In New Mexico, a school principal is fretting about the fact that his students didn't make the AYP (adequate yearly progress) targets this year:
Gonzales Elementary Principal Michael Lee knows exactly why his school didn't make "adequate yearly progress" this year under the federal No Child Left Behind Act: The fourth-graders didn't learn how to use rulers and measure quantities.
It is particularly painful to him, because his daughter was among the fourth-graders who took the test used to rate the school, and he thinks they're an exceptionally bright bunch of kids.
Dude. Fourth-grade is not too early to learn to use a ruler. It pains me to see these educators who insist that their students are smart - but just haven't gotten around to learning some basic facts and skills. If they really are that smart, heck, they should be converting inches to centimeters by now.
Still, Lee knows what his school has to do: Make sure this year's fourth-graders learn how to measure. Gonzales began a Cooking with Kids program this year, so the teaspoons and measuring cups they'll use in that program should help.
Well, that's something, but surely they could learn about measuring devices in math class as well, right? The article in general is good, but there are a few testing criticisms thrown in that, well, don't add up:
Sewing also sees problems with regard to students whose first language isn't English. Under the law, students have to start taking the standardized test in English three years after they enter the United States. Sewing said research shows language development takes five to seven years. "It's frustrating for these kids," she said. "It makes them feel like a failure."
"I would ask the adults out there, 'If you moved to China and lived there for three years, would it be fair to measure your education and your skills in Chinese?' " Sewing added.
If the entire time that I was in China, I was enrolled in a program that, for eight hours a day, was supposed to immerse me in Chinese and teach me the Chinese language, then yes, it would be fair. I might need a different standard than a native speaker - I can see the argument for that - but it's not unfair to test me to see if I'm where I should be after three years.
Gonzales Elementary's Lee said he'd rather "be sucker-punched" than repeat the experience of hearing his school had failed to meet AYP. "What we have to do at Gonzales is make darn sure we're teaching the standards. And because this test is based on standards, that should be easy."
"The pressure is going to build. And if principals and teachers are feeling pressure, then you can be sure that kids are feeling pressure. I have to wonder if this is the kind of world we want to bring them up in?"
If I had a fourth-grade daughter, and the choice was rearing her in (a) a stress-free environment, or (b) an environment with some stress in which she learned how to use a ruler, I know which one I'd pick.
Meanwhile, over in Boston, the educators insist that the "failing" labels are wrong:
...For the first time, a district could land on the federal watch list if just a single category of students fell below federal standards. Educators attributed the ballooning list to that new provision, which isolated the performance of groups including Hispanics, blacks, special education students, and low-income students...
Daniel Mayer, a school administrator in Maynard, where special education and low-income students fell short of federal standards, criticized the watch list as a punitive scare tactic.
"To me, it's sort of like the terrorist alerts that the federal government puts out and says, 'Everybody watch out, there's terrorists out there," he said. "No Child Left Behind is trying to motivate people from fear rather than well-thought-out initiatives."
So is it better for schools not to know if one group is doing more poorly than another? Is it better for parents not to know this? Mayer is apparently of the belief that any shortcoming within a school shouldn't be made public. But others don't agree:
Tom Loveless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington who has studied how states comply with the federal law, said bringing shortcomings to light is likely to spur progress.
"The real question is, is it better to know or not to know" how groups of students are doing, he said. "I think there is a growing public awareness it's better to know."
Posted by kswygert at September 20, 2004 02:33 PM