Don't Say We Didn't Warn You

Backloaded No Child Left Behind

Approach Hides Progress

The Public Sees Failure

The annual release of test scores in Kentucky has befuddled parents and school observers alike. How could my school's scores go up at the same time our NCLB rating goes down? Even knowledgeable education watchers (who have forgotten the "backloaded" approach KDE chose to follow) are confused. Shouldn't we be making more progress?

But as KSN&C reported in September 2008, as 2014 approaches, more and more successful states will experience a decline in NCLB ratings while their students continue to improve.

NCLB requires states to increase the percentage of "proficient" students and then allowed the states to define what that meant. States could set their own targets.

A 2008 report by the Center on Education Policy found that almost half of the states (23 states) had backloaded their trajectories for reaching 100% proficiency. In other words, they called for smaller achievement gains in the earlier years of the trajectory and much steeper gains in later years, as 2014 grows nearer. Welcome to the later years.

(How backloading looks in California: Researchers at the University of California, Riverside used state assessment data reported for the school years 2002-2003 through 2006-2007 to project the growth in student proficiency through 2014. Data was drawn from more than 4,900 California elementary schools. The researchers used three different growth models (represented by the blue, grey and green lines) to project average annual growth in proficiency for mathematics (solid lines) and English language arts (dotted lines). Models are plotted out to 2014 to illustrate that the available data (through 2007) does not indicate the accelerated growth in proficiency required to meet legislated goals. California's benchmarks for adequate yearly progress (AYP) under No Child Left Behind are shown in the red lines.)

Another 25 states and the District of Columbia adopted a more incremental approach that assumes steadier progress toward the 100% goal. The two remaining states blended trajectories that do not fit readily into the backloaded or incremental categories.

Some states assumed that they would need a few years to implement new testing programs. Some states wanted to give school districts more time to ensure that curriculum and instruction were aligned with state tests and that teachers received the necessary professional development. Some states felt that the positive effects of these efforts, as reflected in higher student test scores, would be more likely to appear in the out years than in the early years.

But the more likely reason for the backloaded approach was a calculated gamble.

A 2003 report from the National Education Association speculated that states were backloading large increases after the law’s scheduled reauthorization, in 2010, in the hope that the 100% proficiency goal would be relaxed. Oooops.

Results of this year's testing were mixed. KDE reported the best news they could, one supposes:

55 PERCENT OF SCHOOLS MEET ALL NCLB GOALS

NCLB Status Data indicate that 55.6 percent ‑ 640 ‑ of Kentucky's 1,151 accountable public schools made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the 2009-10 school year under the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act...

According to the data, 640 Kentucky public schools met 100 percent of their NCLB goals for AYP, while 511 schools did not. Of the 511 schools that did not make AYP, 178 made 80 percent or more of their goals. Statewide, 60 percent ‑ 15 ‑ of the 25 target goals were met.

Schools and districts that are funded by the federal Title I program, which provides funds to ensure that disadvantaged children receive opportunities for high-quality educational services, will be subject to federal consequences if they do not make AYP in the same content area in any student group for two or more consecutive years.

Student groups in Kentucky are disaggregated by ethnicity, low-income (eligibility for free/reduced-price meals) status and those with disabilities and limited-English proficiency. Statewide, 134 schools are subject to consequences outlined through
NCLB:
· 55 Title I schools are in first-year School Improvement consequences.
· 21 Title I schools are in second-year School Improvement consequences.
· 17 Title I schools are in first-year Corrective Action consequences.
· 11 Title I schools are in second-year Corrective Action consequences.
· 5 Title I schools are in first-year Restructuring consequences.
· 7 Title I schools are in second-year Restructuring consequences.
· 17 Title I schools are in third-year Restructuring consequences
· 1 Title I school is in fifth-year Restructuring consequences.

In previous years, the levels of NCLB consequences were described as “tiers.”

Senate Bill 1, passed in the 2009 session of the Kentucky General Assembly,
requires that state accountability for non-Title I schools be based on their Adequate Yearly Progress status. If a non-Title I school does not make AYP in the same content area for two consecutive years, the school will be eligible for state assistance.

Data indicate that 168 schools are eligible for state assistance.

Of Kentucky's 174 school districts in 2009-10, 60 – 34.5 percent ‑ met 100 percent of their target goals. Of the 114 districts that did not meet all of their goals, 67 met 80 percent or more of their goals. For NCLB requirements, school districts are gauged on the total student population. This can mean that, even if every school within a district makes AYP, the district may not because of the total size of student populations and their performance.

Kentucky Core Content Test Results

Results of the 2010 administration of the Kentucky Core Content Tests (KCCT), compared to 2009, show increases in the percentage of students scoring at the highest performance levels (proficient and distinguished) in nearly every subject at the elementary and middle school grade levels. Average high school subject-area scores dipped slightly in every subject except writing on-demand.

NOTE: Average social studies scores, particularly at the elementary level, show an anomalous decrease from 2009 to 2010. This decrease can be attributed to many factors, including the shortening of the 2010 testing window, and does not appear to be a systemic or psychometric issue. KDE will continue to explore this issue...

Because of changes to student performance standards and definitions for NAPD in 2007, student performance from 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 cannot be compared to prior KCCT trends (1999-2006).

College/Career Readiness Results

This year, for the first time, KDE is reporting information related to college and career readiness for Kentucky’s public high schools.

Three main criteria are used to determine a school’s percentage of college/career-ready students:

• number of students meeting the Council on Postsecondary Education’s system-wide benchmarks on the ACT
• number of students meeting college placement test benchmarks (not available for 2010)
• number of students meeting career measures standards (receipt of industry certifications)

The baseline data this year indicate that, on average, 34 percent of public high school students statewide are ready for college or careers. Readiness percentages among schools range from 3 percent to 81 percent.

2009’s Senate Bill 1 calls for schools and districts to improve the college and career readiness of their students by 50 percent by 2014. The measures reported today include improvement goals and will eventually be included in the state’s accountability system for public schools.

Achievement Gaps

Also this year, for the first time, KDE is reporting information on how schools and districts are progressing in closing achievement gaps to the goal of proficiency.

This data is derived by averaging the percentage of students scoring at proficient and distinguished in reading and mathematics, then comparing that figure to prior-year data and to the ultimate goal of 100 percent proficiency for all student groups. This measure will be included in the state’s new accountability system.

Average statewide data indicate that, for nearly every student group, the achievement gap has narrowed from 2009 to 2010. All students are expected to reach proficiency in reading and mathematics by 2014....

Detailed information on AYP, KCCT, college/career readiness, ITBS and achievement gap data of each Kentucky public school and district is available through the OpenHouse section of the KDE website.

Education Commissioner Terry Holliday softened the ground for this week's score reporting by reminding Kentuckians on his blog that NCLB's goals are "ridiculous" and faulted NCLB's "singular focus on proficiency." What Holliday did not say is that he inherited a time bomb that was made in Kentucky.

This from the Herald-Leader:

Just more than half of Kentucky's public schools are meeting academic goals required by the federal No Child Left Behind program, according to achievement test scores and other academic indicators...

And this from H-L:

Kentucky Education Commissioner Terry Holliday blamed the inability of many Kentucky schools to keep pace with rising reading and math targets provided under the federal NCLB, for the decline. The targets increase by eight to 10 percent per year until 2014. Many schools fell short of the rising goals even though scores improved, he said.

This from Bluegrass Moms:

Only 34 percent of the 40,528 students who graduated from Kentucky public high schools last spring were ready for college or careers, according to test data released Thursday, a statistic the head of state schools called "abysmal."

And this:

Fayette County Public Schools students improved their scores on statewide tests but not enough to reach steadily rising requirements in reading and math, which kept 20 county schools from reaching federal No Child Left Behind goals, according to results released Thursday.

This from the News Enterprise:

LaRue County Schools met all of its goals in the 2010 No Child Left Behind reports, while about half of Elizabethtown Independent Schools and Hardin County Schools met its goals.

This from the Paducah Sun (subscription):

Paducah and McCracken County public schools experienced their ups and downs in the 2009-10 school year based on the latest round of testing scores.

This from the Courier-Journal:

No Child Left Behind's rising expectations are leaving behind more Kentucky public schools, with hundreds of schools failing to adequately to meet the math and reading standards required by the federal law.

Only 56 percent of the state's 1,158 public schools met all their goals — down from 60 percent last year and 71 percent in 2008, according to 2010 test results being released by the state.

The drop is more severe in Jefferson County Public Schools, where just 21 percent of the district's 133 schools met all their goals, compared with 37 percent last year and 44 percent in 2008.

This from C-J:

Bullitt and Oldham county saw their schools’ test results head in opposite directions under No Child Left Behind, according to state data released Thursday.

This from the Daily Independent:

The federal No Child Left Behind Act is still in effect, and Kentucky schools are inching toward proficiency goals set under that legislation, according to data released today by the Kentucky Department of Education.

This from the Messenger-Inquirer (subscription):

School assessment data released today by the Kentucky Department of Education is a mixed bag for Daviess County and Owensboro public schools.The scores, which are based on the Kentucky Core Content test, indicate elementary schools in both districts continue to perform well.But the three high schools in Owensboro and Daviess County are performing poorly overall, and in the case of Daviess County High School, showed a decline in every core content category.

This from the Enquirer:

Fifty-one of the 99 public elementary, middle and high schools, or 51.5 percent, in six Northern Kentucky counties made adequate yearly progress this year under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

This from Maysville online:

For the area, some districts fared well, such as Augusta Independent which continued to meet target goals and make adequate yearly progress, while others
fell short.

Hat Tip to KSBA.

The Accountability Illusion

AYP Rules Skew Schools' Results,

Study Concludes

Geography may have as much to do with a school making AYP under the federal No Child Left Behind Act’s accountability system as does student achievement.

Because states set their own standards, define proficiency differently, and employ a variety of statistical methods in interpreting test scores, a school’s accountability status could differ from one state to another, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute found in research for the “The Accountability Illusion.”

“Unfortunately, the way NCLB rates schools appears to be idiosyncratic—even random—and opaque,” says the report...

This study examines the No Child Left Behind Act system and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) rules for 28 states. We selected 36 real schools (half elementary, half middle) that vary by size, achievement, diversity, etc. and determined which of them would or would not make AYP when evaluated under each state's accountability rules. If a school that made AYP in Washington were relocated to Wisconsin or Ohio, would that same school make AYP there? Based on this analysis, we can see how AYP varies across the country and evaluate the effectiveness of NCLB.

Click Here for an interactive map of state AYP targets.

Fix that failing school! Click here for the full-size video game.

The Accountability Illusion: An interview with Checker from Education Gadfly on Vimeo.

Tougher NCLB Standards Challenge Top States

This from the Boston Globe:

Half of schools in Mass. fall short

Federal standards getting tougher

Half of all Massachusetts public schools this year failed to meet achievement standards established by the state under the No Child Left Behind Act.

That includes 100 of 143 public schools in Boston, according to a report released yesterday by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

The number of underachieving schools rose sharply from last year, when 37 percent failed to meet performance standards under the federal law.

Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester said the schools aren't getting worse - federal guidelines are getting tougher...

2007-8 NCLB Scores: 71% Make AYP...which means 29% don't

SEVENTY PERCENT OF KENTUCKY PUBLIC SCHOOLS MAKE AYP

(FRANKFORT, Ky.) -- Data indicate that 70.9 percent -- 820 -- of Kentucky's 1,157 public schools made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the 2007-08 school year under the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, the Kentucky Department of Education announced today.

In 2007, 78.7 percent of schools made AYP. A rise in reading and mathematics goals likely contributed to a lower percentage of schools making AYP in 2008 than in 2007.

However, fewer schools are subject to consequences in 2008 than in 2007, with three main reasons for the drop:

Seven schools that were eligible for Title I funding in 2007 were not eligible in 2008; only Title I schools are subject to NCLB consequences.

Three schools were reconfigured, meaning that their AYP status was based on their districts’ status.

Thirty-five schools made AYP for two consecutive years, meaning that they are no longer subject to consequences.

AYP results are based on the Kentucky Core Content Tests' (KCCT) items in reading and mathematics. Schools are required to have specific percentages of students reaching proficiency or above in reading and mathematics each year and to meet other criteria in order to make AYP.
According to the data, 820 Kentucky public schools met 100 percent of their NCLB goals for AYP, while 337 schools did not. Of the 337 schools that did not make AYP, 212 made 80 percent or more of their goals. Statewide, 80 percent -- 20 -- of the 25 target goals were met.

The Kentucky Board of Education adopted the approach of establishing two, three-year plateaus of performance toward the goal of 100 percent proficiency by 2014. For the 2007-08 school year, reading goals rose an average of 9.3 points, and mathematics goals rose an average of 12 points.

ANNUAL MEASUREABLE OBJECTIVES IN READING AND MATHEMATICS
(percentage of students reaching proficiency or higher)

Schools and districts that are funded by the federal Title I program, which provides funds to ensure that disadvantaged children receive opportunities for high-quality educational services, will be subject to federal consequences if they do not make AYP in the same content area in any student group for two or more consecutive years. Student groups in Kentucky are minority students, low-income students, students with disabilities and students with limited-English proficiency. Statewide, 119 schools are subject to consequences outlined through NCLB:

• 32 Title I schools are in Tier 1 consequences.
• 24 Title I schools are in Tier 2 consequences.
• 19 Title I schools are in Tier 3 consequences.
• 9 Title I schools are in Tier 4 consequences.
• 32 Title I schools are in first-year Tier 5 consequences.
• 1 Title I school is in second-year Tier 5 consequences.
• 2 Title I schools are in third-year Tier 5 consequences.
  

Consequences for the tiers increase each consecutive year that a school does not make AYP:

Tier 1 (2 years of not making AYP)

• Notify parents
• Implement school choice
• Write or revise school plan

Tier 2 (3 years of not making AYP)

• Continue Tier 1 consequences, including:
• Offer supplemental services

Tier 3 (4 years of not making AYP)

• Continue Tiers 1 and 2 consequences, including:
• Implement corrective action

Tier 4 (5 years of not making AYP)

• Continue Tiers 1, 2 and 3 consequences, including:
• Write a plan for alternative governance

Tier 5 (6 years of not making AYP)

• Continue Tiers 1, 2, 3 and 4 consequences, including:
• Implement alternate governance consistent with state law

School districts also are held to the requirements of AYP under NCLB. Of Kentucky's 175 school districts in 2007-08, 103 – 58.9 percent -- met 100 percent of their target goals. Of the 72 districts that did not meet all of their goals, 65 met 80 percent or more of their goals. For NCLB requirements, school districts are gauged on the total student population. This can mean that, even if every school within a district makes AYP, the district may not because of the total size of student populations and their performance.

School districts also are subject to consequences, which can include rewriting district plans and receiving state assistance. The 2008 data for school districts indicate:

• 3 Title I districts are in Tier 1 consequences.
• 13 Title I districts are in Tier 2 consequences.
• 18 Title I districts are in Tier 3 first-year consequences.
• 16 Title I districts are in Tier 3 second-year consequences.
• 17 Title I districts are in Tier 3 third-year consequences.

In Kentucky, 809 of the 1,174 schools that participated in the state's 2007-08 assessment and accountability system were funded by Title I. With the exception of Anchorage Independent, all of the 175 school districts that participated in the 2007-08 assessments received some Title I funding.

NOTE: Because some schools are designated as "joint" schools for accountability purposes, the combined numbers of those making AYP and those not making AYP only total 1,157.

Signed into law in January 2002, NCLB requires states to provide information on schools' and districts' progress toward proficiency by 2014. Each state uses its own standards and assessments to make the annual determinations. Kentucky used data from the 2007 and 2008 administration of the KCCT to provide 2008 AYP information for its schools and districts.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is the term used in NCLB to refer to the minimum improvement required of each school and district over the course of one year. It is measured at the school and district levels by:

• measuring growth in the percentage of students scoring proficient or above in reading and mathematics
• assessing improvement on the "other academic indicator"
• testing at least 95 percent of enrolled students and student populations of sufficient size

NCLB mandates that schools and districts be held accountable for the progress of student groups in reading and mathematics testing in grades 3 through 8 and at least once in each subject in high school and rates of participation in testing. Schools also are held accountable for other academic indicator -- for elementary and middle schools, that indicator is the CATS accountability classification; for high schools, the indicator is the graduation rate.

Each Kentucky school and district has a specific number of NCLB goals to meet in order to make AYP. Each grade level -- elementary, middle, high and combined -- has a unique Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) for reading and mathematics that schools and districts must reach in order to achieve AYP.

The number of goals varies depending on the sizes of student populations in each school and district. Student population data is reportable only if it meets a minimum group size of 10 students per grade where NCLB-required assessments are administered and 60 students in those grades combined, or the population makes up at least 15 percent of the total student enrollment in accountable grades. The maximum number of goals is 25. For school districts, the number of goals to meet ranges from 4 to 25, with only four of the state's most diverse school districts -- Boone County, Fayette County, Jefferson County and Warren County -- required to meet all 25 goals to make AYP. For individual schools, the number of goals to be met ranges from 4 to 22.

Detailed information on the AYP status of each Kentucky public school and district is available here.

SOURCE: KDE press release

State-wide NCLB data released by KDE

THREE-QUARTERS OF KENTUCKY PUBLIC SCHOOLS MAKE AYP

(FRANKFORT, Ky.) -- Data indicate that 75.8 percent – 884 -- of Kentucky's 1,167 public schools made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the 2006-07 school year under the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, the Kentucky Department of Education announced today.

AYP results are based on the Kentucky Core Content Tests' (KCCT) items in reading and mathematics. Schools are required to have specific percentages of students reaching proficiency or above in reading and mathematics each year and to meet other criteria in order to make AYP.

The Kentucky Board of Education adopted the approach of establishing two, three-year plateaus of performance toward the goal of 100 percent proficiency by 2014. For the 2004-05 school year, the reading and mathematics goals rose an average of nearly nine points. The reading and mathematics goals remained at 2004-05 levels through the 2006-07 school year, then will rise again in 2007-08.

...According to the data, 884 Kentucky public schools met 100 percent of their NCLB goals for AYP, while 283 schools did not. Of the 283 schools that did not make AYP, 231 made 80 percent or more of their goals. Statewide, 92 percent -- 23 -- of the 25 target goals were met.

Schools and districts that are funded by the federal Title I program, which provides funds to ensure that disadvantaged children receive opportunities for high-quality educational services, will be subject to federal consequences if they do not make AYP in the same content area in any student group for two or more consecutive years. Student groups in Kentucky are minority students, low-income students, students with disabilities and students with limited-English proficiency. Statewide, 147 schools are subject to consequences outlined through NCLB:
· 47 Title I schools are in Tier 1 consequences.
· 34 Title I schools are in Tier 2 consequences.
· 20 Title I schools are in Tier 3 consequences.
· 40 Title I schools are in Tier 4 consequences.
· 1 Title I school is in first-year Tier 5 consequences.
· 5 Title I schools are in second-year Tier 5 consequences.

Consequences for the tiers increase each consecutive year that a school does not make AYP:

Tier 1 (2 years of not making AYP)
§ Notify parents
§ Implement school choice
§ Write or revise school plan

Tier 2 (3 years of not making AYP) Continue Tier 1 consequences, including:
§ Offer supplemental services

Tier 3 (4 years of not making AYP) Continue Tiers 1 and 2 consequences, including:
§ Implement corrective action

Tier 4 (5 years of not making AYP) Continue Tiers 1, 2 and 3 consequences, including:
§ Write a plan for alternative governance

Tier 5 (6 years of not making AYP) Continue Tiers 1, 2, 3 and 4 consequences, including:
· Implement alternate governance consistent with state law

School districts also are held to the requirements of AYP under NCLB. Of Kentucky's 175 school districts in 2006-07, 86 -- 49.1 percent -- met 100 percent of their target goals. Overall, 166 of 175 districts met 80 percent or more of their goals. For NCLB requirements, school districts are gauged on the total student population. This can mean that, even if every school within a district makes AYP, the district may not because of the total size of student populations and their performance.

School districts also are subject to consequences, which can include rewriting district plans and receiving state assistance. The 2007 data for school districts indicate:
· 21 Title I districts are in Tier 1 consequences.
· 27 Title I districts are in Tier 2 consequences.
· 13 Title I districts are in Tier 3 first-year consequences.
· 36 Title I districts are in Tier 3 second-year consequences.

In Kentucky, 811 of the 1,184 schools that participated in the state's 2006-07 assessment and accountability system were funded by Title I. All but two of the 175 school districts that participated in the 2006-07 assessments received some Title I funding. Anchorage Independent and Beechwood Independent did not receive Title I funding in 2006-07...

..Because of changes in implementation of NCLB for districts and schools, comparisons from 2006 to 2007 should be made with caution. An impact study will be done to determine the degree of genuine school improvement from 2006 to 2007 versus increases due to changes in NCLB policy.

Signed into law in January 2002, NCLB requires states to provide information on schools' and districts' progress toward proficiency by 2014. Each state uses its own standards and assessments to make the annual determinations. Kentucky used data from the 2006 and 2007 administration of the KCCT to provide 2007 AYP information for its schools and districts.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is the term used in NCLB to refer to the minimum improvement required of each school and district over the course of one year. It is measured at the school and district levels by:
· measuring growth in the percentage of students scoring proficient or above in reading and mathematics
· assessing improvement on the "other academic indicator"
· testing at least 95 percent of enrolled students and student populations of sufficient size

NCLB mandates that schools and districts be held accountable for the progress of student groups in reading and mathematics testing in grades 3 through 8 and at least once in each subject in high school and rates of participation in testing. Schools also are held accountable for other academic indicator -- for elementary and middle schools, that indicator is the CATS accountability classification; for high schools, the indicator is the graduation rate.

Each Kentucky school and district has a specific number of NCLB goals to meet in order to make AYP. Each grade level -- elementary, middle, high and combined -- has a unique Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) for reading and mathematics that schools and districts must reach in order to achieve AYP.

The number of goals varies depending on the sizes of student populations in each school and district. Student population data is reportable only if it meets a minimum group size of 10 students per grade where NCLB-required assessments are administered and 60 students in those grades combined, or the population makes up at least 15 percent of the total student enrollment in accountable grades. The maximum number of goals is 25. For school districts, the number of goals to meet ranges from 4 to 25, with only four of the state's most diverse school districts -- Boone County, Fayette County, Jefferson County and Warren County -- required to meet all 25 goals to make AYP. For individual schools, the number of goals to be met ranges from 4 to 22.

Detailed information on the AYP status of each Kentucky public school and district is available here.

SOURCE: KDE press release No. 07-073

What Testing Guru Bill Sanders Really Meant About Multiple Measures

This from Alexander Russo at This Week in Education.

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.

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 -- [See] ... Tennessee ...and Nevada.

This from the Center for Greater Philadelphia at the University of Pennsylvania:

Value-Added Assessment in Tennessee

Tennessee is the state most strongly identified with value-added assessment. Its system dates back to 1992, when value-added was implemented as an integral part of a comprehensive education reform measure. Using a complex statistical method developed by Dr. William Sanders, then a statistician at the University of Tennessee , the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS) provides:

Data to the public on the performance of districts and schools, and data for appropriate administrators on the performance of teachers;

Information to teachers, parents and the public on how schools are doing in helping each child make academic gains each year;

Information to school administrators to help identify weaknesses in even the strongest schools.

TVAAS is a statistical methodology that begins with testing each student in each grade in a number of subjects. Through 1997, Tennessee tested second through eighth grades in Reading , Math, Language, Science, and Social Studies. Tennessee began testing grades three through eight in 1998.

The TVAAS statistical model aggregates student growth increases using a design that accommodates missing data. Because of a philosophical belief that schools should insure that all students progress at equivalent rates, no matter their disadvantages, the model does not include other data on students.

In a report by the Council of Chief State School Officers, Tennessee's 8% increase in math and science scores was linked to TVAAS. In addition, Tennessee is one of the few states that have shown improvement on the National Assessment of Education Progress since TVAAS was implemented in 1992.

The state has both rewards, aid, and sanctions linked to its school rating system.There is no specific value-added teacher evaluation as part of Tennessee 's accountability system, but school administrators have access to teacher level data that can be used to improve instruction. Value-added scores can be used for up to 8 percent of a teacher's evaluation.

The incentive funds are only available to schools, not to teachers.

Although teachers and administrators were suspicious at first, they are now finding they can actually use TVAAS to improve teaching, something that no other accountability system has afforded.

Advocates for Students With Disabilities Balk at Proposed NCLB Changes

Education Week reports:

As Congress wrestles with reauthorizing the 5½-year-old No Child Left Behind Act, some disability-rights advocates fear high standards for students with disabilities could be sacrificed as states seek more flexibility in the law.

Some education groups, as well as lawmakers, have called for more choice in how states can administer the law’s accountability provisions, including greater power for school-based teams to decide what type of assessment a student receiving special education services should take.

That’s a step away from grade-level achievement as a goal for all students, said James H. Wendorf, the executive director of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, a New York City-based group that works to provide opportunities for children and adults with learning disabilities. The law needs tweaks, not wholesale changes to its ambitious achievement goals, he believes.

Mr. Wendorf’s group advocates on behalf of the largest group of children served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the federal law that mandates special education services for some 6.6 million students nationwide. Students with “specific learning disabilities” account for nearly half the students covered under the law.

“No Child Left Behind has put some real teeth in the IDEA,” Mr. Wendorf said. “It’s given parents some information they wanted desperately, and some information that they didn’t know how much they needed until it was being provided to them.”

The federal law requires schools and districts to report the academic progress of students with disabilities, along with other subgroups of students, such as those in low-income families and those who are learning English. The performance of such subgroups on annual tests in reading and mathematics helps determine whether their schools have made adequate yearly progress toward proficiency for all students, as required under the law.

The reporting provision has forced administrators to pay attention to a group of students that is too often ignored, disability-rights advocates contend. They point to studies that show that students with disabilities, even those with cognitive impairments, can achieve at higher-than-expected levels when teachers hold them to grade-level standards.

As disability-rights advocates lobby federal lawmakers, their focus has been on maintaining what they see as the strong standards of the law, while allowing schools to get credit for a student’s academic growth towards proficiency, even if the student occasionally falls short of a particular benchmark.

For instance, the National Center for Learning Disabilities recently released two reports that outline the progress students with disabilities have made under the No Child Left Behind law, as well as the challenges that remain.

The group says that Congress should maintain the requirements for schools to make adequate yearly progress, or AYP; that all schools should be required to report the performance all student subgroups 20 students or more (current rules allow for a larger minimum); and that students should not be subject to repeated retesting for the purpose of determining AYP. Those recommendations would maintain or tighten existing rules for districts and states.

At the same time, the center supports allowing a “growth model” factor to be a part of No Child Left Behind’s accountability rules. Growth models allow schools to receive credit for improving individual students’ academic performance over time...