This Week in Education

Alexander Russo's inside scoop on education news.

Written by former Senate education staffer and journalist Alexander Russo, This Week in Education covers education news, policymakers, and trends with a distinctly political edge. (For archives prior to January 2007, please click here.)

Main

November 2, 2007

Wisconsin NCLB Protest Teacher Gets Reprimand Letter

asmaxuk1.lnk
Google Images says that this might be Madison middle school teacher David Wasserman, who refused to administer a test to his students in protest against NCLB and sat in the teachers lounge. No word on whether Jonathan Kozol was the inspiration. News accounts today say he's going to get a letter in his file.

October 30, 2007

Halloween Happenings Around NCLB Reauthorization

There's been a recent lull in any real NCLB reauthorization news since Kennedy's folks put out the boring parts of their discussion draft and the rest of the Hill was focused on appropriations. But the AFTies report that Ted Kennedy is back on the march and The Hoff (how come that guy never links to me?) says that the House links have gone dead. Next thing you know, the lights will go out, a door will creak open, and Margaret Spellings -- face lit from below with a flashlight -- will cackle like a witch.

October 26, 2007

It's All NCLB's Fault

17145_normal.jpg
Charlie Barone predicts that the recent deaths of students from the staph "superbug" will inevitably get blamed on NCLB. But why stop there? The nasty cold I have, the wildfires in San Diego County, and the coming wave of subprime mortgage defaults -- they're all because of NCLB in one way or the other.

October 16, 2007

Dentists Good, Dentists Bad

tooth.gif
In its letters to the editors section, the New York Times recently printed the overly familiar story about how NCLB's rating system is unfair like punishing dentists based on their patients' health. Luckily, a couple of days before, the paper had reminded us what money-grubbing louses many dentists are, refusing access to poor kids and families more than ever before. So much for sympathizing with the dentists, I say.

October 11, 2007

Dental Programs Needed For Poor Kids

Poor and working class kids have less access to dental care than ever before, and it's showing, according to this NYT article (Boom Times for Dentists, but Not for Teeth).  Sometimes the delays and lack of care are serious.  Strange that I've seen vision programs at schools but never dental ones.


October 10, 2007

Lots Of Coverage, Not Much Action

Busheducation-thumb.jpg
Bush: Leaving no child, and no agenda, behind
Baltimore Sun
Bush delivered his remarks in the Rose Garden, following a meeting with advocates of his signature educational reform, the No Child Left Behind Act, a first-year legislative triumph for which he is seeking reaffirmation during his final years in office.

Bush Prodding Congress to Reauthorize His Education Law NYT
President Bush tried Tuesday to prod Congress into reauthorizing his biggest domestic achievement, the 2001 No Child Left Behind education law.

Bush Declares His Openness To Revising Education Law Washington Post
Under pressure from the right and the left, President Bush said yesterday that he is open to reformulating his signature No Child Left Behind education law but stressed that he remains unwilling to surrender on its core elements of testing and accountability.

Bush Pushes Congress on 'No Child' Law AP
President Bush said Tuesday that he's open to new ideas for changing the "No Child Left Behind" education law but will not accept watered-down standards or rollbacks in accountability.

October 4, 2007

Democratic Hill Staffers Spill The NCLB Beans

morningstar.JPG
Check out David Hoff's post on what Hill staffers like Jill Morningstar (House Dems, pictured, I think) have to say about the latest NCLB doings. No Kennedy bill yet, however, and no real timeframe.

October 3, 2007

Ravitch Proposes Impractical & Unlikely Pullback On NCLB

03opart.190v.jpg
Education historian Diane Ravitch proposes a radical overhaul of NCLB in today's New York Times (Get Congress Out of the Classroom). She points out all the usual flaws in the law, and, as in the past, she proposes that the feds collect and report out data (including the results of national testing), and the states and districts take back the whole school reform thing. However, Ravitch overstates NCLB's reach into the process by quite a bit. Districts and schools aren't actually doing what the current NCLB tells them to do with struggling schools, finding loopholes and complying nominally without making bigger changes. And they aren't to my mind particularly likely to do more revamping with fewer prescriptions from Washington. National standards just aren't viable this time around. And, perhaps most important, Congress is unlikely to pass (or fund) education programs that don't give them a substantial say in trying to make education better. A big part of the funding increase that accompanied NCLB's first years was lawmakers' enthusiasm for the law.

September 24, 2007

What NCLB Reauthorize Requires Is Better Politics, Not More Policy

Everyone says they know how to fix NCLB -- what should be done -- but no one seems to know how to get the politics right to get there. Former New York City education guy Robert Gordon's piece in Slate does much the same, unfortunately. Titled with supreme confidence (How to fix the No Child Left Behind Act), the Gordon piece rehashes the obstacles we all know about and then proposes -- yes -- national standards as a solution. Politically speaking, NCLB proponents need to do something along these lines: buy off the teachers by softening the mandatory merit pay language, win back the testing hawks by dumping local assessments, and make the multiple measures language tight enough that Spellings and the business groups can live with it. Give it a new name, let everyone say that it's not NCLB anymore, and declare victory. Pretty? No. Perfect? No. But that's not what this is really all about. Via Eduwonk.

September 22, 2007

EdWeek NCLB Update

As September's End Nears, Legislative Action Awaits
It's looking as if Rep. Miller will miss his goal, and Sen. Kennedy still has a chance to meet his.

Edwards Promises NCLB Overhaul
John Edwards' presidential campaign said today that the former senator would "totally overhaul" NCLB.

On Senate Panel, a Different Dynamic for NCLB Renewal
Senator Edward M. Kennedy is hoping to get a bill reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act through Congress before the end of this year. But if that’s going to happen, he has some big stumbling blocks to overcome.

September 13, 2007

All Children Shall Be Proficient By, Well, Whenever

nclb3logo.jpg
I guess pretty much everything is on the table, since according to the fat cats at the AFT blog who can afford Ed Daily there's apparently been some talk about loosening the 2014 proficiency targets that have made -- or muddled -- NCLB for so long. It seems like the AFTies think it's a good idea. Hmm. I may be thinking about this too simplistically, but what does doing that get you, substantively or politically? Miller did everything short of that, and his unholy alliance of business, conservative, and civil rights supporters broke up over it. Still the teachers weren't satisfied. So who does getting rid of 2014 get you, and what does getting rid of it actually accomplish? I'm not sure, and until then disinclined to think it's a good idea. But that doesn't mean it's going to happen. Far as I know, neither this blog (nor any other) has substantially influenced the reauthorization process. God willing, it will always be so.

September 12, 2007

Are Unions Over-Reacting, Or Does Miller Proposal Over-Reach?

While it's easy to look at this week's NCLB meltdown as the result of teachers union recalcitrance, Bess Keller's piece on the comparability provision (Proposed NCLB Rule on 'Salary Comparability' Draws Scrutiny) raises the possibility that the Miller draft, on the whole, tries to do too much -- not just fixing NCLB's flaws but carving out new ground that is especially difficult to reach under the current circumstances.

Widespread Concern Over NCLB Dynamics, Direction

NCLB fails our schools USA Today
Bill Richardson: A one-point plan for No Child Left Behind: Scrap it.

Teachers attack education lawSan Mateo Times
The state's largest teachers' union on Monday launched a campaign decrying the 5-year-old No Child Left Behind Act as a failure and criticizing a proposal to renew the plan as only making the situation worse.

What's Good for Children NYT
With Congress gearing up to reauthorize the act, business leaders are rightly raising their voices in an attempt to prevent the teachers’ unions and their political allies from weakening this important law

No Race Left Behind NRO
One part of [the law] has generated surprisingly little debate, but ought to — namely the law’s requirement that schools track the scores of racial subgroups of students, and that each group hit the target pass rate on the tests.

Education Reform Goes From Bad to Worse Conservative Voice
Miller’s proposed changes to No Child Left Behind gut its school-choice provisions.

September 7, 2007

Editorial Responses Criticize Miller Draft

It might not make much of a difference to Congressman Miller's political calculations, but today's slew of editorial responses to the discussion draft skew against him:

Our view on education: Five ways to improve NCLB USA Today
The appropriate response, however, isn't to scrap the whole act or to water down its emphasis on reading and math.

Really Leaving No Child Behind NYT
Mr. Miller’s draft contains some important reforms that deserve to become law, but much of that good will be undermined if states, schools and teachers are not held accountable for the quality of education they provide.

English learners left behind LA Times
Congress didn't get it all right with NCLB -- but it didn't get it all wrong either. Some simple improvements can make a good law better and more fair for all our students. Via EdNews.org.

In the meantime, this article from the New York Sun reminds us what states are really like, and are likely to do more of under a more open NCLB school rating system:

State Guts Its Test of Reading
The difficulty of a reading test used to judge students across New York State dropped by as many as six grade levels between 2004 and 2005, according to an internal study by the New York City teachers union obtained by The New York Sun.

September 6, 2007

Handy-Dandy NCLB Reauthorization Resources

Feeling a little bit overwhelmed and bored over all this NCLB reauthorization action (already)? Me too. Plus which, I'm too lazy to read everything. So here are some handy-dandy resources to consider, with thanks for all the hard work you've done:

What You Should Think About the New Version of No Child Left Behind TQATE
"A good accountability system is a fragile thing, and making the law more complex also makes it more vulnerable to those who disagree with the principles themselves."

Miller-McKeon draft thoughts Sherman Dorn
"The first page is my attempt to cross-reference common criticisms of NCLB with pages/sections of the discussion draft that may address those criticisms."

Who's saying what about NCLB Reauthorization? ECS
"To better inform the national debate on NCLB reauthorization, ECS collected and analyzed these recommendations and created a one-stop source that allows you to easily find out who’s saying what about revising the law."

Cheat Sheet NCLB Part II
EdWeek's David Hoff dissects the MM draft in three sections (see also Part 1 and Part 2).

Spellings Letter; Teacher Quality Draft Later Today

Thanks to the Ed Trust, here's a PDF of the Spellings letter to Miller that she promised yesterday, listing problems she and others have with the M&M discussion draft. Speaking of which, Miller said that Title II and the rest would be posted sometime today, which will help us see whether the teacher quality elements of NCLB are going to be strengthened or -- is such a thing possible? -- weakened. (There's a nod to teacher quality in the form of an attempt to close the equitability loophole in Miller's Title I proposal, according to EdWeek's David Hoff, but if they couldn't do that in 2001 they don't seem likely to take care of it now.)

September 5, 2007

New NCLB Bill "Isn't Wonkery," Says Chairman Miller;
Criticisms Are "Hokum"

The public mud-slinging between Spellings and Miller is really heating up. Makes you wonder what they say about each other behind closed doors. And, substantively, it bodes poorly for a strengthening of the current NCLB law.

Responding to Spellings' criticisms read to him by USA Today's Greg Toppo at a conference call with reporters today, Chairman Miller said that what he's trying to do with NCLB isn't just "wonkery" (as Spellings describes it) but rather much-needed changes to an imperfect law. "I know she wants to add confusion and doesn't like the debate," said Miller of Spellings. He also repeatedly mocked the "99.9 percent pure" claim Spellings once made (fire the writer who came up with that one), and called claims that multiple measures would muck up accountability "hokum."

Obviously, Miller's got to do what he's got to do, and -- this sentence is already so vague -- is going to go ahead and do it. But still it's sad to hear him denounce the current NCLB system which he created and defended for so long, now using much the same language as his detractors had (ie, a single test on a single day determining AYP). Such is politics. Somewhere, Joel Packer is smiling.

Spellings Outlines "Way Forward" On NCLB 2.0

back-to.gif
EdSec Spellings is giving a little speech this morning to business leaders and talking to reporters about where things go next (with Miller and McKeon expected to be there as well). She's trying to bolster the notion that NCLB's goals are achievable -- seven years is a long way off, she says, and state standards aren't that high. Making the law more flexible shouldn't dilute it too much -- or make it too complicated. Delaying reauthorization means no changes to the current law, and no increase in funding. "Grade-level learning is not too much to ask," says Spellings. And she calls out various proposals (not by name) for reducing tutoring or miraculously making most state schools adequate.

September 3, 2007

Labor Day Roundup: NCLB Reauthorization

Report, lawsuit question NCLB's effect on teacher quality USA Today
A federal lawsuit and a new report challenge the Bush administration's rules on teacher credentials, saying they fail to ensure that students have a highly qualified teacher.

Coverage of the Miller Proposal:

House Committee Members Propose NCLB ChangesTitle I Monitor
Draft NCLB Bill Intensifies the Discussion Ed Week
Changes Proposed for Education LawNYT

August 16, 2007

Conservative Scholar Opposes Multiple Measures

Not that letters from academics usually make much difference, especially when they're on the other side ideologically from the folks making the decisions, but here's a letter from Hoover Institute researcher Erik Hanushek from last week that was sent along to me, in which he tells Chairman Miller what a bad idea multiple measures, writ large, are for school improvement. PDF here. Keep sending those letters and secret memos in.

NCLB "Coming Through," Says Departing Rove

rove.jpg
One of departing Bush advisor Karl Rove's most recent interviews includes the claim that NCLB is "coming through" (Roundtable with Karl Rove Seattle Times). No big surprise there that he'd say that, but it does make you wonder if Rove's departure will have any impact on NCLB reauthorization. Rove had a soft spot for EdSec Spellings, if the rumors are true, and was certainly part of the first administration folks who are likely to be most loyal to the law. Maybe others have already addressed this.

August 9, 2007

More Tests! Can States & Testing Industry Handle "Multiple Measures"?

Gerald Bracey points out in this Huffington Post post (Nothing Will Happen with NCLB) that adding more tests (ie, multiple measures) is no guaranteed solution because it could well overwhelm the testing infrastructure. It's an interesting argument, in part because I hadn't heard it before and mostly because it puts Bracey in the position of arguing against multiple measures.

August 7, 2007

Civil Rights Groups Divided On How To Rate School Performance

A letter signed by dozens of civil rights groups -- but not by the Education Trust, Citizen's Commission On Civil Rights -- shows just how divided the broader civil rights community is on whether to include other tests and evidence of performance in the AYP school rating system of NCLB.

"Today's letter -- signed by many more organizations, several with large grassroots membership bases -- demonstrates, among other things, that those two groups [Ed Trust and CCCR] do not represent the views of the broader civil rights community on NCLB," says Bob Schaeffer of the FEA.

There's nothing particularly new about this divide. See below for the press release from the pro-multiple measures umbrella group known as the Forum on Education Accountability. See herefor the Ed Trust's statement, which calls these changes a giant step backwards.

Continue reading "Civil Rights Groups Divided On How To Rate School Performance" »

More Editorial Pages Oppose "Retreat" On NCLB

What happens next with NCLB won't be determined by what position editorial pages take on the issue of multiple measures, but it's interesting to note that several, including at least two more today, have decided that it's worth taking a moment to talk about what direction the law is going to go and warning against a retreat on NCLB:

A Vote for 'No Child' Washington Post
To let states wriggle out of accountability on the basics would betray the mission of No Child Left Behind.

No Retreat From No Child Dallas Morning News
The last thing that students need is for Washington to turn school accountability into the educational equivalent of mashed potatoes.

If there are editorial pages out there coming out in favor of multiple measures, I'd be happy to show them, but so far at least I haven't come across any.

August 3, 2007

What Testing Guru Bill Sanders Really Meant About Multiple Measures

Once in a while, I actually do some reporting, and today I happened to talk Prof. William Sanders, the testing guru whose recent letter to Congressman Miller was leaked to the press and seemed (according to an Ed Daily story) to put Sanders squarely against Miller's proposed use of multiple measures in AYP.

Well, it turns out that Sanders is against the use of portfolios and classroom observations that are often called multiple measures, but not against end of course tests, college entrance tests, and the like that he thinks Miller is talking about. "Those things have a place," says Sanders, who points out that they are already part of the growth model projections that he has developed and are being used in some pilot states.

1080.jpg
To those who are concerned about the complexity and transparency of both the current AYP and proposed changes, Sanders says such intricacies are the price of a nuanced and reliable rating system. "A simple system could be developed," he says, noting that some states are going that direction, "but it would be less reliable and more biased [than a more complex one]."

His main accountability concern, however, is not so much that the current AYP relies on "a single test" (a description he says irks him and ignores the fact that there are three years of tests and hundreds if not thousands of test item responses that go into each year's AYP calculations), but rather that it encourages too much focus on lower-performing kids rather than "early high-achieving kids" who get ignored. He proposes a rating system that evaluates schools not only on reducing the achievement gap but also on helping already-proficient kids do even better -- apparently a part of the Tennessee pilot and perhaps what Nevada is trying to do here.

Leaving Special Ed Kids Behind: What Happens When You Start Mixing Measures

AYP%20logo.jpg
This post from edspresso about a school that fails to make AYP -- but gets rated highly by Newsweek -- gives us a good preview of just how confusing things can get when there's more than one way of measuring school success (edspresso.com: Exposing an Ugly Paradox). The school misses AYP due to special ed kids, but Newsweek is only looking at AP and IP scores. The district of course likes Newsweek's rating better. Who wouldn't? Of course, nothing quite this simplistic is likely to get into NCLB, but it's a good reminder that we already have competing -- and confusing --ratings systems, and most (all?) of them are less rigorous than NCLB's.

August 2, 2007

Multiple Measures: Foxes Guarding The Henhouse?

Over at The Quick And The Ed, Kevin Carey points out that one of the main concerns about multiple measures isn't just that it would take the focus off of core subjects like reading and math but also that it would put accountability back in the hands of schools and teachers whose performance is being measured (and who, previous to NCLB, often declined to publish achievement gaps or rate schools rigorously). Carey also asks "What's the law going to look like if there's one version for each of the nation's 14,000 school districts, or 90,000 schools? A lot like having no accountability at all."

Meanwhile over at The Gadfly, Mike Petrilli has a new post that calls Miller's speech a lurch to the left that could could delay reauthorization.

What no one's figured out -- or said out loud at least -- is how far Miller is going to go with these alternatives, or what it will take (if anything) to get new Democrats on board with a NCLB that is any better than the old one.

How Student Achievement Is Like Global Warming 10 Years Ago

bear1.gif
Ten years ago there was lots of debate about whether global warming was real or not, and it often seems like that's where we are these days when it comes to research on overall student achievement in the US. This week, a new Bruce Fuller study came out that suggests a falloff in testing gains since NCLB was implemented (Education Week). But a few weeks ago another study from the Center on Education Policy said differently. So where's the consensus? There isn't one. And until there is -- which may never happen -- it's going to be mighty hard for anyone to push for, much less take, bold action towards improving schools.

Testing Expert Questions Multiple Measures

Reactions to the Miller speech continue to trickle in, including a story in yesterday's Ed Daily (subscription required) that reiterates Miller's intent to prevent multiple measures from turning into an "escape hatch" (as if there aren't already enough of those) and tensions with ranking member Buck McKeon, who has threatened to block the bill if necessary.

There's also mention of a letter from testing expert Bill Sanders that calls multiple measures into question: “Most of the measures usually advocated under the banner of ‘multiple measures’ have so little reliability that any attempt to use them in summative assessment is certain to provide results so untrustworthy that essentially no distinction among schools can be made."

Will multiple measures turn into a big "do-or-die issue," or will it be worked out in a way that gives the NEA credit for changing NCLB without gutting the already-loose NCLB accountability framework? I don't exactly know. But my guess is that something will get worked out that allows the reauthorization to move forward even if it doesn't really help the functionality of the law.

August 1, 2007

The Price Of A Democratic Majority: Making "Mush" Out Of NCLB

Not everyone's holding their tongues and waiting to see what the Miller reauthorization bill looks like. This commentary from Scripps News Service is an example: Diluting the No Child law. "As attractive as these indicators might sound, they would dilute the purpose of the law to where ultimately the standards become the usual educational mush."

Perhaps there's some way to thread the needle and come up with a bill that avoids creating mush and gives Congressional Democrats enough of the fig leaf they think they need to get re-elected. After all, many would argue that the growth model idea, which could have created just such a confusing morass, has seemed to have been just such a success. And others would observe that, with all its confidence intervals and subgroup minima and safe harbors and all the rest (attendance and graduation indicators), the current NCLB isn't as clear and simple as it seems on the outside.

But I'm not particularly hopeful, and remain somewhat dismayed and -- perhaps I'm alone -- surprised at this turn of events. After five years of defending NCLB, ducking and weaving all the way, Miller seems to be telling us that multiple measures are to be the price of a Democratic-controlled Congress.

July 31, 2007

Is Miller Breaking Up With Pro-NCLB Groups?

brokenheart1.jpg
Perhaps the most compelling interpretation I've heard of the Miller speech from yesterday is that Miller was emphasizing that (a) the reauthorization process is still moving along despite recent delays, and (b) multiple measures are going to be part of his bill no matter what.

If multiple measures are definitely in, then this represents the first big break by Miller from the groups that helped craft and defend NCLB 1.0 and the EdSec -- and a big win symbolically at least for NCLB 1.0 critics like the NEA who have been clamoring for years now that annual standardized tests were a bad way to go and, more recently, working hard on freshman lawmakers that previous compromises (like the growth model or the idea of treating schools that just miss AYP one year differently from those that miss it all the time, every year) aren't enough.

More Folks Like NCLB Than Like Their Local Schools, Says New Poll

It's easy to forget that parents and the public don't necessarily think the same things about NCLB that you do -- and that their feelings about NCLB may actually be better than their feelings about their local schools or schools nationwide.

JoanneJacobs has more evidence of this, citing a new poll showing that 57 percent of the public back reauthorizing No Child Left Behind "as is or with minimal changes." A lot higher than you thought, I bet. But don't worry, the number goes down to 41 percent for current and former teachers, says Jacobs.

That's roughly the same percentage that give their own public schools an A or B -- a figure that drops to 22 percent for public education nationally. So the public likes NCLB more than their local schools, even, and educators like NCLB about the same as their local schools.

NB: The poll was put out by the generally conservative but pro-NCLB Hoover Institute and will be in Education Next magazine sometime soon. Changes in the wording of these poll questions can often affect their outcome -- an analysis I'll leave to others.

Wait Until September, Says Miller

nclb_web.jpg
There's wall-to-wall coverage of the Miller speech on Monday morning, which tells you just how little is going on. Sherman Dorn goes point by point here. EdWeek's Mark Walsh has it here. (wait until September). Sara Mead sees room on multiple measures here. The prepared text is here. And the NYT coverage focusing on reactions to the speech is here.

UPDATE: What I'm not clear on is why Miller felt like he needed to make this speech, which doesn't appear to have been particularly reassuring to either side of the strengthen/weaken NCLB debate, or what he hoped to gain. We already knew that things were going slowly, and that multiple measures (anything other than math and reading tests) was an issue. But it's not like Miller has been giving regular updates in the past. Hmmm. I'll ask around and see what I can find out.