Re: Insanity of the Month

["gerald bracey" <gbracey@erols.com>]

This essay just leads me to repeat a prediction I made over two years ago in
my own essay that called NCLB a weapon of mass destruction: The dissarray
among states in what is "proficient" will lead to a disaster: the adoption
of the NAEP achievement levels.

Coming soon to a school near you: very few kids at the proficient level.

----- Original Message -----
From: "George Sheridan" <learn@jps.net>
To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 2:17 AM
Subject: [arn-l] Insanity of the Month


Another regular feature of NEA Today is the "Insanity of the Month" This
one focuses on the wildly varying meaning of "proficient" in different
states.

*
Making the Grade

So, are Montana's students really smarter than Wyoming's? If you compare
their state test scores, you might think so. But, a study by the
Oregon-based Northwest Evaluation Association, a nonprofit assessment
group, found the test scores deceiving. Students in the two states could
have the same skill levels, but show different test results.

How so? It's another inconsistency raised by the test-focused Elementary
and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The act gives states the opportunity to
set passing scores or "proficiency" levels for their own state tests-but
what's really being measured? That's anybody's guess. In Montana, for
example, an eighth grader is considered "proficient" in math if she scores
in the 36th percentile on the test. Across the state line, the same student
would have to score in the 89th percentile to pass.

But the discrepancies don't end there. Sometimes, the proficiency levels
vary between grades or subjects within a single state. In Arizona, for
instance, a third grader can pass the state math test by scoring in the
46th percentile, while an eighth grader needs to score in the 75th. In
Washington, fourth graders need to reach the 76th percentile on their math
tests, but only the 53rd percentile on the state reading exam.

The nutty result: school districts saddled with ESEA's requirements to
measure student progress only with tests can't accurately judge students'
abilities in different subjects. And if they can't do that, the report
notes, how can they determine funding and services needed for struggling
students?

Where did we ever get the crazy idea that in order to make children do
better, first we have to make them feel worse? Think of the last time you
felt humiliated or treated unfairly. Did you feel like cooperating or doing
better? - Jane Nelson


-----------------------------------------------
Report list problems to listmom@interversity.net