Re: [ca-resisters] Title I

[kber <kber@EARTHLINK.NET>]

Following on this thread

As some of you may know, Nacy Grasmick, in charge of education at the state level in Maryland, had offered to let schools
this year not give MSPAP (Maryland School Performance Assessment Program) at the 8th grade level.  This is the test in which
almost eery single state school system went down last year but which the state and an outside evaluation team determined had
nothing wrong with the test.  In case you don't know, students do not get individual scores on this test - it is a score of
schools based on how their students do.

Ssaun Newman, Asst Ssec of Education, informed Grasmick this week that any school receiving Title I moeny would still be
required to give the test or else lose their Title I money. One district that was planning to drop it, Montgomery County, has
no Title I schools and hence can feel free to move ahead.  It is not clear from Newman's comunication what happens within a
distirct if some schools are Title I and others are not -  most all schools still give the test?

Having been and dminstrator of 8th grade MSPAP, I sincerely doubt that it provides the kind of information that the new ESEA
seems to demand.  There is, realistically, no separate score in reading, since all reading occurs within embedded larger
tasks, for example.  Thus I am not sureon what basis Newman is insisting it must be given.  Perhaps she has found a
requirement in previous legislation? And perhaps the Feds just don't wan to see any step back in their approach of Leave No
Child Untested.

Ken Bernstein

Peter Farruggio wrote:

> Right!  How can we find out the facts about this fast?
>
> At 03:18 PM 3/16/02, Harold Berlak wrote:
>
> >I am concerned that we don't overreact to the threat to withdraw Title I
> >funds. It is a very serious matter, of course,  but it is also important
> >not to panic. I'm not at all sure,  but I  assumed that this provision
> >would not take effect immediately. This is the feds decision , not the
> >State's .  As far as I have been able to find out, the rules for
> >enforcing ESEA punitive provisions are not as yet set.  I have not read
> >the provisions of the law.  Has anyone? Perhaps someone who knows
> >Congressman Miller, could pose the question to him.  Where did the
> >principal who sent this threat to his/her staff get this information?
> >I also have doubts about the legality of giving parents the right to
> >exempt their child and then to enact rules that coerce parents so they
> >do not exercise this right.     On the other hand, we  certainly cannot
> >count on the courts to defend the rights of parents or students.   If
> >there is enough of an uproar, I suspect the Administration would back
> >down . I take some  comfort that the authorities are truly worried that
> >the resistance to tests is widespread and is growing. Threats, founded
> >and not founded are to be expected in an effort to disarm resistance.
> >Harold Berlak
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------
> >Archives--> http://www.ncte.org/lists/ca-resisters/archives.shtml
> >To leave CA-RESISTERS send email to majordomo@lists.ncte.org
> >In the first line put: unsubscribe ca-resisters
> >Report problems to: listmgr@lists.ncte.org (NOT to the list itself)
> >
> >
> >
> >---
> >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> >Version: 6.0.336 / Virus Database: 188 - Release Date: 3/11/02
>
>                                                   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.336 / Virus Database: 188 - Release Date: 3/11/02

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.