What You Missed At Yesterday's "Growth Models" Hearing

After Chairman McKeon teased George Miller for sounding excited at the thought of retirement (Miller was thanking longtime GAO researcher Marlene S. Shaul for her service), the Committee hearing launched into the issue of whether or not growth models fit the requirements of the NCLB law as a measure of accountability.

Shaul, who discussed the results of her latest GAO report on growth models and NCLB, noted that growth models meet the requirements of NCLB but that state will face challenges in doing them (testimony here). Kati Haycock of Ed Trust agreed with Shaul, but noted that growth model alone will not be a solution by itself for calculating accountability (testimony here). Both Joel L. Klein, Chancellor of NYC DoE and Reg Weaver, NEA president noted that the current form of calculating AYP is harmful to students who improve but don't meet certain benchmarks and undue credit is given for sometimes very little progress. William L. Sanders, SAS Institute was on hand to discuss the particulars of growth models.

One of the largest points made about growth models is that it works well for students who need to make progress, but when you are at the top of the scale it essentially would show that the student made no progress. McKeon seems dedicated to a serious conversation with the experts when re-authorization comes up.

Miller, McKeon Comment On GAO Report On Measuring Student Achievement Under No Child Left Behind Act


Post a Comment

<< Home