Schools fail to achieve benchmarks

By Kristine Thomas

If a physical education teacher places the high-jump bar at 2 feet, it’s likely the majority of his high school students will clear it. As the teacher raises the bar higher, the number of students able to clear it is likely to decrease.

The recent release of the 2007-08 preliminary federal ratings under No Child Left Behind for Oregon’s public elementary, middle and high schools indicates there was a significant decrease in the number of schools meeting Average Yearly Progress requirements after the bar was raised 10 percent.

Last year, 74 percent of Oregon’s 1,237 schools met the AYP standard compared to 61.7 percent this year – a 12.3 percent decrease.

”

“Most people think the number of schools meeting the AYP is down because the bar has been raised for the percentage of students required to pass the benchmark,” Silver Falls Superintendent Craig Roessler said.

Silverton High, Mark Twain Middle and Robert Frost Elementary schools in the Silver Falls School District and St. Mary’s Public Elementary, Mt. Angel Middle and Kennedy High schools in the Mt. Angel School District didn’t meet the AYP outlined under the federal requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Under Oregon’s No Child Left Behind plan for this year, 60 percent of all students in public schools must reach state standards in English/language arts compared to 50 percent who had to do so last year, and 59 percent of students must meet state standards in mathematics compared to 49 percent last year.

The 2007-08 academic targets are 10 points higher than last year and will continue to increase until 2014 when 100 percent of students must meet the AYP requirements. Schools also must also meet an attendance or graduation requirement to meet overall AYP requirements.

Mt. Angel School District Superintendent Bob Young said state testing is one measure of how well schools are doing.

“We need to keep in mind that the majority of our students are meeting standards,” Young said, “and as we focus on specific subgroups to meet AYP, as required, our focus is on challenging all of our students to continue to be challenged and grow as successful learners. The focus of the district is the whole child, not a statistic from test scores.”

Roessler said the 2008 presidential election will have an impact determining what happens next with the No Child Left Behind Act. He doesn’t think the act will be rescinded but does think changes may be made after a new president is elected.

“Many people recognize that having 100 percent of kids meeting the standards is not realistic,” Roessler said, adding the tests vary from state to state with Oregon having “relatively high standards.”

Both Young and Roessler said a school could receive a “did not meet” rating because it failed to meet the requirements in one subgroup – even if it passed all the others.

As part of AYP, students have their progress measured and reported by the following population groups: economically disadvantaged, students with disabilities, English language learners and racial and/or ethnic groups.

One of the purposes of the Preliminary AYP Report is to identify schools needing improvement, especially those serving a high percentage of children in poverty and receiving federal funds under Title I.

Young said St. Mary’s Public School receives Title 1 federal funds, meaning it is the only school in his district with sanctions for not meeting AYP. Last year, St. Mary’s Elementary was placed into “school improvement” status that required the school to develop and implement an improvement plan to address the area in which they did not meet – the limited English-proficient subgroup.

This year’s AYP results show the St. Mary’s met the standards in the limited English proficient subgroup showing the school’s efforts to improve, Young said.

However, St. Mary’s didn’t meet the goal this year in the subgroup “students with disabilities,” Young said.

Since St. Mary’s is in the second year of not meeting AYP, Young said parents will be notified of an offer of supplemental educational services, most likely tutoring, for students who are not meeting standards.

“Another requirement for second year status,” Young said, “is to offer parents the ability to transfer their child to another school in the district who met AYP. Since there are no other elementary schools in the district, that is not available.”

Young said since Mt. Angel Middle and Kennedy High schools do not receive Title 1 funds, they are not under No Child Left Behind sanctions.

“However,” Young said, “they will need to revise their school improvement plans to address the areas in which they did not meet and use what little Title funds they receive – other than Title 1 – to address the areas they did not meet.”

Young said the middle school did not meet in two subgroups, Limited English Proficient and Students with Disabilities, in reading and did not met in math subgroup, Students with Disabilities.

The high school did not meet under the subgroup, “Hispanic Origin” in reading and math, and did not meet in subgroup “Economically Disadvantaged” in math.

Since Silverton High School does not receive federal funds, there are no sanctions for not meeting AYP, Roessler said. Both Mark Twain and Robert Frost schools receive federal funds, but since both schools met AYP in 2006-07, 2007-08 is the first year they did not meet AYP, he said adding, there are no sanctions in year one if a school does not meet AYP.

Roessler said it is the district’s goal to get every student to the highest academic level possible. He thinks rather than measuring students by a test – which, he added, some students are not good at taking, students should be measured by their academic growth. For example, if a student is in the third grade and reading at a first-grade level the goal should be for the student to progress a year or more in his reading level.

“The way the tests are designed are to measure how subgroups of kids are doing rather than how an individual is doing,” he said. “Our schools give daily, weekly and monthly tests to show what a student is learning and what areas he is deficient in.”

Both Young and Roessler said they know every staff member strives to help students be successful.

“When the AYP report and the state report card shows us not meeting (standards), it is disheartening to all. It is taken personally by many staff as they know how hard they are working to help students be successful,” Young said.

Young added state testing is one measure of how well a school district is doing.

The true measure of academic progress has to be changed to focus on each individual student’s progress year-to-year, not groups of students. The federal tests reflect only a small measure of what is going on in the schools, Young said.