[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fw: hickok



See the story about growing evidence of tutoring fraud:
http://transformeducation.blogspot.com/2006/05/more-evidence-of- tutoring-fraud.html

See also my post on the complete lack of accountability of private, for-profit SES providers:
http://transformeducation.blogspot.com/2006/05/private-tutoring- companies-are-not.html

According to a 4/5/06 report from the federal dept. of ed, states are trying to fill in the gap in the federal law. However, according to the report:
15 states had not established any monitoring process of SES providers at all
25 states had not yet established any standards for evaluating provider effectiveness
none had finalized their evaluation standards
According to the ED report, private firms accounted for 76 percent of approved providers in May 2005. 17 states said they will evaluate student achievement on state assessments, although only one of these plans to use a matched control group. The most common approaches that states have implemented to monitor providers, according to the federal report, are surveying the districts about provider effectiveness (25 states) and using providers’ reports on student- level progress (18 states).

Other relevant facts as reported by ED:
The number of state-approved supplemental service providers has tripled over the past two years, rising from 997 in May 2003 to 2,734 in May 2005.
A growing number and percentage of faith-based organizations have obtained state approval, rising from 18 providers (2 percent of providers) in May 2003 to 249 (9 percent) in May 2005.
---
Peter Campbell

On Jun 1, 2006, at 10:18 AM, GERALD BRACEY wrote:

I sent this to the WP the day that Hickok's oped appears. No response save acknowledgment that they got it.

JB

----- Original Message -----
From: GERALD BRACEY
To: letters@washpost.com
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 7:45 AM
Subject: hickok

Eugene W. Hickok's essay on the tutoring available through the No Child Left Behind law omits a few inconvenient truths.

First, he says that "those providing the service have been certified by the state as qualified to tutor." In most cases the certification process is a joke. There are enormous numbers of companies that overwhelm state agencies--states, not districts, certify provideds. Caifornia has 214 approved providers. Illinois has 68, and only one staff person to oversee results.

Second, he is hypocritical. There is no evidence that the tutoring works. In my paper, No Child Left Behind: Where Does the Money Go? I pointed out while public schools are required to provide "scientifically based evidence" for the effectiveness of any program they wish make part of the school curriculum. The private companies that provide most of the tutoring get a free ride. They have no scientifically based evidence for effectiveness because they conducted no honest research, just marketing research (as I said, the certification process is a joke).

While the law requires "highly qualified teachers" in the schools, it makes no such demands on the tutors. They can have any level of education.

Once again, a Bush administration program assumes that as soon as money leaves the public sector for the private sector (up to $2 billion a year for the tutoring), everything will work just fine, no accountability needed. In fact, I am surprised that the Post accepted Hickok's essay as a legitimate op-ed. He's just lobbying for more money for his clients.

The paper mentioned can be obtained free by putting the title into Google.

Sincerely,


Gerald W. Bracey
1797 Duffield Lane
Alexandria, VA 22307
703-317-1716

The writer is a former Director of Research, Evaluation and Testing for the Virginia Department and is a fellow at the Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Arizona State University and at the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, Ypsilanti, Michigan.





  • Follow-Ups:
  • References:
    • Fw: hickok
      • From: "GERALD BRACEY" <gbracey1@verizon.net>

Post a Message to arn-l:

Your name:

Your email address: (use the exact address you are subscribed with)

Subject line:

Message: