works great, but they are only there for a limited amount of time. I teach math and science to two classes and the Title 1 math teacher comes to my room twice a week for one period for each class. The rest of the time, I'm on my own. Last year I had 8 kids in one class that were eligible for Title 1 services for math alone.

What bothers me is the kids that need to be in the classroom, but are pulled out for non-essentials like instrumental music. I understand that music is important, but when you can't add and subtract, math is probably not the best to be pulled from. My school also has, get this, a juggling club. Yes, kids were leaving math and reading class to go juggle for a period. I finally put my foot down and said my students will NOT be leaving to go do this. When I was a new teacher I didn't think I should be so vocal, but now I don't care who I offend. I am responsible for their test scores. I am the one that gets called into the principal's office after the scores come back to "explain" my students' scores. I'll be damned if I let them leave during my instruction to go throw some balls in the air.

100% of the schools met AYP, but that doesn't mean that every child was proficient. I didn't see in that article what the percentages were for a school to pass.

Another problem with NCLB is that every state makes up their own test to determine proficiency. NJ has one of the hardest tests. Take kids from some of those states that have a high percentage of kids passing and have them take the NJ test and see if they are still proficient.

Here's an interesting article about state testing and comparing state results (Georgia and South Carolina)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/30/notebook/main2867441.shtml

"Consider the places we traveled: Georgia and neighboring South Carolina. The two states have nearly identical scores on a national reading test for fourth graders (around 26 percent proficiency) but dramatically different results on their state tests. South Carolina's fourth-graders had a 36 percent proficiency rating in reading, while Georgia's was 87 percent.

Does this mean kids are reading that much better in Georgia than in South Carolina?

No, says Jim Ray, a school superintendent in Spartanburg, S.C., who says his state's standards are tougher than Georgia's. The answer, he says, isn't for South Carolina to lower its standards but for the federal government to come up with uniform standards so all states can be judged equally.

"If you are not going to mandate a common playing field and a common measuring stick, then you don't really have any teeth in this system, except that you are going to punish the ones, ironically, that were trying to do the right thing," he told CBS News"

ITA, it's what's going to sink NCLB unless they standardize it.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

The interesting thing about that article is that it stated that 26% of Georgia children passed the NAEP exam.

My kids have been in the Georgia school system since kindergarten, and we've never taken that exam.

We've never even HEARD of that exam.

I just emailed a teacher friend and she says she knows of no children that have come her way in 30 years of teaching that have taken that exam.

I don't doubt that there are children in GA who did take it, but they weren't from my neck of the woods-in other words, the parts of metro atlanta that have very high achieving school systems haven't had the opportunity to take it, I suspect.

There is a huge, huge disparity between high and low performing schools in GA. Much larger, I believe, than in many other states with a more homogenous population.

I'd LOVE for my kids to be taking the same test that the MA, GA and CA kids are taking. After all, it's those kids who are going to be competing to get into the same schools my kids will be competing for.

I wonder if there is an organized group that is lobbying for reform on the NCLB? (as opposed to abolishing it).

 

[daughtersrus]

Then, factor in WHO isn't making progress and it is even more stupid. In our district the severely handicapped kids weren't able to pass the math or reading tests--never mind that these kids can't talk, walk or feed themselves but they better be able to pass the algebra tests in 11th grade??? All other 'groups' passed just fine but we aren't making 'progress'.

As a parent of a severely disabled student, I doubt that children similar to mine were taking these standardized tests.

http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/raising/alt-assess-long.html

 

[golfgal]

I agree with you that counting a student four times is appalling. Especially since you're not categorizing the advanced kids the same way. If the hispanic, poor, disabled, ell and special ed kid gets categorized 4 times, then the caucasian, middle class, able bodied, english speaking, gifted kid should be counted four times as well. I still don't think you throw the baby out with the bathwater-there are obvious flaws in the system, as with any large system, and people should be specific in their need for reform.



I don't think it's practical to follow every child, from a purely informational point of view. Who's going to maintain and oversee those databases? Who would create the program that tracks and follows the millions of children. Especially since the most at-risk kids are the ones that tend to bounce all over the system anyway. Short of putting a RFID chip in the kid, there's no way to accurately track them.

Also, school systems that are successful tend to be successful outside of the makeup of the student body. They have systems in place that successfully deal with a changing student body. We had a large influx of hispanic ELL kids a few years ago, and the county recognized it and quickly instituted several programs designed to mainstream those kids (and their parents) as quickly as possible. It showed up on the AYP's a few times during the first few years, but now it doesn't negatively affect the numbers because the system is working efficiently to bring the ELL learners up to proficiency.

Again, I think the focus on the county and the school systems, rather than the individual child, is important. Those counties that abuse the federal NCLB funds can't hide it, because you're seeing it in a lack of improvement with those kids the funds are designed to help.

I do heartily agree that special ed students, who cannot ever achieve mainstream proficiency due to mental deficits, should absolutely not be part of the mix. Those kids can't be "left behind" because they should not be in the race to begin with.

The other groups I think absolutely can achieve at mainstream levels.

Well, MN was doing this before NCLB. All children took state tests every year and they tracked their progress. Actually all districts still use some kind of annual test but it is different then the one they take for NCLB-it is a comprehensive test each year, not just math one year, reading another, etc. We have records of our kids' state testing from the time they were in kindergarten. It isn't an issue, there are testing organizations out there that do exactly this. Tracking the kids with a social security number would be a simple process. Again, how can you measure success in a school or county if you don't track individual progress??? Also, not every state has county wide school districts-we don't here. Most districts only cover one town or maybe a couple towns, never an entire county.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Sadly, sometimes students are being forced to take tests that are inappropriate.

Only a certain percentage of your students can take the alternate exam. (Basically, you write the tasks based on their IEP goals and then collect data showing they met it.) If you go over the limit, they will send it back as "Level Not Determined" which is worse than a kid not making proficiency on the regular exam. At the school I was at last year we actually had to make the decision for several children: Do we let a child with an IQ below 40 take the exam and not make proficient, or do we give them the alternate and take the hit when it comes back "Level Not Determined." Right now it is much worse to have a level not determined, so we had kids who had no business taking the state exam taking the test because that is what the law forced us to do. It is frustrating for hte kids and the teachers and should not have to happen.

 

[IDoDis]

http://public.doe.k12.ga.us/ayp2008/participation.asp?SchoolID=644-0173-c-1-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0

basically the breakdown for the SWD is 89.3% for meets or exceeds, 80% for the economically disadvantaged, and there were not enough ELL in this elementary school to measure.

The county we now live in had 100% ayp for all schools:

http://www.hometowntimes.com/cumminghome/news50000/schools/all-forsyth-county-schools-and-district-make-adequ.shtml

Georgia and a few other states received an "F" for state standards levels that are determined "proficient." Johnny can't read in 47 states, but in Georgia, Oklahoma, and Tennessee he's proficient.

Check out this chart to see what grade your state received for setting the standards high enough.
http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/18845034.html

For others reading this thread, if you are in the top 10 and all schools met standards, then you have bragging rights. Otherwise, -- no.

 

[golfgal]

As a parent of a severely disabled student, I doubt that children similar to mine were taking these standardized tests.

http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/raising/alt-assess-long.html

You doubt wrong. They DO have to take the test, at least a certain percentage of the student do. Read back a few pages where a mom with a severely disabled child has been taking the test. Ask at your school, you will be surprised.