A new report by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, To Dream the Impossible Dream: Four Approaches to National Standards and Tests for America’s Schools, brings together education policy leaders from across the political spectrum to flesh out and evaluate several forms that national standards and testing could take. The report queried a bipartisan selection of prominent experts to gather input on how a system of national standards and tests might be designed. The result was four distinct models/approaches to national standards and tests.

1. The Whole Enchilada - a very direct and aggressive approach in which the federal government would create and enforce national standards and assessments, replacing the fifty state-level sets of standards and tests we have now.
2. If You Build It, They Will Come - a voluntary version of the first model, states would be provided incentives to opt into such a system.
3. Let’s All Hold Hands - states would be encouraged to join together to develop common standards and tests or, at the least, common test items. The federal government might provide incentives.
4. Sunshine and Shame - would make state standards and tests more transparent by making them easier to compare to one another and to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Read the entire report here.

Source: Thomas B. Ford Foundation [August 2006]

MANY STATES LATE WITH "ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS" GOALS

The 2005-06 school year was the first time that all states had to give reading and math tests in grades 3-8 and at least once in high school to comply with the No Child Left Behind Law that was enacted over four years ago. The tests are the primary basis for calculating whether schools and districts have made adequate yearly progress, or AYP, as required under the law. However, more than a dozen states will not release information about whether schools have met achievement targets until after the school year begins. This means that some parents may not learn until well into the fall semester whether their children have the right to transfer to another public school or receive free tutoring under the federal law.

Schools receiving federal Title I money that miss their targets for at least two years in a row are identified as needing improvement and are required to notify parents of their rights before the school year begins. State officials are blaming the delays on the addition of new tests or, in a few cases, on problems with test vendors. Read more here.

Source: Edweek.org [August 2006]

NCLB FULL PROFICIENCY TARGET

A recent article in The Achiever, the U.S. Department of Education's monthly bulletin on No Child Left Behind, focuses on three schools that are well on their way to meeting NCLB's 2014 target. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was signed into law on Jan. 8, 2002. NCLB dramatically restructured the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—the main federal law affecting education from kindergarten through high school—by raising the achievement bar for America's children. Ultimately, NCLB set a new goal for the country: every child reading and doing math at grade level by 2014.

According to The Achiever, in just a few short years since its enactment, the legislation has proven that raising academic standards leads to a rise in achievement. According to the 2004 Nation's Report Card, America's nine-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971) and math (since 1973) in the report card's history, while the country's 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded. With such success at the primary levels, the president is looking to expand NCLB's provisions at the high school level, beginning with his American Competitiveness Initiative to better prepare the nation's youths for the global marketplace.

The article highlights three schools (Smith Street Elementary School in Uniondale, N.Y; Peabody eMints Academy in St. Louis, MO; and New Plymouth Elementary School in New Plymouth, Idaho) proving that, despite the challenges communities may face, achieving full proficiency in reading and math is possible. Read the report here.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, The Achiever, [August 2006].

2006: THE STATE OF STATE STANDARDS

The Thomas B. Ford Foundation has recently released an unedited draft version of its report: 2006: The State of State Standards. This is the Foundation's first comprehensive look at state academic standards since 2000 (before NCLB). In 2000, the average grade for state standards across all subjects was a "C-minus." The report claims that the grade has not changed six years later, although 37 states have updated or revised their state standards in at least on subject. For three years, expert reviewers for the Foundation and the Foundation itself examined state standards in five subjects: U.S. history (2003), English/language arts (2005), mathematics (2005), science (2005), and world history (2006). The report shares the reviewers' findings. The report also reviews state standards for each state. Read the report here.

Source: Thomas B. Ford Foundation [August 2006]

QUICK LINKS

ECS Online Redesigned Teacher Compensation Database Goes Live
The Education Commission of the States Teaching Quality and Leadership Institute recently announced the launch of its Redesigned Teacher Compensation Database. The online database houses information on district- and state-level compensation systems that include salary increases or bonuses based on student performance as one element of the system. Users have the option to view summary reports or to build their own customized reports by selecting certain elements of the programs such as the type of evaluation system used and how the program is funded. The database can be accessed here. Source: Education Commission of the States [August 25, 2006]

Commission on Future of Higher Ed Approves Final Report
The Commission on the Future of Higher Education approved a final report this month that calls for public universities to measure learning with standardized tests, federal monitoring of college quality and sweeping changes in financial aid. The report recommended bolstering Pell grants by making the program cover a larger percentage of public college tuition. Eighteen of the 19 members of the panel, the Commission on the Future of Higher Education, voted to sign the
report. The New York Times [August 11, 2006]

STATE BY STATE. . .

State Progress on National Governor's Association Graduation Counts Compact
In 2005 governors of all 50 states signed the Graduation Counts Compact, making a commitment to a common method for calculating each state’s high school graduation rate. In 2006 13 states will report their graduation rate publicly according to the Compact formula and by 2010, 39 states plan to report a graduation rate using the Compact definition. Many states are still determining in what year they will report. Two states do not plan to report according to the Compact formula and two states have codified the Compact rate through state board regulations and legislation. Read the report here. Source: National Governor's Association [August, 2006]

Missing the Mark: States’ Teacher-Equity Plans Fall Short
A new Education Trust analysis of teacher-equity plans prepared by all 50 states and the District of Columbia finds that most states failed to properly analyze data that would determine whether poor and minority children get more than their fair share of unqualified, inexperienced, and out-of-field teachers. Only two states, Nevada and Ohio, fully complied with the requirements and offered specific plans to remedy inequities. Read more here. Source: EdTrust.org [August 2006]