Editorial: Some progress on education law

Revised testing rules should improve NCLB.

Last update: December 12, 2007 - 7:12 PM

Talks in Congress over reauthorization of the federal No Child Left Behind law have not been going well. With discussions stalled and pressure from the states mounting, the Bush administration recently granted the states new flexibility in tracking student achievement. Federal education officials will allow states to evaluate individual student progress, rather than simply comparing one year's group of students to another year's. Though much remains to be done to fix other flaws in the law, this concession is a step in the right direction.

Under current federal rules, schools must report how this year's third graders, for example, performed compared to last year's third graders on reading and math tests. Those assessments matter for schools; if benchmark goals are missed, schools can be cited and penalized for failing to make what the law calls "adequate yearly progress."

But that measurement offers only limited snapshots of student abilities. It is imprecise and unfair because it looks only at groups of students, without considering individual gains. Educators say such snapshots can be misleading, given that poor and otherwise disadvantaged students often start out far behind their more affluent peers.

A better way to measure achievement, known as a value-added or growth model, requires schools to assess the progress of individual students over time. To do that, states must have good methods of tracking test scores that also protect student privacy.

Previously, the department had allowed eight states to experiment with growth model testing. Now Education Secretary Margaret Spellings says she is expanding the pilot program because many states have improved their efforts to collect and protect information about individual students.

The change responds to concerns raised at a Minnesota Senate hearing on NCLB last September. And it reflects a set of good recommendations outlined earlier this year by a group of legislators and educators. In addition to "growth'' evaluations, the group suggests extending timelines for students to reach proficiency; designing better assessments for special-education and English-language learners, and allowing for different levels of consequences and support when schools do not make adequate yearly progress.

Members of Congress rightly continue to debate various aspects of NCLB. Some are calling for complete repeal, while others want major modifications. Despite disagreements on other issues, most support the new method of measuring student gains.

Now that the administration is also on board with that change, lawmakers can focus on revising other parts of the law. Congress can turn its attention to provisions that, among other things, properly fund mandates and make the rules less punitive and more supportive. Congress is making progress; "adequate" is still a ways off.

Recent Editorials stories

Editorial: This Bud Light's not for U - December 12, 2007

Editorial: This Bud Light's not for U - Anheuser-Busch's ill-advised 'Fan Cans'' promotion. More

Comment on this story | Be the first to comment | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS