Harkin’s Achievement Gap Schools by the Numbers
“Split Classroom-Achievement Gap” Copyright © by Amanda Long.
More than any other provision of the Harkin-Enzi ESEA bill (synopsis here), the rollback of federal accountability for student performance in schools and districts (no more AYP and targets for student achievement, no strict consequences for schools that fail to make AYP) has gotten the most attention over the last two days. Civil rights’ groups hate it, teachers’ unions are okay with it, and I imagine states and districts are pretty thrilled. Instead of a federally-designed system, states will be able to create their own school accountability plan, so they’ll have much more control over what measures of achievement are included, what performance targets students must meet for a school to be “continually improving,” what designations schools could receive, and
How We Calculated State Testing Costs
My Education Week “Truth About Testing Costs” commentary outlines why the rhetoric about the high budgetary costs of testing is not only overblown, but in many ways counter-productive, because it stifles investment in the very sorts of high-quality assessments that most educators deeply desire.
My inquiry found that states actually spend very little of their per-pupil spending on standardized testing costs:
