The Problem that Had No Name
May 10, 2007 04:05 PM
I disagree with the most of the arguments made by Eric Shaps in this week’s Edweek Commentary, but I do appreciate that he’s introduced me to “Campbell’s Law:”
The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decisionmaking, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.
The applications of Campbell's Law to NCLB are endless. Off the top of my head, I can think of testing pressure driving the curriculum, inflation of graduation rates, N size manipulation, HOUSSE standards, and states’ lowering of cut scores for proficiency.
Shaps argues that because of Campbell's law, the only solution is to revert back to pre-NCLB ESEA days and dole out money to schools based on their number of poor students. Too bad that didn't work for the 30 or so years the federal government did just that with ESEA money.
Comments
AYP in most states has so far exempted most middle class districts from the failure label.
This isn't because middle class districts have made more progress than low SES districts; it's because they started with higher test scores.
The way the bars rise means the more difficult settings for high scores are labeled inadequate now, the medium ones will be labeled in the next couple or four years, the high scoring ones will be labeled after that.
I think this has led to a skewing of what is considered as appropriate accountability actions. Low SES schools failing? Bring in private management and fire the teachers! Does this prescription sound like one that would fly in middle class districts?
If states had adopted a need for every district to improve steadily from its baseline, rather than allowing "alternate statewide" improvement targets, the dynamics of NCLB would already be significantly different. Rather than focusing in on failures due to SES, race, and Special Ed, many more middle and high performing schools would already be in later stages of sanctions. Now, I grant, there is some merit to shedding light on different performances for subgroups, but it is also important to shed light on what the formulas are doing, and that isn't visible to typical school districts yet.
Posted by: MassParent | May 11, 2007 11:02 AM