Get Schooled

By Dan

June 22, 2005 01:03 PM | Link to this

Incomplete would be a better term. But since prior to NCLB we had no standard measure it is an improvement. Furthermore if a local district doesn’t like NCLB they don’t have to play. It is optional

By Jake

June 22, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this

Incomplete is correct, as well as somewhat misleading. Perhaps the most misleading aspect is that the ‘passing’ rates average somewhere around 80% of the students, but ‘passing’ only requires a cut score of about 40% correct. Anything less than 60%, 70% in many school districts, is failing for course purposes, but 40% is passing for CRCT purposes.
Let’s be perfectly clear, most of the questions are multiple choice with five possible answers, so a chimpanzee trained to fill in one block per question would get 20%.
What’s clear is that the public school system is failing, miserably.

By Robert

June 22, 2005 02:19 PM | Link to this

As with most of the idiotic Republican ideas to "help" society, specifically the non-higher-class members, NCLB is a hollow law. First, it uses standardized testing as the sole measure of a students success - do you really want your childs future to be determined by a single standardized test ever? Check out how India's and China's single standardized test in 10th grade to determine if that child is college bound and then look at the suicide rates. Second, the standards are complete BS. Make progress? By whose standards? What about a child new to the Country and to English? Should they make the same on these tests are others even though they cannot read English? What about Special Ed students? Third, NCLB includes ridiculous measures such as attendence on test taking days. How can a school be accountable for this? Can schools really control sickness, family emergencies, death in the family, and so on? Finally, the wonderful Republican Federal Government that we now enjoy does not fund NCLB yet they expect States to adhere to it. Yeah, that'll work. Send our Federal tax dollars to fight a war we don't want but don't fund our own children.

By Robert

June 22, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this

Jake, What is failing is NOT the public school system. I am a teacher in a public school that is NOT failing and I take GREAT offense to your statement. Enron failed and so do you say that all of corporate America is failing? Are you that stupid?

By shala

June 22, 2005 02:50 PM | Link to this

I agree with the fact that there are more things that need to be looked at than just the NO CHILD slogan. Most of your schools are filled with students that don’t want to learn and teacher that really don’t want to teach.

The system needs to do some secret surveillance on these classes. Send those students home for good that don’t want to learn and those tired teachers that really don’t want to teach home. Send a message that the system is taking back these schools.

You can’t call the parents, because most of these students don’t respect their parents, so intern they disrespect every other adult. These are the students that disrupt class early on in life and continue this pattern all the way to 12 grade. They are simply there for the teachers to babysit. The mothers don’t have any place for them to go.

Make a curriculum that is based on the test starting now for 1st graders when testing time comes they want fail.

By FunkyGee

June 22, 2005 02:53 PM | Link to this

Robert - you are failing. You’re a teacher that takes great offense to someone’s opinion. I guess you are told by the school what to say because they own you. Republicans own you too. NCLB was Ted Kennedy’s plan anyway. He’s got you by the nose ring leading you down the spiraling pit of failure of the system guys like you are active in. Way to go socialist bro.

By Nick

June 22, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this

I always thought that testing the students twice a year would be a great way to determine improvement and measure the quality of a teacher. Once in september and once in march. If the test scores improve, the teacher is doing a good job, if they don’t or improve slightly, then a teacher is not.

By Autumn

June 22, 2005 02:58 PM | Link to this

In what other facet of the real world does the theory behind NCLB hold true? If I don’t meet the standards of my job - I will be let go! Unfortunately, some of these children were left behind on the day they were born to their irresponsible parents.

Furthermore, let’s think logically. Would you want your surgeon to be the one who passed his exams with a 40%? The pass rate on the EOCT exam is ridiculously made low so that the schools can claim a high success rate. As stated earlier, monkeys could pass the exam (which, by the way, counts for more than the final exam now in high school) - but, that doesn’t mean that the material has been mastered.

The curriculum is getting watered down, and eventually, we will just teach to the test - which is not the objective of education.

By Jake

June 22, 2005 02:59 PM | Link to this

Robert - Did your degree work include a logic class? I’m not saying Georgia public education is pitiful because a couple of inner city schools don’t make AYP.
I said overall for the entire state roughly 1 in 5 students can’t even double a blindfolded chimpanzee’s average score. What do you call that, a success story? By the way, those are the 2005 results, excluding special ed. Perhaps you are in one of the blessed communities that has involved parents and performs above the dismal state averages. But bear in mind that’s in a state that doesn’t rank too well in norm-referenced tests like the ITBS or the SAT. And that’s in a country that is seeing high tech jobs going increasingly to Indians and Indonesians and Chinese that have truly successful public education systems, places where an entire calculus curriculum is completed in high school. I went to public schools, but I also attended Phillips Exeter Academy, so I know the difference. At Exeter they taught me it is extremely rude and only demonstrates your own ignorance, when you call someone stupid just because you don’t agree with them.

By Autumn

June 22, 2005 03:02 PM | Link to this

Nick, are you taking into consideration the teachers who receive students the day or the week before the exams are given? Or, what about the teachers who teach children who do not speak one word of English?

The fact that test scores are low is not necessarily a reflection upon the teachers.

By Nick

June 22, 2005 03:07 PM | Link to this

Autumn I agree with you that there are exceptions that need to be taken into consideration. I also don’t think it is fair on the teachers or the students who fall under these circumstances to be held accountable to the same standards as those who speak fluent english or have been in the same classroom since day one. I think that havnig two tests to determine improvement and quality is a good idea and can be used bases on the 75% of a classroom that stays withe same teacher all year long.

By Autumn

June 22, 2005 03:20 PM | Link to this

Nick, the problem is - the state is not going to differentiate between those classes that have the majority of students who stay with the same teacher for the entire year, and those classes that have a transient rate of upwards of 50% a month. Therefore, when the numbers are announced - of course some teachers are going to complain, because the pass rates don’t accurately reflect what is really going on in the classroom.

I have gotten a student one week before final exams, and told to “do my best” to prepare the student for the test! Of course, this student’s grade reduced the class average, but, is that a reflection on my teaching? Not at all!

By Nick

June 22, 2005 03:26 PM | Link to this

you are right autumn, i don’t think we should use those students scores the same way we would use the scores of other students to assess the quality of our teachers. What I am saying is that if we used the date provided by the scores of our studetns that stay with us all year long, that would be a good indicator. I don’t think any teacher should be deemed good/bad when looking at students who are new to the clasrooom or dont speak english , etc.

By OptimisticTeacher

June 23, 2005 09:17 AM | Link to this

Do you agree or disagree that NCLB gives the public a false measure of schools?

I just read a recent study that polled people about their feelings toward NCLB. You know what the findings said? That well over half of the partcipants had heard of “NCLB” and knew there was controversy surrounding it, yet less than a 1/3 could actually explain the law and what it applies to. So in one sense, I would argue that yes, NCLB does give a false measure of schools simply because people don’t understand what it encompasses.

That aside, and answering more like what the question was actually asking, I would still say that NCLB does not provide the public an accurate, complete measure of schools. On the surface, if you were to strictly measure test scores..I would admit that you can see differences between individual schools and districts.

However, we are only reviewing the ends, not the means. Do the ends really justify the means? I know I’m taking the allusion out of context, but follow me….

We really aren’t looking at other factors such as the percentage of ELLs and SPED students who take the test, as well as the economic levels of each school, or the percent of improvement that schools have made (even though they are still below the cutoff line). We need to permanently readjust the scales to allow for factors that may skew the test results. I know there are brilliant statistians out there, why can’t either the federal government or states hire a few and have them create this type of formula?

By T. R.

June 23, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this

The public school system failed long ago, before we even had NCLB to measure it. It failed because compulsory schooling is a flawed concept.

Take families, break them apart, and then use a one-size-fits all approach to teach a multitude of different personalities, abilities, and learning styles. And if the child doesn’t fit in to this system, he or she is labeled disruptive, stupid, or both.

NCLB has made a bad situation worse, not better. It takes the creativity out of the classroom. As to the original question - no it does not give an accurate representation of the school. It doesn’t give an accurate representation of anything other than how those students were doing on that one day out of 180.

By abc

June 23, 2005 09:42 AM | Link to this

The more I’ve thought about it the past month the more I’ve started thinking that, as unsavory a notion as it may be, one of the things that really knocks down testing scores and inflames the NCLB debate is race.

Don’t get mad all at once! For the record I’m a middle-aged white male.

In looking at graduation rates and test scores by ethnicity, specifically White, African American and Hispanic, it becomes obvious that (with exceptions, of course) Hispanic and African American students score lower. More lies, damn lies and statistics, I know. As others have blogged in the recent past, if you examine ethnic mix in midwestern states where graduation rates and testing scores are at the top of the chart, the white population is at about the same percentage as the test/graduation results: 90 to 93%. In the south, where graduation rates and testing scores are at the bottom of the chart, this postulation holds at least approximately true.

Now, this may be bogus, or maybe it’s not so farfetched. I’m no expert, just another middle class working schmoe.

How to remedy this? Another recent blog topic was about minority male teachers and how they could provide a positive role model. I submit that they also would relate to students of their own ethnicity better than white teachers do (with exceptions, of course). What do you all think of the notion that if the demographics of the faculty and administration were on par with the demographics of the student body, we could very well see drastic improvements among minority students?

Or shall I get flamed unmercifully for even posing the question!

By Ron

June 23, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this

Whatever standard of measurement we impose will be arguable, and some will complain. If you come into teaching, you have to accept the fact, without whining, that you are responsible for the kids you get, regardless of lifestyle or ability level. Spend less energy complaining about them, and do what you can to help. I teach in a poor, rural district, and managed to get 85% of my kids through the test. As long as I have taught, there have been tests used to measure success. Every test has either been rewritten or thrown out when 90+ percent pass for several years. The levels of proficiency required to pass most tests are easy for most children. No matter what standard we use, the results will be a bell curve of scores, with the bulk of students falling somewhere in the middle. I’ve been at this long enough to know what skills my kids need to have, and I concentrate on that and not the test scores. If you teach well, the scores will come. Get on the phone and get parents involved. It may take a while, but you can get most of them to come in eventually. I make them part of the process of helping the child in some way, and in most cases, that helps motivate the child to do better and rise to the standards he needs. Trust me, if NCLB doesn’t work, they’ll find another way to measure success that’ll be just as controversial. If you love the job, you’ll find a way to get through the politics and test scores and do the job with enthusiasm.

By Nikole

June 23, 2005 10:23 AM | Link to this

NCLB DEFINITELY provides false measurements. Standardized tests do not measure intelligence or even mastery some times. And the worst part is that every state gets to decide what instruments they will use and can make their own definition of what is passing or failing. NCLB is part of an agenda to privatize public schools.

By Ron

June 23, 2005 10:34 AM | Link to this

I’m not sure privatizing would be such a bad thing, although I think that’s hardly the real agenda. As a teacher, I’d love to be able to teach in a private school and make the money I am as a public school teacher.

By lynn

June 23, 2005 12:34 PM | Link to this

RON:You can forget about that you can’t have it both ways,at least i found out in this world you either get your own school and be your own boss because the system is not design for the have not only the haves.

By OptimisticTeacher

June 23, 2005 03:16 PM | Link to this

Ron: I completed my student teaching at a private school…yes, its nice…we had an abundance of resources, I could create whatever curriculum I wanted, not focus on end of year tests when teaching, etc. It was great, except for the fact that my colleagues, who have been working at the school for over 15 years, were making under 40K. They couldn’t believe how much I signed my contract for in one of the metro school districts a few years ago…

Besides, private schools aren’t all what they’re cracked up to be. Some of the schools can’t give out a lot of scholarships because they are tuition-driven instead of having a large endownment, you have to deal with a lot more complaining “helicopter” parents who demand that you give little Susie a higher grade because she “deserves” a B, many of times the administration will back the parents instead of the teachers because they want to keep them happy, and obviously, you have a dramatic paycut.

By Iteach

June 23, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this

I agree with Petruzielo’s statement. Although NCLB is a step in the right direction we must look at some factors that are not taken into consideration.

Factor #1: Student attendance in relation to scores. I teach a class that has an End of the Corse Test in H.S. Last semester I traded my Honor’s and Gifted classes (16 students and 19 students respectively) to work with the lower achieving students in an effort to boost our school’s overall test average. After all, the honor and gifted students were going to pass. In exchange I recieved classes of 24 and 21 students.

The 1st Block class of 24 students had 14 students that missed in excess of 15 days - results, I had 12 pass the EOCT (all students with less than 15 absences passed). The class I kept was a general class of 22 students where I had 1 student out for medical reasons for 27 days and 1 that was either in ISS or suspended for 28 classes. Twenty of those students passed. In the class of 21 there were 4 cronic class cutters, 2 who came from alternative school in mid semester, and 3 that transfered to our school within 3 weeks prior to the test - none had an equivelent science class prior). For that class I ended up with 9 students passing the class.

For the previous semester I had a 88% pass rate with an avg score of 86 with 21 students exceeding. Last semester, working just as hard, I ended up with a 61% pass rate and avg score of 72 with 9 exceeding. What was the reason for poor student performance?

Factor #2: Changes to a school’s population. When the public see’s AYP and Graduation Test Results few consider what happens if a school’s population changes. After going through redistricting our school saw a massive drop in scores and pass rate. Almost a third of our population changed (it greatly changed our social economic profile).

I know it sounds like crying but it will take time for schools to first of all develope their students. Each school had the same objective - educating their students, however student populations are different.

By TTB-POTS

June 23, 2005 04:28 PM | Link to this

Some thoughts on NCLB and testing…

First, most teachers have no problem with accountablility. Nick’s idea of pre- and post-testing is something many teachers and schools do (mine did - we gave the test 3 times and we had to turn in scores and tests to our evaluating administrator. I went an extra step - thank you, Excel - and pulled out the scores of anyone who wasn’t there the entire year - my scores rose significantly). Pre and post assessment let’s us know if the students are learning what we’re trying to teach them.

There are two types of subject as far as the CRCT goes - there are cumulative knowledge/skill subjects like reading and math, and then there are more area-specific subjects like science and social studies. Math and reading consists of skils that build upon each other, where most counties’ social studies and science curriculums are different from year to year.

For the most part, as a science teacher, I have no problem with the CRCT because the test is on what I teach that year (8th grade is earth science). It is a good measure of what the state has determined the students’ should learn. My two issues are students who are below level in reading not understanding the questions and that I haven’t finished my curriculum in April when the test is given - I still have 6 more weeks.

Reading and math teachers however, have more of a problem, because if students come in below grade level, they have to teach both the skills they are behind on as well as what they should be learning. Low scores in these subjects may be a reflection of the student or a reflection of the teacher - it’s hard to tell.

This is compounded when you add the ITBS, which is norm-referenced - meaning it’s comparing your child to the results of a group nation-wide, rather than a set of criteria like the CRCT. It’s a differnt type of test.

Parents (as well as all others with a vestd interest in schools) should be made aware of the difference.

If you have a child with average ITBS scores who does exceptionally well on the CRCT, chances are that’s the teacher. If you have a child with above-average ITBS scores do badly on the CRCT, chances are (unless there’s something unusual going on with the child) that, unfortunately, is the teacher. If you have a child with below-average ITBS scores do poorly on the CRCT, chances are that’s the student.

I haven’t even mentioned what it takes to “pass” the CRCT…

So, yes, NCLB and the criteria used to measure it can be misleading - false sense of dismay or a false sense of confidence. Whne a large number of schools state-wide failed to make AYP, it made big news. What didn’t make big news was that a lot of the schools failed because of attendance and sub-groups - areas where some schools weren’t even evaluated because they didn’t have enough of a particular subgroup to “count.”

By JW

June 23, 2005 04:38 PM | Link to this

I always find it quite amusing how some people think public schools went to “h**l in a handbasket” the second they walked across the stage and received their diplomas.

Let me address some issues brought up: 1. High tech and other types of jobs are being outsourced so that companies in the U.S. can continue to compete - plain and simple. It is the “everyone else is doing it…” argument. It is all about money - not education.

It never fails that folks eventually get around to making comparisons based on SAT scores. How many times do people have to be told that you CANNOT make county-to-county or state-to-state comparisons using SAT scores? The publishers of these tests have even written OP-ED pieces in the AJC about such blatant misuse of test data.

Another comparison often made is between U.S. students and students from other countries. It is true that American students appear to fall behind. However, if we tested only our elite students as do many of the countries we are constantly being compared, I bet we would have a much higher ranking on these “academic performance” lists.

I am not saying that there is not room for improvement in public education, but I think the “crisis” that a lot of people fear is much like the “crisis” with Social Security - a political one. While anyone with a serious interest in education would like to see improvements, this is not going to happen with NCLB - and certainly not until politicians stop parading as education reform experts.

By Teacher

June 23, 2005 04:47 PM | Link to this

This was my very first year teaching special education at an elementary school. All of my students were below level by at least two years or more. I was given incomplete reading and math “kits” to use, rather than the textbooks that their peers were using. There was not a single study to access on whether these “kits” were more effective than the curriculum texts that their peers had access to. I had to use materials that I purchased on my own to teach them language as the “kits” did not have the language materials any more. The math “kits” didn’t teach the same skills as the QCCs recommend/require for students no matter what the level. Again, more materials purchased out of my pocket. We didn’t receive our $150 from the county for materials (paper, pencils, etc.) until November this year. As a new teacher, I had nothing to use and had to again spend my own money to buy supplies for the students (their parents were unable to buy them school materials). I even had to buy my own chalkboard eraser. I could go on, but I won’t. How they expect students served through special education to pass the CRCT when they don’t give teachers materials to use to teach them, and they have these students learning material from grade levels two or three years below where they should be, is beyond me. I agree that students should be pushed to move to higher and higher levels and to accomplish as much as they can, but one simply can’t expect students who already have learning disabilities to move up two or three grade levels in one year in order to pass a test at the end of the year. Especially when you don’t give your teachers supplies or teaching materials! I think the people who came up with all the rules for NCLB clearly did not benefit from an appropriate education as obviously they haven’t made very intelligent decisions with this law!