State Testing: Educational Growth Model Defies Logic
-->
by Allen Koshewa
Education is under attack again. The state has ensured that some schools will once again be labeled failures, thanks to the new categories it has created, its distorted definitions of success, and its continued use of tests to punish rather than to inform instruction.
It will come as no surprise to most people that the state is using students’ scores on the OAKS (Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) in reading and math as the sole determinant of educational growth. Under the new system, implemented last fall, some schools have been labeled as “model” schools, “focus” schools, or “priority” schools while other schools have not been labeled at all. Since the new labels only apply to Title I schools (in which the majority of students come from poverty), schools in higher-income areas are immune to the scrutiny and sanctions of schools labeled focus and priority.
State number crunchers have come up with a new formula to establish what they are calling a “growth model,” which will determine the label a school gets (or doesn’t get). In a travesty of equity, students who scored the lowest scores last year are expected to improve the most. For example, students with low scores must demonstrate up to three years of growth (according to how OAKS scores are analyzed) to meet the “growth target” the state has established for them, whereas some students with higher 2012 scores only need to
