[
Author Prev][
Author Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Author Index][
Thread Index]
Re: AYP celebrations
The AYP rate varies state by state and by the two tested subjects. Depends
on the starting point essentially divided by 12 - CA was indeed close to 8
percent per year. Other states had a much lower rate of improvement because
they deemed a far greater percentage of students "proficient" based on the
tests and cutoff scores than did other states.
In any event, studies from at least 10 states show that most or all schools
will fail to make AYP by 2014, with those receiving federal title I $
subject to sanctions (and in some states, other schools as well, depending
on state policies). (See current FT Examiner update on NCLB with link to
breif FT report summarizing the studies on projected numbers of schools.)
Clearly, this data has been and will be used to attack public education.
Some privatization advocates - e.g., Nina Riis - explicitly saw AYP as a
tool to attack public education, while others saw a way to cash in (e.g.,
privately run charter school operators).
That said, it is I think not true that all NCLB supporters seek to demolish
public schooling - some genuinely believe NCLB will lead to a focus on
improving schools that will provide benefits for low-income students. They
are wrong, were predicted to be wrong and have been shown wrong. It is
therefore (past) time for them to withdraw their support for NCLB and to
work with true school improvement adovocates to devise an actually
beneficial role for the federal government.
Finally, Joe is correct to be concerned about teachers not stepping forward
to actively participate in overhauling both state and federal test-based
accountability systems. In some places this is very hard to do because it is
easy to fire teachers - but there are quiet ways to educate on the problems
of NCLB and to support healthy educational activities that can counter the
reduction of schooling to test-prep. And yes, even in other places teachers
face pressure and sanctions - but compared to most employees, they have far
greater job protection. In survey after survey, some 85-90 percent of
teachers have opposed NCLB. A far greater share of these teachers need to
find ways to be active - they are essential.
Monty
----- Original Message -----
From: <MONICALUCIDO@comcast.net>
To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: [arn-l] AYP celebrations
Well, you're wrong. On the ANNUAL MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES FOR ELA, the
requirement from this year through 2014 is approximately 8-10% growth PER
YEAR of the number of students that should land in the proficient range.
Of course, according to the all important standardized test.
Joe Lucido
EPATA
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: aburke5054@aol.com
Nowhere in NCLB is there a requirement for 10 percent annual
improvement.
The whole purpose of NCLB is to make sure that schools focus on all
children. Standards, tests, and AYP are surely imperfect, but they can
be an important mechanism for advancing the educational equity that is
the heart of NCLB. We should expect far better out of public education
than the "game of looking good rather than being good." We should
expect and demand better today, the day we celebrate Martin Luther
King's birthday, and every day. For people who cling to the delusion
that AYP is a tool to destroy public education, there is simply no hope.
Art
-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Patterson <patterna@gvsu.edu>
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:24 pm
Subject: Re: [arn-l] AYP celebrations
The really inane thing about being on the dreaded AYP "list" is that
now even so
called top schools are failing to make annual yearly progress because
they can't
improve the required 10 percent each year. Someone in the Bush
administration
forgot how to do math. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a
10 percent
gain each year is impossible. In some schools the only reason why they
didn't
make AYP is because of the special ed students. Under NCLB, all but
the
severely impaired have to take the tests, even if they can't read.
And,
non-english speaking students have to take the tests, too, even if they
can't
read the tests.
What has happened in some schools is that special education and at risk
students
have been shoved out--sent to alternative schools or simply kicked out.
In
other schools, kids who aren't likely to pass the test are retained the
year
before a significant test is taken. Then they skip a grade, into
another grade
where a significant test is not given. It becomes a game of looking
good rather
than being good.
Nancy
Nancy Patterson, PhD
Literacy Studies Program Chair
College of Education
Grand Valley State University
920 Eberhard Center
301 W. Fulton
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49504
616-331-6226
patterna@gvsu.edu
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/patterna
>>> "Tauna Rogers" <taunar@plateautel.net> 1/21/2008 11:25 AM >>>
Diane,
My .02 is that you are right on the money. Celebrating making AYP
serves to
legitimize a mechanism designed to discredit and ultimately destroy
public
education, although I can easily understand how relieved the schools
must be
to get off the dreaded list. Keep up the good fight. They may mean well
but
celebrating making AYP sends exactly the wrong message. Stick to your
guns,
you're doing the right thing!
Tauna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Aoki" <dkeikoa@hawaii.rr.com>
To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 2:28 AM
Subject: [arn-l] AYP celebrations
> Please help me out on this. I had a recent outburst at a union
meeting
> about
> plans to honor schools that made AYP after being in restructuring.
This is
> how I feel: Making AYP is the result of many factors that have
nothing to
> do
> with the teachers at that school and the quality of their teaching.
These
> factors could be: whether or not that school is large enough to be
> required
> to count the subgroups; whether or not that school focused their time
and
> resources on the test at the expense of other subjects - "teaching
to the
> test;" the schools may have focused on the "bubble kids," at the
expense
> of
> the others who are too low or too high to make a difference on the
test.
> Those are my main points - are there others?
>
> My reasons for being upset are: The NCLB reform program of which AYP
is an
> integral aspect is not meant to improve public education, but to
destroy
> it,
> so we need to be critical of it. By celebrating AYP, we are saying
that
> NCLB
> is working. By celebrating AYP, we are sending a message out to the
other
> schools, if they can do it, you can too. But the way it is set up
(100%
> proficiency by 2014), we will either all fail, or all be Stepford
schools,
> shaped into such by private companies who got lucrative contracts to
do
> this. By celebrating AYP, we are being divisive, setting the AYP
schools
> in
> opposition to the non-AYP schools, a heirarchy based on test scores
that
> don't necessarily mean better schools. By not recognizing the truth
of it,
> we are blurring our vision, which should be focused on, what IS a
quality
> school, how CAN we take back our profession, how can WE be the
determiners
> of what a good school is and celebrate that.
>
> In the room of about 11 people, only 3 seemed to get what I was
saying.
> And
> these were union leaders. They said things like, "we need to be more
> positive," "it gives us hope," "it's all we have."
>
> Please help me out. I need to know if I am off my rocker or on the
money.
> Is
> what I am saying so off base? Or is it just one of those things that
are
> hard to be honest about, so people would rather cling to the illusion.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Unsubscribe ARN-L:
> http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html
>
________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com
-------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe ARN-L:
http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html
Post a Message to arn-l:
