Susan On Saturday, April 21, 2007, at 01:34 PM, Horace B Lucido wrote:
Nebraska uses DIBELS for k-2 and Gates MacGinitie comprehension for 3rd grade.From Nebraska's Dept. of Ed. web site on Reading First assessment:http://www.nde.state.ne.us/ReadingFirst/ Nebraska%20RF%20Ex%20Eval%20Report%20Year%202.pdfStudent AchievementGrade-level achievement was determined using a different outcome measure at the springassessment in each grade to match grade-level expectations. In Kindergarten, we used the DIBELS Phoneme Segmentation Fluency. In First Grade, we used the DIBELS Non Word Fluency. In Second Grade, we use the DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency. In Third Grade, we used the Gates MacGinitie comprehension results.For simplicity of presentation, only these scores will be presented in the section.Rog ( Horace ) Lucido, Physics Instructor, Ret. Program Evaluator Adjunct Faculty, Fresno Pacific University Educational Consultant Educators and Parents Against Testing Abuse ( EPATA ) Assessment Reform Network Central Valley Coordinator Phone: 559-277-1312 Cell: 559-355-4215 email: lucid4@cvip.net Rog ( Horace ) Lucido, Physics Instructor, Ret. Program Evaluator Adjunct Faculty, Fresno Pacific University Educational Consultant Educators and Parents Against Testing Abuse ( EPATA ) Assessment Reform Network Central Valley Coordinator Phone: 559-277-1312 Cell: 559-355-4215 email: lucid4@cvip.net Rog ( Horace ) Lucido, Physics Instructor, Ret. Program Evaluator Adjunct Faculty, Fresno Pacific University Educational Consultant Educators and Parents Against Testing Abuse ( EPATA ) Assessment Reform Network Central Valley Coordinator Phone: 559-277-1312 Cell: 559-355-4215 email: lucid4@cvip.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org> Date: Saturday, April 21, 2007 12:57 pmSubject: Re: [ca-resisters] Key NCLB Initiative Under Federal InvestigationTo: ca-resisters@interversity.orgNebraska does, and is a model for the rest of us. Susan On Saturday, April 21, 2007, at 09:31 AM, Horace B Lucido wrote:Improved test scores could just mean better test prep, notgenuinecomprehension. A one-time test on reading is not a validmeasure ofcomprehension. Each state uses a different assessment ( althoughsomemay use the same-DIBELS? now under investigation ) and thereforeadifferent definition of what it means to read withcomprehension. Animprovement in one dimension of comprehension scores on onestate'sassessment, may correspond to a reduction in scores in another. Even in this flawed assessment processes one cannont even uttertheword 'scientific' as there is no standardization in which toassumethat increases in percent proficient using one assessment can be mathematically combined and/or contrasted to another. No states,to myknowledge, use multiple measures either. Rog Rog ( Horace ) Lucido, Physics Instructor, Ret. Program Evaluator Adjunct Faculty, Fresno Pacific University Educational Consultant Educators and Parents Against Testing Abuse ( EPATA ) Assessment Reform Network Central Valley Coordinator Phone: 559-277-1312 Cell: 559-355-4215 email: lucid4@cvip.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu> Date: Saturday, April 21, 2007 6:58 am Subject: [ca-resisters] Key NCLB Initiative Under FederalInvestigation> To: ca-resisters@interversity.orgFirst Krashen, then the Washington Post... The good news: the reading nazis are being exposed for their corruption. The bad news: Miller and Kennedy still buy the official propaganda that kill and drill teaching "works" Sent to the Washington Post, April 21 According to The Post ("Reading first paying off, Education Dept. Says," April 19), the US Department of Education reported that the percentage of third graders meeting or exceeding the proficient level on tests of reading comprehension increased by 12% between 2004 and 2006, which they regard as strong support for the effectiveness of Reading First. I have examined this data (available on the Department of Education website). For the 30 states with test scores available, I found an average increase of 6.7% in the percentage of third graders scoring at the proficient level or higher between 2004 and 2006. This is considerably less than the figure reported by the Department of Education. Eight states had impressive gains, ranging from 10% to 26%, but these states combined contained only about 10% of the total number of students in Reading First. For other 22 states, the average increase between 2004 and 2006 was only 3%. In other words, only a small percentage of children appear to have profited from Reading First. For states that include 90% of those in Reading First, gains were minimal. Children in Reading First get 100 extra minutes of reading instruction per week, and Reading First teachers get significantly more professional development. The Department of Education's own data shows that Reading First, for the vast majority of children, is not very efficient. Stephen KrashenKEY INITIATIVE OF "NO CHILD" UNDER FEDERAL INVESTIGATION Washington Post -- April 21, 2007 by Amit R. Paley The Justice Department is conducting a probe of a $6 billionreadinginitiative at the center of President Bush's No Child Left Behind law, another blow to a program besieged by allegations offinancialconflicts of interest and cronyism, people familiar with themattersaid yesterday. The disclosure came as a congressional hearing revealed howpeopleimplementing the $1 billion-a-year Reading First program made at least $1 million off textbooks and tests toward which the federal government steered states. "That sounds like a criminal enterprise to me," said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House education committee,whichheld a five-hour investigative hearing. "You don't get tooverridethe law," he angrily told a panel of Reading First officials."Butthe fact of the matter is that you did." The Education Department's inspector general, John P. Higgins,Jr.,said he has made several referrals to the Justice Departmentaboutthe five-year-old program, which provides grants to improvereadingfor children in kindergarten through third grade. Higgins declined to offer more specifics, but Christopher J. Doherty, former director of Reading First, said in an interviewthathe was questioned by Justice officials in November. The civil division of the U.S. attorney's office for the District, whichcanbring criminal charges, is reviewing the matter. Doherty, one of the two Education Department employees whooversawthe initiative, acknowledged yesterday that his wife had workedfora decade as a paid consultant for a reading program, Direct Instruction, that investigators said he improperly tried to force schools to use. He repeatedly failed to disclose the conflict on financial disclosure forms. "I'm very proud of this program and my role in this program," Doherty said in the interview. "I think it's been implemented in accordance with the law." The management of Reading First has come under attacks frommembersof both parties. Federal investigators say program officials improperly forced states to use certain tests and textbookscreatedby those officials. One official, Roland H. Good III, said his company made $1.3millionoff a reading test, known as DIBELS, that was endorsed by aReadingFirst evaluation panel he sat on. Good, who owns half thecompany,Dynamic Measurement Group, told the committee that he donated royalties from the product to the University of Oregon, where heisan associate professor. Two former University of Oregon researchers on the panel, EdwardJ.Kame'enui and Deborah C. Simmons, said they received about$150,000in royalties last year for a program that is now packaged with DIBELS. They testified that they received smaller royalties in previous years for the program, Scott Foresman Early Reading Intervention, and did not know it was being sold with DIBELS. Members of the panel said they recused themselves from voting on their own products but did assess their competitors. Of 24 tests approved by the committee, seven were tied to members of thepanel.>>>"I regret the perception of conflicts of interest," saidKame'enui,former chairman of the committee, who now works at the departmentascommissioner of the National Center for Special EducationResearch."But there was no real conflict of interest being engaged in." The intricate financial connections between Reading Firstproductsand program officials extend beyond issues the committee exploredyesterday.>Another researcher, Sharon Vaughn, worked with Kame'enui, Simmons and Good to design Voyager Universal Literacy, a program that Reading First officials urged states to use. Vaughn was directorofa center at the University of Texas that was hired to providestatesadvice on selecting Reading First tests and books. The publisher of that product, Voyager Expanded Learning, was founded and run by Randy Best, a major Bush campaign contributor, who sold the company in 2005 for more than $350 million. Now Best runs Higher Ed Holdings, a company that develops colleges of education, where former education secretary Roderick R. Paige isasenior adviser and G. Reid Lyon, Bush's former reading adviser,isan executive vice president. "I'm very disappointed and saddened by the information that was provided at the hearing today," said Lyon, who had been a strong defender of Reading First, which he said had nothing to do withhisnew job. "The issues appear much more serious than I had been ledtounderstand." Despite the controversy surrounding Reading First's management,thepercentage of students in the program who are proficient onfluencytests has risen about 15 percent, Education Department officials said. School districts across the country praise the program. Members of both parties continue to support the goals of Reading First even as they attack its management. Miller and Senate education committee Chairman Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) joined Republicans yesterday in pledging to tighten restrictions on conflicts of interest in No Child Left Behind. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, who declined to comment yesterday, has said management problems with Reading First"reflectindividual mistakes." But Doherty said nearly every aspect of the program was carefully monitored by the department and the White House, where Spelling was Bush's top education adviser. "This program was always firmly under the watch and control ofthehighest levels of the government," Doherty said.