Who benefited from the No Child Left Behind?

[Psi U MC Vito]

I'm waiting for him to insult somebody and it turns out that they are white, upper class and a doctorate. I think that would be entertaining to watch.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

I'm waiting for him to insult somebody and it turns out that they are white, upper class and a doctorate. I think that would be entertaining to watch.

He already hit 2/3.

[AGDee]

Well, if one kid in your class had a really bad first grade teacher, wouldn't it follow that about 1/6th of your kids had the same teacher? If your district isn't blaming the individual teachers, I think you're lucky. The teachers I know, up here, are very much judged based on how their kids do on those tests even though the test is administered in October, when the teachers have only been teaching those particular kids for 5-6 weeks. It was really crazy in the elementary school, when teachers would approach you and ask you to request them for your child for the next grade because they knew your kid was a good student and, therefore, would make them look good. There were 3 teachers at our elementary who did that. I deliberately requested different teachers because of it. And no, NCLB doesn't say to punish the teachers whose kids don't do well, but sh*t always rolls downhill, as the saying goes. The blame all goes to the teachers when the district is in danger of losing its funding.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by AGDee

Well, if one kid in your class had a really bad first grade teacher, wouldn't it follow that about 1/6th of your kids had the same teacher? If your district isn't blaming the individual teachers, I think you're lucky. The teachers I know, up here, are very much judged based on how their kids do on those tests even though the test is administered in October, when the teachers have only been teaching those particular kids for 5-6 weeks. It was really crazy in the elementary school, when teachers would approach you and ask you to request them for your child for the next grade because they knew your kid was a good student and, therefore, would make them look good. There were 3 teachers at our elementary who did that. I deliberately requested different teachers because of it. And no, NCLB doesn't say to punish the teachers whose kids don't do well, but sh*t always rolls downhill, as the saying goes. The blame all goes to the teachers when the district is in danger of losing its funding.

But aren't the scores judged based on improvement from last year, and not so much whether or not they're actually at grade level? I mean, grade level is the goal, but I was under the impression that improvement and retention of improvement from year to year was what was actually being measured.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by agzg

But aren't the scores judged based on improvement from last year, and not so much whether or not they're actually at grade level? I mean, grade level is the goal, but I was under the impression that improvement and retention of improvement from year to year was what was actually being measured.

I only know how they are measuring it on the tests here. The MEAP gives a score of 1-4. 1 is performing above grade level, 2 is at grade level. A 1 or a 2 is considered "passing". They look at the percentage of kids who meet that minimum vs those who don't. Their raw scores work like this: A 420 means they are working at a 4th grade, 2nd month level. 490 is 4th grade, 9th month level. If, in second grade, a child earns a score of 140, they are not "passing". If, when they take it in third grade, they score a 280, they are still not "passing", even though they've advanced a year and 4 months in one year. They are improving, they are catching up, but the way it's measured doesn't reflect that. Either way, they failed to meet the minimum required. That may be a problem with the tool being used here? Also, they used to test in May, so they were testing the learning from that school year. They changed it to October though, a couple years ago. I'm not sure why. It seems to make more sense to me to test at the end of the year if you're going to judge teachers on how their kids perform.

[ASUADPi]

Originally Posted by agzg

But aren't the scores judged based on improvement from last year, and not so much whether or not they're actually at grade level? I mean, grade level is the goal, but I was under the impression that improvement and retention of improvement from year to year was what was actually being measured.

One problem with the tests, is they don't always test on the standards.

For example, AIMS 3-8th grade is a combination norm-referenced test and criterion-referenced tests. The ADE literally states that the test includes questions from the SAT-10, which is a norm-referenced test. The SAT-10 doesn't align with AZ standards, so therefore the kids are being tested on items that they might not have learned as they aren't a standard for that particular grade. When I taught 3rd grade, I focused on the 3rd grade standards.

Another problem with AIMS is that it is given, in most districts, the 2nd/3rd weeks of April, when there is still a good 6 weeks left of school. So right there we have lost 6 weeks worth of instructional days. Teachers would LOVE for AIMS to be pushed back, but the state won't "get the scores in time" to determine AZ Learns (that is the excuse they are giving as to why AIMS can't be given in May instead). The reality is, the scores are back to schools by mid-July, its just that they aren't "official" until October, so I quite honestly don't buy their excuses.

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

And, unless I've missed something major, NCLB doesn't really require that anyone do anything to teachers based on the results of the test. If that's going on, it's an example of a local or state policy that the district is blaming on NCLB.

But it is due to NCLB that put these high stakes tests on the map, which therefore translates down to the teachers. It's not the districts that blame NCLB for the kids failing, the districts blame the schools administrators, who in turn blame the teachers. Blame is never put on the district or administrators. Blame is never put on the parents or child (god forbid), it is always the teachers fault that the kids are failing. And it isn't the previous teachers fault, it is that teachers fault. I have witnessed it first hand.

Like I've mentioned I taught 3rd grade. Before I moved up to 3rd grade, there was a lot of "problems" (according to adminstration) in the grade level. When the scores came back, 3rd grade was the reason the school failed to make AYP and was labeled failing by the state. My principal was very good at blaming the 1 remaining 3rd grade teacher (myself and the other one were moved to the grade level). He had no problem saying that she was the reason the school failed. This made her feel like crap! Of course my administrator wasn't taking into account that that particular 3rd grade students were awful not only in behavior but in academics. Hello, shouldn't then the 2nd,1st and kinder teachers be blamed as well considering you get what is "brought" up to you? (Just an FYI of these students they did awful on their 4th grade tests and 5th grade tests).

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by AGDee

Well, if one kid in your class had a really bad first grade teacher, wouldn't it follow that about 1/6th of your kids had the same teacher?

I'm not a teacher, but I know it depends on the circumstances of the individual school district. I grew up in a predominantly military area, and it was pretty rare for a 5th grade class to have even 1/6 of the students in a situation where they had the same 1st grade teacher.

But, the district I grew up in has the best test scores in the state of Florida. Maybe they're teaching to the test. Maybe the schools are just that good. But, I think it's a sign that maybe bad teachers, especially in the primary grades, aren't as big of an indicator of academic success?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AGDee

Well, if one kid in your class had a really bad first grade teacher, wouldn't it follow that about 1/6th of your kids had the same teacher? If your district isn't blaming the individual teachers, I think you're lucky. The teachers I know, up here, are very much judged based on how their kids do on those tests even though the test is administered in October, when the teachers have only been teaching those particular kids for 5-6 weeks. It was really crazy in the elementary school, when teachers would approach you and ask you to request them for your child for the next grade because they knew your kid was a good student and, therefore, would make them look good. There were 3 teachers at our elementary who did that. I deliberately requested different teachers because of it. And no, NCLB doesn't say to punish the teachers whose kids don't do well, but sh*t always rolls downhill, as the saying goes. The blame all goes to the teachers when the district is in danger of losing its funding.

We have pretty big schools where I am and most of the kids are on grade level, so I'm not seeing what you are seeing where you are. It's just not that high stakes.

We also have relatively easy state tests, so it's not that hard for an average learner to catch up to speed in a year, assuming that they aren't years behind, which does happen some places by high school.

We see our individual results but nothing ever seems to be said about them, which kind of stinks when you are really doing well, but I guess if we're going to look at it as cumulative learning, these results aren't solely the one teacher's good results either.

I think that a lot of teachers have really strong perfectionist streaks and even when there aren't any real job consequences for lackluster performance in a certain area, even calling it to their attention freaks them out. So, if the principal is giving out verbal gold stars for high scores, some teachers would try to pre-load their classes for success by trying to attract easier kids. It may not be the case that they have any realist fear for their jobs.