Re: Is Bar Set Too High?

[Michelle Montali <michel1282@cox.net>]

> With respect to the California State Standards on which the terms  
are purportedly based, the notions of "advanced," "proficient," and 
"basic" are absurd.  Read the K-6 standards and see if you would 
give a rat's abdomen if your own child had "mastered" them (again, 
absurd) or not.  I know kids who can analyze literature, often with 
startling acumen, kids who would laugh at the type of "activities" 
outlined in their grade-level standards.  Furthermore, performance 
varies among children form day to day and text to text.  With the 
truly measurable goals being the most laughable, I guess it's up to 
me to assess, and celebrate, my own children's progress towards 
real literacy.> 
From: George Sheridan <learn@jps.net>
> Date: 2006/03/19 Sun PM 04:13:37 EST
> To: Ca-resisters@interversity.org
> Subject: [ca-resisters] Is Bar Set Too High?
> 
> California Senate and Assembly leaders recognize that the 
state's 
> definition of "proficient" is set too high. The definition was 
enacted a 
> lofty goal before the enactment of the current version of the 
federal 
> Elementary and Secondary Education Act (the so-called "No 
Child Left 
> Behind" act). That law creates a set of sanctions for schools in 
which less 
> than 100% of students are "proficient" by the year 2014. But no 
one 
> seriously imagined that all children could ever meet California's 
> definition of "proficient." Some people say that one part of a 
solution is 
> to change the definition of "proficient." Perhaps the state could 
introduce 
> a new term - something like "exemplary" - for students who meet 
the current 
> definition of "proficient." Then proficient could be used as it is in 
many 
> states, to describe what we now call "basic."
> 
> Is bar set too high for schools?
> Critics say lawmaker's push to change definition of 'proficient' 
amounts to 
> lowering standards.
> By Jim Sanders -- Bee Capitol Bureau
> Published 2:15 am PST Sunday, March 19, 2006
> Story appeared on Page A3 of The Bee
> 
> http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/education/story/
14232353p-15054528c.html
> 
> 
> Too many students fail to meet California's standard for 
proficiency, 
> sparking a simple solution under consideration in the Capitol: 
redefine 
> "proficient."
> 
> By changing a few words in state law, legislators could 
dramatically affect 
> how the federal government rates the state's education system.
> 
> "I think it's a totally sensible thing to do," said Assemblywoman 
Loni 
> Hancock, D-Berkeley.
> 
> Critics of Hancock's proposal, Assembly Bill 2975, say the state's 
goal 
> should be to improve schools, not alter words.
> 
> Hancock counters that both are needed to avoid severe 
sanctions in coming 
> years under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, or NCLB.
> 
> "What all of this needs is for grown-up egos to be set aside and 
to focus 
> on the young people," she said.
> 
> The California School Boards Association and the Association of 
California 
> School Administrators have taken no position on AB 2975, but 
they say 
> Hancock has seized on a very real problem.
> 
> Jack O'Connell, state schools superintendent, opposes AB 2975.
> 
> "It's a measure that would have the net effect of watering down 
our 
> standards," O'Connell said. "It takes us in the wrong direction."
> 
> "It's a terrible idea," added Jim Lanich of California Business for 
> Education Excellence. "We should never back down from rigor 
and redraw 
> targets. It's bad policy and it's bad for kids."
> 
> Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the California Teachers 
Association have 
> taken no position.
> 
> AB 2975 targets a California academic standard, set years ago, 
that 
> basically requires a proficient student to score on standardized 
tests at 
> levels that show grade-level competence and, thus, skills 
necessary to 
> attend college.
> 
> When the federal government adopted NCLB, it accepted each 
state's 
> definition of "proficient" but required every student to reach that 
> threshold in English and mathematics by 2014.
> 
> Thus the rub: States that set the bar low academically have a 
distinct 
> advantage over California, whose high proficiency standard is a 
laudable 
> but unrealistic mandate to apply universally to more than 6 
million 
> students of varying backgrounds, Hancock contends.
> 
> "Be real," she said. "This isn't 'Alice in Wonderland.'"
> 
> Less than half of California's students currently qualify as 
proficient - 
> 40 percent of them in English-language arts and 38 percent of 
them in 
> mathematics, state records show.
> 
> Under NCLB, sanctions are imposed on schools that receive 
federal funds for 
> disadvantaged children and fail two consecutive years in 
meeting annual 
> targets for the number of proficient children overall and in ethnic 
or 
> other subgroups, such as English learners.
> 
> Penalties increase in severity over a five-year period, from 
allowing 
> students to transfer at district expense to restructuring the faculty 
or 
> administration of a targeted school.
> 
> AB 2975 would give California some "breathing room" to avoid 
sanctions and 
> would eliminate a perverse incentive in the current system, 
Hancock said.
> 
> Because schools are judged by NCLB on the number of 
proficient students, 
> the temptation is to focus attention on those closest to clearing 
that bar, 
> not necessarily on the lowest-performing children, she said.
> 
> "(We must) create the best situation in which our teachers and 
principals 
> can do their best work to engage these kids," she said.
> 
> Under AB 2975, proficient students need not necessarily perform 
at grade 
> level. Rather, test scores must show that they are acquiring 
adequate 
> skills, year by year, to pass the state's high school exit exam by 
the end 
> of 12th grade.
> 
> Since California grants diplomas to students who pass the exit 
exam, it 
> should consider those children proficient, Hancock contends.
> 
> The exit exam measures English-language arts at about the 
ninth-and 
> 10th-grade levels, and mathematics at about the seventh-and 
eighth-grade 
> levels, said Hilary McLean, a spokeswoman for the California 
Department of 
> Education.
> 
> Neither the U.S. Department of Education nor the Education 
Commission of 
> the States keeps statistics on how California compares to other 
states in 
> its definition of proficiency or its percentage of students meeting 
that 
> standard.
> 
> But Kathy Christie, senior vice president of the Education 
Commission of 
> the States, said states clearly differ in the rigor of their academic 
> standards, their definition of proficiency, and in the standardized 
tests 
> they use.
> 
> A report last year by California's nonpartisan Legislative 
Analyst's Office 
> cited Texas as one state where the proficiency standard is 
relatively 
> modest and high numbers of students - more than 80 percent - 
have met it.
> 
> State Sen. Jack Scott, an Altadena Democrat who is chairman of 
the Senate 
> Education Committee, said he conceptually supports AB 2975.
> 
> "I'm not trying to lower standards, but if I as a teacher gave a test 
that 
> (a vast majority) of students failed, I'd think there was a little 
> something wrong with my test," he said.
> 
> Bob Wells, executive director of the Association of California 
School 
> Administrators, said California's definition of proficiency was "sort 
of a 
> lofty goal" that never was intended to serve as a high-stakes 
mandate for 
> every child.
> 
> "We think something ought to happen," Wells said of redefining 
proficiency. 
> "It does look to us like taking it all the way down to the level of the 
> high school exit exam might be overkill, but it's a good 
conversation to have."
> 
> O'Connell, state schools superintendent, agrees with Hancock 
that NCLB can 
> result in schools being unfairly penalized based solely on 
proficiency 
> statistics.
> 
> Rather than redefine proficiency, however, O'Connell said he is 
pushing for 
> changes to federal law that would take into consideration a 
school's 
> year-to-year progress, which is the top priority of California's own 
> accountability program, the Academic Performance Index.
> 
> "We know that we're challenging students," O'Connell said of the 
> proficiency standard. "But it's in their best interest. Bottom line, 
> students must have the skills not only to survive in the new 
economy, but 
> to thrive in it."
> 
> Dave Gordon, Sacramento County schools superintendent, 
urged legislators to 
> stay the course.
> 
> "In my career, I've found that kids will rise to your standards," he 
said.
> 
> About the writer: The Bee's Jim Sanders can be reached at (916) 
326-5538 or 
> jsanders@sacbee.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> George Sheridan
> 
>