Monday, December 22, 2008

Crisis Averted

In May the Center on Education Policy (CEP) released a report looking at how states structured their Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs). The No Child Left Behind Act required only that AMOs reach 100% by 2014 and that each increase must be equivalent, and it allowed states up to three years of no growth. It being 2002 at the time, about half the states chose to backload their AMOs, calling for no gains in the early years of the law, followed by steep increases each year leading into 2014. Depending on your cynicism, this was either to allow districts the opportunity to prepare for the new requirements or a way to force changes to the next generation of the federal education law.

The May CEP report warned of the impending consequences of such backloading:
Although states may have had logical reasons for choosing a backloaded approach, it appears that schools and districts in backloading states are likely to have more difficulty making AYP than in previous years, and the number of schools identified for NCLB improvement in these states might rise.
The numbers are now in ($) for 46 states and the District of Columbia, and it turns out the CEP report was wrong. Nationwide, 7.3 percent more schools failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) this year, for a total of 35.6 percent of all Title I schools. But, that increase was led by the states categorized by CEP as "incremental." While backloaded states averaged only a 3.2 percent increase, incremental states rose 7.7 percent. The percent of schools rated "in need of improvement" rose 2.1 percent for a total of 17.9. This too was led by states that were incremental in their AMOs.

These results suggest that Charlie Barone was right: the safe harbor provision is working. Safe harbor allows districts and schools to make AYP so long as they reduce by 10 percent the percentage of students in any sub-group not meeting proficiency targets. Backloading states are clearly benefiting from this provision (which Charlie dubbed the "poor man's growth model"), and this is entirely a good thing. The law's built-in flexibility is being put to work. The fear that 100 percent of schools will fail is not happening, and the sky remains intact.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

"The CEP report was wrong ... Charlie Barone was right."

Gosh it must be nice living in such a Black and White world.

I'd asked you the same thing I asked Charlie, if you would consider the possibilities:

a) NCLB causes uninteneded negative results,
b) panic caused by NCLB made things worse; early adapters and states with the money to avoid shortcuts did relatively better,
c) it would have been better if Charlie and other NCLB supporters had publicized the more realistic options under the poor man's growth model, because
d) fearful organizations make worst decisions.

I see education as a people business and people as being full of contradictions. I wish you guys had taken the time to listen to veteran educators who were much more aware of those complexities. And one of the best sources for that wisdom is the CEP. Read all of their stuff.

Anonymous said...

Hello,

I found your blog while searching the web for information related to my blog.

I think your site content is very good and I think we would both benefit from a link exchange. This would bring more targeted traffic to our sites, plus increase our websites' weight at the search engines, as they give greater value to the links from the topic-related sites rather than irrelevant backlinks.

My blog at http://eschoolsearch.blogspot.com/ is definitely related to yours.

I would be glad to link to your site in return to you linking back to mine.

Please email me at info@eschoolsearch.com to discuss further details on this.

Thank You

Theresa Fox

Anonymous said...

The AMO climb-up hasn't really started yet:

http://www.heritage.org/research/education/images/b2047_chart1-lg.gif