Fwd: More from FairTest

[Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org>]

Begin forwarded message:

  From: James Crawford <jwcrawford@COMPUSERVE.COM>

  Date: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:14:42 AM US/Pacific

  To: ELLADVOC@asu.edu

  Subject: More from FairTest

  Reply-To: James Crawford <jwcrawford@COMPUSERVE.COM>

  0000,0000,0000FairTest's letter to U.S. House education staff in response to
  a letter from Education Committee Chair George Miller

  0000,0000,0000Date: July 11, 2007

  From: Monty Neill, Co-Executive Director, National Center for Fair & Open
  Testing (FairTest); Chair, Forum on Educational Accountability (FEA)

  To: House education staff

  Re: Chairman Miller's letter on NCLB to first year members of Congress

  The education, civil rights and other organizations that have signed the
  Joint Organizational Statement on NCLB and are active in the Forum on
  Educational Accountability (FEA) are pleased to see that the House Education
  Committee will be taking up many of the key issues surrounding NCLB, per Mr.
  Miller's letter to first year members of Congress.

  Basing this analysis on the 1999,1999,FFFFJoint Statement0000,0000,0000 (now
  signed by 137 national education, civil rights, religious, disability, civic
  and labor organizations representing more than 50 million Americans) and the
  FEA legislative proposals, we hope that members of the Committee and Congress
  will consider the following points as they work to re-authorize the law:

  1. Growth models: Adopt the Joint Statement's recommendation on growth
  models: "Replace the law's arbitrary proficiency targets with ambitious
  achievement targets based on rates of success actually achieved by the most
  effective public schools." FEA legislative recommendations and the report of
  the Expert Panel on Assessment specify how to accomplish this. (All "growth
  models" approved to date by the U.S. Department of Education are limited by
  the requirement of 100% proficiency by 2014 and by "Adequate Yearly
  Progress"; this should not be the case in a reauthorized law.)

  2. Multiple sources of evidence (measures) and local assessments: Adopt the
  Joint Statement recommendation on multiple measures: "Help states develop
  assessment systems that include district and school-based measures." FEA and
  the 1999,1999,FFFFExpert Panel on Assessment report0000,0000,0000 provide
  details on how to do so. Multiple measures and local assessments are already
  permitted under NCLB. For example, Nebraska's system for accountability,
  which includes only local, state- approved assessments, has received
  provisional approval from the U.S. Department of Education, the current
  status of most states. Though the law need not be changed to allow such a
  system - and should not be changed to limit such systems - financial support
  must be provided to help states develop locally-based assessment systems that
  include multiple kinds of assessments. Such efforts should focus on
  assessments that first help teachers to teach better, and secondly
  contribute, when they are technically adequate, to accountability
  information.

  3. Growth and multiple measures: The Joint Statement supports combining
  growth models and multiple, largely local, measures. The FEA legislative
  recommendations and the Expert Panel report specify ways this can be done.
  Growth models make sense, but if they do not include multiple sources of
  evidence, they will have the same failings as current statewide standardized
  tests - failure to assess higher order learning, measuring a limited slice of
  the curriculum, and fostering narrow teaching to the test.

  4. Improve test quality: A new law should direct funding toward assessments
  that help improve teaching and learning (as in point 2, above). Annual
  statewide tests do not and cannot do much on that, while "interim" or
  "benchmark" mini-tests share the failings of state exams noted in point 3.

  5. Flexible interventions: This is a good idea, but FEA recommends that
  schools be held accountable for implementing systemic reforms; targeted and
  intense assistance should be given to schools unable to implement locally
  guided systemic reforms and/or are not making sufficient progress (see FEA
  recommendations). This connects to Mr. Miller's point on improving the
  teaching force, since high-quality professional development (and the use of
  high-quality classroom assessments) improves teaching and learning - though
  his points do not refer to professional development beyond mentoring.

  6. Improved assessments for English language learners and students with
  disabilities: The 1999,1999,FFFFFEA's Expert Panel on Assessment0000,0000,0000
  has detailed recommendations, under Principle III, for improving the
  assessment of these students. Multiple forms of assessment are also essential
  for these children. We strongly support continuing to include all children in
  accountability systems, but in appropriate and educationally sound ways.

  7. Funding: The Joint Statement says, "Fully fund Title I to ensure that 100
  percent of eligible children are served," and "Raise authorized levels of
  NCLB funding to cover a substantial percentage of the costs that states and
  districts will incur to carry out these recommendations, and fully fund the
  law at those levels without reducing expenditures for other education
  programs." Those costs include developing local assessment systems and
  professional development.

  8. Decrease the testing burden: Mr. Miller's letter did not address this
  issue. The Joint Statement says, "Decrease the testing burden on states,
  schools and districts by allowing states to assess students annually in
  selected grades in elementary, middle schools, and high schools." One method
  to accomplish this is to delete the NCLB requirement to expand testing to
  grades three through eight.

  Members of the Education Committee should stand firm in seeking these changes
  to NCLB. I and the members of the FEA are ready to work with you to ensure
  these positive changes are included in the reauthorization.

  o The Joint Statement, the FEA legislative recommendations, the FEA report
  Redefining Accountability and the Expert Panel report Assessment and
  Accountability for Improving Schools and Learning, are all available at
  1999,1999,FFFFwww.edaccountability.orgTimes New Roman0000,0000,0000. The FEA
  is a working group from among the signers of the Joint Statement, including
  FairTest.

  Note: For a copy of Rep. Miller's original letter, click here.

Vote in the National Cheney Impeachment Poll

http://www.usalone.com/blogvoices.php?Cheney%20Impeachment%3F

Add this text to your own email and blog signatures!