82 percent of US schools may be labeled 'failing'

[jimmy olsen]

This was inevitable given how Congress wrote the law.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41992391/ns/us_news-life/

82 percent of US schools may be labeled 'failing'

Affected schools will face sanctions ranging from offering tutoring to closing their doors

By CHRISTINE ARMARIO, DORIE TURNER
The Associated Press
updated 3/9/2011 7:35:40 PM ET 2011-03-10T00:35:40

The number of schools labeled as "failing" under the nation's No Child Left Behind Act could skyrocket dramatically this year, Education Secretary Arne Duncan said Wednesday.

The Department of Education estimates the percentage of schools not meeting yearly targets for their students' proficiency in in math and reading could jump from 37 to 82 percent as states raise standards in attempts to satisfy the law's mandates.

The 2002 law requires states to set targets aimed at having all students proficient in math and reading by 2014, a standard now viewed as wildly unrealistic.


"No Child Left Behind is broken and we need to fix it now," Duncan said in a statement. "This law has created a thousand ways for schools to fail and very few ways to help them succeed."

Duncan presented the figures at a House education and work force committee hearing, in urging lawmakers to rewrite the Bush-era act. Both Republicans and Democrats agree the law needs to be reformed, though they disagree on issues revolving around the federal role of education and how to turn around failing schools.

A surge in schools not meeting annual growth targets could have various implications. The most severe consequences — interventions that could include closure or replacing staff — would be reserved for those schools where students have been failing to improve for several consecutive years.
Obama talks education in Boston

Duncan said the law has done well in shining a light on achievement gaps among minority and low-income students, as well as those who are still learning English or have disabilities. But he said the law is loose on goals and narrow on how schools achieve them.

"We should get out of the business of labeling schools as failures and create a new law that is fair and flexible, and focused on the schools and students most at risk," Duncan said.

Russ Whitehurst, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institute, said some states and districts have dug themselves into a hole by expected greater gains in the final years.

"The reality is coming home that you can't essentially demonstrate very little progress for ten years and then expect all of your progress to occur in the last two or three years," Whitehurst said.

He said some states believed improvement would accelerate as students advanced, creating a "snowball effect," while others put off the heavy lifting to avoid the consequences.

Daria Hall, Education Trust's K-12 policy director, said it was also important to distinguish between schools that don't meet the annual growth benchmark for one year, versus those who have failed to do so for two consecutive years and are labeled as being "in need of improvement."
Read more school coverage on NBC's Education Nation

Both distinctions could mean vastly different outcomes in terms of how many schools are subject to which interventions. The Department of Education was not able to provide data breaking down how many of the 82 percent would be failing to meet yearly goals for one year, versus consecutive years.

Hall said there are many ways states can meet their annual achievement benchmarks, and questioned whether the 82 percent figure took them all into consideration. Amy Wilkins, Education Trust's vice president for government affairs and communications, also noted that schools which are struggling are given various options — contesting Duncan's assessment that the law is tight on means and loose on goals.

"There is an objective finish line with annual finish line targets for everybody," Wilkins said.

Paul Manna, a professor focusing on education policy at the College of William & Mary, noted that while there are specified goals, what is considered "proficient" in math and reading varies by state.

He said the rising number of schools not meeting the benchmarks could become unmanageable.

"There's no way given the resources, the personnel available, to do what would be required, that they'd be able to do it," Manna said.

___

Associated Press writer Dorie Turner contributed to this report.

[CountDeMoney]

Damned teachers' unions.

[Neil]

A stunning indictment of the American parent and educational culture in general.

[Razgovory]

I guess they should have consulted Tim, before passing the law.  Or not based in on a school district in Texas that was perpetrating a fraud.

[Eddie Teach]

A stunning indictment of the American parent and educational culture in general.

targets aimed at having all students proficient in math and reading

That's an unobtainable goal in any culture.

[derspiess]

Damned teachers' unions.

Yep, we should preserve a system that pays teachers based upon how long they've been employed instead of how effective they are.  Also we need to dump even more money into the public education system.  That will magically fix everything.

[grumbler]

Yep, we should preserve a system that pays teachers based upon how long they've been employed instead of how effective they are.  Also we need to dump even more money into the public education system.  That will magically fix everything.

Yes, we should shift to a system that measures performance based on slogans, bullshit, and black magic so that we can say we are 'reforming" schools.  That will magically fix everything.

It is funny how many people expect raises themselves without having to pass tests to see "how effective they are" but want everyone else to pass such tests before getting their raises.  Paying more experienced people more money without testing them for effectiveness is somehow mysteriously okay when they are cops, firemen, factory workers, lawyers, soldiers,computer dweebs, civil servants...

[derspiess]

Yes, we should shift to a system that measures performance based on slogans, bullshit, and black magic so that we can say we are 'reforming" schools.  That will magically fix everything.

Is that my position? 

It is funny how many people expect raises themselves without having to pass tests to see "how effective they are" but want everyone else to pass such tests before getting their raises.  Paying more experienced people more money without testing them for effectiveness is somehow mysteriously okay when they are cops, firemen, factory workers, lawyers, soldiers,computer dweebs, civil servants...

I'm not wedded to the idea of testing if there is another, more reliable, way of judging effectiveness.  I'm evaluated every year on my performance in my job, and my raise (or whether I even get one) is tied to that evaluation.

[Eddie Teach]

Most professional middle-aged Americans are overpaid for what they do in any field.

[grumbler]

Yes, we should shift to a system that measures performance based on slogans, bullshit, and black magic so that we can say we are 'reforming" schools.  That will magically fix everything.

Is that my position?   

Did I say that was your position? 

I'm evaluated every year on my performance in my job, and my raise (or whether I even get one) is tied to that evaluation.

What tests determine your personal effectiveness year-by-year?

[The Brain]

Everywhere I've worked my salary has been negotiated directly between me and my employer. I've never encountered any encumbering "system" that messes up the proceedings.

[derspiess]

Did I say that was your position? 

Seems like you implied it.  Either that or you posted your response to the wrong person.

What tests determine your personal effectiveness year-by-year?

Tests are not a part of my evaluation criteria. 

[Slargos]

Since no one is going to mention the elephant as usual, I'm going to go ahead and say it:

This is what you get when you integrate the Negro Community into your schools.

[grumbler]

Everywhere I've worked my salary has been negotiated directly between me and my employer. I've never encountered any encumbering "system" that messes up the proceedings.

Ideally, this is how it would be everywhere (that certainly is the way I have established my salary since leaving the navy). In the navy, as well as other places in bureaucracies, though, pay increases with seniority even leaving out promotions.

[grumbler]

Tests are not a part of my evaluation criteria. 

There must be some means to test your value, if you are "evaluated every year on my performance in my job."  Using "test" in this case in the larger sense.