Re: SF Gate: Education Act ties cash to exams/Low

["Art Burke" <aburke@vansd.org>]

The "accountability" clock is ticking now, though, and you won't have to
wait until 2014 to see things happening.  We should have all the
excitement we need in the next few years.  Art

>>> kvscanty@pacbell.net 01/10/03 01:27PM >>>
Art and George C.

Thank you for your thoughtful answers - although I'm not sure still
what
will happen in 2014...by then, I'll be so old I won't care  :)

Karen

-----Original Message-----
From: arn-l-owner@interversity.org
[mailto:arn-l-owner@interversity.org] 
On Behalf Of George K Cunningham
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:58 AM
To: arn-l@interversity.org 
Subject: Re: [arn-l] SF Gate: Education Act ties cash to exams/Low

Karen,
 
As I understand it, each state has to have standards and an
assessment.
 The states each set their own performance standards, which can differ
across states.  For a school to pass, a certain percent of their
students must be proficient.  I don't remember whether that is set by
states or is specified in the NCLB legislation.  The law also requires
the results to be disaggregated to include the different subgroups and
I
know that schools are supposed to have all of these groups pass, not
just the total.
 
California has challenging content standards and the performance
standards are also high.  Based on the way things are set up now there
will be a very high failure rate in California.  There are many other
states that have the same issues.  In the past, as the deadline
approaches, states have found many creative ways to manipulate the
results to obtain a satisfactory passing rate.  I am sure that
California will do the same.  
 
Kentucky has very high standards and the performance standards were
written in such a way that reaching them was impossible for most
schools.  Two years ago, they quietly rescaled the test and now it is
much easier.  There will still be a lot of failures with the current
standards and I am sure there are plans for additional "adjustments."
 
 
George K. Cunningham
University of Louisville

>>> kvscanty@pacbell.net 01/10/03 02:29PM >>>
Art,

This is the quote from the Chron article that I was confused about and
your answer only further confuses me...

"That's essentially what the new federal Education Act says, requiring
every student group -- blacks, whites, Latinos, English-learners and
the
disabled -- to do well in school or jeopardize federal Title I funding
for poor students. 

Based on how well students are doing in school today, however, test
experts with the California Department of Education said Wednesday
that
98 percent of its schools would fail to meet that target a dozen years
from now."

What I think the article is saying is that if all groups in a school
do
not reach 100% proficiency, then they will lose federal Title I
funding
for poor students.  Is that right or did the reporter get it wrong?

Karen


-----Original Message-----
From: arn-l-owner@interversity.org 
[mailto:arn-l-owner@interversity.org] 
On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 10:34 AM
To: arn-l@interversity.org 
Subject: Re: [arn-l] SF Gate: Education Act ties cash to exams/Low

The only way for a school NOT to get money is to have NO eligible
children.

Art

>> kvscanty@pacbell.net 01/10/03 10:15AM >>>
Ah Art and here I thought we were actually having a conversation...I
suppose I could have worded my question in a different way - what I
was
trying to find out was if the reporter from the Chron was right or if
you were - that in the end, even though there are no monetary
penalties
now, money can/will be taken away IF schools have not reached 100%
proficiency.  That's all I really wanted to know...

Karen

-----Original Message-----
From: arn-l-owner@interversity.org 
[mailto:arn-l-owner@interversity.org] 
On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 8:08 AM
To: arn-l@interversity.org 
Subject: Re: [arn-l] SF Gate: Education Act ties cash to exams/Low

Heck, if you're in a hurry, lose the money now.  Art

>>> kvscanty@pacbell.net 01/09/03 05:13PM >>>

Art, this was in the SF Chron today - so we just have to wait for 11
years
to lose the money? Karen
----------------------------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------
ARN-L archives:
http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/archives.html 
-------------------------------------------------------
ARN-L archives:
http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/archives.html 


-------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe ARN-L:
http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html 

------------------------------------------------
Direct list questions to listmom@interversity.net 


------------------------------------------------
Direct list questions to listmom@interversity.net