Posted on 07/31/2006 6:20:29 AM PDT by BraveMan
The U.S. Department of Education has warned Wisconsin officials that the state could lose about $233,000 if they don't fix shortcomings in the state's student testing system, including its alternate assessment for English language learners.
Adopting a tough tone, the federal government has given the state until the end of the 2006-'07 school year to bring its tests into full compliance with the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act.
But a November testing period means Wisconsin has only until fall to address the concerns or it risks losing 15% of the $1.5 million it hopes to receive to help administer the federal government's program for low-income students, according to Mike Thompson, executive assistant at the state Department of Public Instruction.
The state would not lose the money entirely, however. The funding would be diverted to local school districts instead of going to the DPI, where it pays for staff, data collection and reports, and technical assistance to schools.
Thompson said the DPI is optimistic it can avoid federal sanctions, even though it anticipates difficulty in bringing its alternate assessment for English language learners into compliance with the law.
"The threat of withholding funds I guess seems a little harsh," he said. "But we don't see that as being a reality in Wisconsin."
In a June 28 letter to state schools Superintendent Elizabeth Burmaster, the U.S. Education Department outlined 34 areas the state must address before its assessment system can be approved. It also said the state would be placed under "mandatory oversight" and asked for a timeline showing how it will come into compliance by the end of the upcoming school year.
Altogether, 36 states are in the same position as Wisconsin, with "approval pending" for their standards and assessment systems. Two states' systems were rejected altogether.
The most common problem states face is meeting technical quality requirements for their assessment systems, said Darla Marburger, deputy assistant secretary for policy at the Education Department.
Basically, that means they have to show that the tests are doing what they're supposed to do: accurately assessing student knowledge and skills.
"You need to know whether they're learning what we're teaching them," Marburger said. "And if they're not, you need the data to inform instruction, so you can go back and teach in a more effective manner."
The toughest issue facing Wisconsin is ensuring that the assessments for students still learning English match up to the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations, which are given to the vast majority of public school students in third grade through eighth grade and in high school, Thompson said.
Testing English language learners is harder than it sounds. Simply translating a test into a student's native language can be expensive because of the breadth of languages spoken. Also, the translated test is not guaranteed to match the original English language test, given that sentence constructions vary in complexity, depending on the language.
Compounding the problem is that testing for students learning English is still relatively new and there is little research on what works, experts say.
"I don't think there's a nationwide consensus on how to deal with the LEP (limited English proficiency) testing at this point," said Christy Boscardin, a senior researcher with the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Instead of giving a written test to English language learners, Wisconsin uses what it calls a portfolio assessment, essentially having teachers check student work to see whether it matches state standards for how well they should perform at their grade level.
Those can be difficult to compare to standardized tests, said Jamal Abedi, an education professor at the University of California, Davis, who specializes in the testing of English language learners.
"When you're talking about portfolio assessment, that really is very, very broad," he said. "It's not the same form of test. It could differ across states, even districts and across schools."
Abedi was also skeptical of the state's backup plan to not count its English language learners if it can't support the validity of its portfolio assessment program. He noted the federal law requires at least 95% of students in the tested grades be assessed, or schools face possible sanctions.
"If they decide not to give the alternate assessment, the question is: Are they going to exclude all those students from assessment or give them the state assessment?" he said. "Both cases are going to be a problem."
Last year, 10th-graders were the most likely to be left out of Wisconsin assessments, with about 2% missing the test. The state estimates 1% of the students tested overall took an alternate assessment because of limited English proficiency.
To see the text of the letter outlining Wisconsin's shortcomings, go to www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/nclbfinalassess/wi.html.
Uh, where does Congress get the power over taxing and spending on education in the first place? Last I looked this wasn't a delegated power given to them.
It's obviously concealed in an emanation from the penumbra. Seriously, though, your question nails the main problem, our congresscritters, having taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution are treasonous in their collective efforts to completely ignore the document. (with the possible exception of Ron Paul)
WI should take the threat as a blessing! Getting the Feds out of education would be a step closer in putting education back into the hands of the locals and parents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.