[regional_school] Fw: Why We Need to Debunk "Grade Level"

  • From: Dan Drmacich <dandrmacich@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Denise Bartalo <denisebartalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Bill Bendschneider <bamboo789@xxxxxxx>, Carolyn Bennett <cwriter85@xxxxxxx>, Mary Berger <mpresber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wasa Bouphavong <daboupha@xxxxxxxxx>, G Brown <gjb0145@xxxxxxxxx>, Amy Brown <scottvbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pat Cavanaugh <cavanaughpat22@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Jason Charno <jasoncharno42@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandra Climaenhaga <dclimenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, A Colon <aacolon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rochelle Corey <archer14611@xxxxxxx>, Deana Darling <jddarling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Deana Darling <darlin3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Brian Erway <brian_erway@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Karen Fisher <fishekh@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Dennis Francione <d.francione@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Shalanda Garfield <Shalonda_Garfield1@xxxxxxxxx>, Lynn Gatto <lynn.gatto@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Nancy Gersh <nancygersh@xxxxxxx>, RJ Glomboski <parallax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Synthia Green <sng4979@xxxxxxxx>, Richard Greene <richard_greene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Gretchen Haag <gretchenhaag@xxxxxxxxx>, Shawn Haarer <drhaarer@xxxxxxxxx>, Kate Hathaway <kaytea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kyra Hawn <khawn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Joseph Henderson <jhenderson11@xxxxxxxxx>, Sara Hughes <sara@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Julia Kantor <julia.kantor@xxxxxxxxx>, Roger Klimek <rklimek001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jack Langerack <jlanger0@xxxxxxx>, Barb Lemcke <b_lemcke@xxxxxxxxx>, Joan LoCurto <locurto135@xxxxxxxxx>, Tom Mackey <tmackey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jennifer Malinchak <jenjenfuller@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Katheryn McCullough <katmccullough@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Gena Merliss <merliss@xxxxxxxxx>, Jessica Metras <jessicametras@xxxxxxxxx>, Nancy Monachino <nmonachino@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Gwynne Mosch <Gwynne.mosch@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Barbara Moynihan <barbara.moynihan@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Murray <kmurray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jessie Nimeh <jgnimeh@xxxxxxxxx>, Maureen Nupp <Maureennupp@xxxxxxxxx>, Anne-Pat Nuzback <Anne-Pat_Nuzback@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rich Ognibene <richard_ognibene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tom Pappas <tjp18@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Sheila Pearlman <yspearlman@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Norreen Pelusio <njpelusio@xxxxxxx>, Liz Porta <lizbecker@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Pamela Pruitt <pamela.pruitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Todd Pschierer <psch811@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kari Ritter <kritter84@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rosemary Rivera <rrivera@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Emily Roberts <emilymarkelle@xxxxxxx>, Peter Rosenthal <prosenthal@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Scott Schaefer <mister_schaefer@xxxxxxxxx>, Chojy Schroeder <chojy.schroeder@xxxxxxxxx>, Sharon Silvio <ssilvio@xxxxxxx>, Pete Smith <petersmith71@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ralph Spezio <rspezio@xxxxxxxxx>, Mathew Taber <sundevil108@xxxxxxxx>, Leslie Vermeulen <ldvermeulen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Jennifer Wheeler <jennifer_wheeler@xxxxxxxx>, Mary Wilkins <mtkwilkins@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Witmer <tbwitmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ruth Young-Card <cardjrb@xxxxxxx>, Lee Zelazny <lee.zelazny@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:49:30 -0700 (PDT)










--- On Thu, 4/16/09, Lynn Ellingwood <lellingw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Lynn Ellingwood <lellingw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Why We Need to Debunk "Grade Level"
To: 
Date: Thursday, April 16, 2009, 11:29 PM



Why We Need to Debunk "Grade Level"As we have seen from the Obama 
administration and so-called "progressives," NCLB is going to be tweaked, not 
fundamentally altered or discarded. I'd argue that it's being tweaked and not 
discarded because there is a very strong sense that there is a magical thing 
called "grade level." This magical thing called "grade level" is (1) very real, 
(2) can be measured empirically with a fine degree of validity and reliability, 
i.e., it really tells us something useful and is beyond repute, and (3) lots of 
low-income minorities are not at "grade level" and is therefore cause for 
concern, as it is our sacred duty to get them to this magical place.

But, as I have been discussing, we can show that "grade level" (1) is a 
phantasm, (2) cannot be measured accurately or reliably and does not yield any 
kind of useful information whatsoever, and (3) is therefore meaningless when we 
talk about the academic achievement of low-income minorities.

This is a foundational critique that, if successful, will raise the following 
questions:

1) If "grade level" is a phantasm and does not accurately measure what students 
know and can do, what are other means by which we can better understand what 
students know and can do?

2) If it's meaningless to say that low-income minorities are not "at grade 
level," then what is a meaningful way to talk about the disparity that exists 
between low-income kids and their more affluent peers?

If we get lots of folks asking these questions, then there's an opening for 
discussion of alternatives. But if folks are not asking them, then they still 
uncritically and unquestionably accept that "grade level" is real and will, 
therefore, always be caught in a box. They will design more assessments -- 
maybe even some pretty good ones -- but these assessments will all be for the 
purpose of determining if kids are at "grade level" or not. Ergo, we are still 
where we are now.

With all due respect to the work that everyone -- including me -- has tried to 
do on debunking NCLB, we have clearly not achieved our goals. So that's why I'm 
suggesting this tactic. 




      

Other related posts:

  • » [regional_school] Fw: Why We Need to Debunk "Grade Level" - Dan Drmacich