States are Faking Minority Progress for No Child Left Behind
Saved in:
| Title: | States are Faking Minority Progress for No Child Left Behind |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Adam, Michelle |
| Source: | Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review. Jan 2006 71(5):18-23. |
| Availability: | Prakken Publications, 832 Phoenix Dr., P.O. Box 8623, Ann Arbor, MI 48108. Tel: 734-975-2800; Fax: 734-975-2787; Web site: http://www.eddigest.com/. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 6 |
| Publication Date: | 2006 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | Graduation Rate, Hispanic American Students, Minority Group Children, State Agencies, School Statistics, Deception, Federal Legislation, Compliance (Legal) |
| Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers: | No Child Left Behind Act 2001 |
| ISSN: | 0013-127X |
| Abstract: | In looking at recent graduation rates reported by states, Latinos should be proud. For the 2002-03 school year, North Carolina reported a 94% graduation rate for Latinos, while New Mexico claimed an 89% rate, and Indiana, an 85% rate. Unfortunately, these numbers are not only deceptive, they are, according to the Education Trust, wrong. Under the "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) Act, states were required to report graduation rates to the U.S. Department of Education in 2003 and, most recently, in 2005. But most states, during both periods, have reported numbers that overestimate graduation rates far beyond reliable estimates provided by independent agents. This article discusses the discrepancies found by the Education Trust in the graduation rates the states have reported to them. |
| Abstractor: | ERIC |
| Entry Date: | 2006 |
| Access URL: | https://www.eddigest.com/index.php |
| Accession Number: | EJ740989 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEyIGxx_YdlIdO-qfqv29y0AAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDFgt478R-A-UKOODvAIBEICBmizr57K80JA1aKG5YXHVRLFy9yPidkLm9z1ymQrWtaWfSUd08yt5Dt9KVD4Lo2GWlPu3QkgAUNfFlawQbdgmtMVw2US7vE-2bALjtnH35X_2QQ9mi6oND0jJe6ryij0ikeGaHtUMJx_ZYOsh77FWD0EqjW2VRFY3HJqWj2nx6-VMEnCkforZgIABON0kJWv-3oVGcgrnnH9FN84= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0019364026;edd01jan.06;2006Jan12.14:27;v2.2.460</anid> <title id="AN0019364026-1">Faking Minority Progress for NCLB </title> <p>IN looking at recent graduation rates reported by states, Latinos should be proud. For the 2002-03 school year, North Carolina reported a 94% graduation rate for Latinos, while New Mexico claimed an 89% rate, and Indiana, an 85% rate.</p> <p>Unfortunately, these numbers are not only deceptive, they are, according to the Education Trust, wrong. Under the "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) Act, states were required to report graduation rates to the U.S. Department of Education in 2003 and, most recently, in 2005. But most states, during both periods, have reported numbers that overestimate graduation rates far beyond reliable estimates provided by independent agents.</p> <p>"We are finding that the numbers states have provided don't jive with independent estimates and with what educators, parents, and community members have been telling us," said Daria Hall, writer and researcher of the Education Trust's report, Getting Honest about Grad Rates: How States Play the Numbers and Students Lose, published in June 2005.</p> <p>"We have found again that far too many states have been reporting data that obscures the extent of the problem students are facing in graduating high school. This graduation data far overestimates the number of students who are actually graduating, and this is far more overestimated when looking at students of color, particularly African-Americans and Latinos.</p> <p>While states like North Carolina and New Mexico are reporting fairly high graduation rates for Latinos, according to Hall, "Two of the most respected studies on graduation rates estimate that just over half of all Latino students graduate from high school within four years. This is a real crisis for the Latino community, yet we see many states educating large numbers and not living up to their responsibilities."</p> <hd id="AN0019364026-2">Huge Discrepancies Shown</hd> <p>In her report. Hall compared state-reported graduation rates with the graduation rates derived from independent studies. In doing so, she demonstrated huge discrepancies.</p> <p>In comparison to North Carolina's 94% Latino graduation rate, the Cumulative Promotion Index (CPI), created by Christopher Swanson of the Urban Institute (a widely recognized expert on high school graduation rates), revealed a 58% graduation rate for Latinos in the same state. (Although the state-reported data is for the 2002-03 school year, and the CPI for the 2000-2001 school year, according to Hall, the likely difference in graduation rates between the two school years is insubstantial.)</p> <p>In addition, Indiana reported an 85% graduation rate for Latinos, compared to the 50% CPI rate; New Mexico provided 89%, while the CPI was 55%; Delaware reported 71%, compared to a 42% CPI; and Ohio, 72%, in comparison to 43%.</p> <p>"In most cases, the discrepancy in over-reporting numbers has been even higher for Latinos," said Hall. "And we need to know the most about them. We have a desperate need to find out how many are making it through high school."</p> <p>Although Hall considers disaggregated data on high school graduation rates crucial if we are going to be able to improve education, especially for those who are the most in need, such as minority students and low-income students, she expressed concern that 33 states haven't even begun to provide disaggregated data on low-income and limited-English-proficient students.</p> <p>"States are saying, give us a couple of years. But Latinos and low-income students don't have that time," she said. "It is incumbent on leaders and advocates to get as accurate information as they can on students now. These are the students having the most difficulty graduating high school. The fact that they can't tell us this basic information is alarming."</p> <p>Hall recognizes the fact that as long as we don't know actual graduation rates for all groups of students, schools won't effectively be able to improve graduation rates. Consequently, the Education Trust has looked closely at state graduation numbers ever since they've been reported under NCLB.</p> <p>When the Education Trust first came to notice that states were overestimating graduation rates in the year 2003, it "wanted to look deeper to see why this was happening." What the organization was to discover was that there were numerous states which were relying on what the organization described as being "ludicrous definitions of graduation rates."</p> <p>Take, as an example, North Carolina — often highlighted in Hall's report, along with New Mexico, as excessive in its overestimation of graduation rates. The former state defined rates by those who graduated in four years or less. The most recent numbers were of only those who received a diploma, and of them, the percentage who graduated in four years or less.</p> <p>"This had nothing to do with how many started high school and made it through," said Hall. "And New Mexico just looked at those who were in the twelfth grade and graduated."</p> <hd id="AN0019364026-3">Same Bad Counting Used After Exposure</hd> <p>Although the Education Trust spoke out against these poor reporting methods in its 2003 report Telling the Whole Truth (or Not) about High School Graduation Rates, Hall was disappointed to discover that many states continued to use the same faulty counting methods.</p> <p>"We went into it [this second report] hoping to see improvements, hoping states would internalize responsibilities. We hoped we'd see more accurate information and results," said Hall. "But for many states that was not the case. Many states reported inaccurate information."</p> <p>In addition, several states, including Alabama, Louisiana, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia, did not report rates at all. According to the report, Louisiana offered no explanation for missing data. The District of Columbia simply reported that the "data required to calculate graduation rates [are] not immediately available."</p> <p>Alabama and Massachusetts both cited an inability to calculate graduation rates based on their current data capacity and gave a time frame by which they would be able to do so (2005-06 for Alabama, 2006-07 for Massachusetts)."</p> <p>Two states — Washington and Alaska — did respond to the Education Trust's 2003 report, and decided to make improvements in their data-reporting process that were visible this time around.</p> <p>"There were a couple of examples of states that decided to make marked improvements. We applaud these states," said Hall. "They are taking the first steps to report which students have made it through and which ones haven't. They are ahead of the game and can begin to make meaningful improvements."</p> <hd id="AN0019364026-4">Using Dropouts in All Four Grades</hd> <p>Since 2003, Alaska has changed its definition to better mirror the actual success of students. It now uses a definition that takes into consideration dropouts in all four high school grades. Consequently, Alaska reported a graduation rate of 67% for 2002-03, which is much more aligned with the Urban Institute's CPI of 64%.</p> <p>Washington state actually called the Education Trust after the 2003 report and expressed its commitment to improve reporting methods. This time around, the results were evident. The state is currently building a statewide, student-level data system, but rather than wait for this to be fully implemented, it has used current-year dropout data to more effectively estimate graduation rates. As a result, its rates changed from 79% for 2001-02 to 66% in 2002-03, far closer to the CPI of 63%.</p> <p>"Our aim is to spur action on the part of educators and policymakers to report more accurately and, with this in hand, to improve education for all students, particularly for minority populations that struggle the most in high school," said Hall. "If anyone is not living up to their responsibility of tending to all students, we'll call them on that."</p> <p>Asked why it is that numerous states beyond those of Washington and Alaska continue to be providing inaccurate information, Hall attributed this to various potential reasons. One of the challenges which is facing states is the problem of being able to keep track of which students drop out and which students transfer.</p> <p>"What we see all too often is that states, districts, and schools struggle with counting students who go missing from high schools. They don't know if t he students transferred to another school or whether they dropped out, died, or were incarcerated," said Hall. "Far too many schools are assuming that these students transferred to another school so they can wash their hands of responsibility for them."</p> <p>Hall added, "If states have a sophisticated data system that helps them track across the system, this will help them account for these students. Some states also have a policy in place where, in order for students to be transferred, there needs to be documentation."</p> <p>Some states or schools may be concerned that they'll be penalized for reporting and admitting to low graduation rates. But, Hall said that this wouldn't happen under NCLB:</p> <p>"No school, district, or state is at risk of losing federal funds. They can lose money if they don't calculate and report a rate, but they determine what percentages they have to meet in state standards and graduation rates. If they don't meet goals, they can set improvement targets," said Hall.</p> <p>"The key underpinning of NCLB had been establishing standards that apply to all students and assessing them as to whether they are meeting these standards and holding schools accountable. Standards were already in place in 1994 under the Clinton administration, but the crux was that the provisions of that law were not being implemented. NCLB is a redoubling of those efforts."</p> <hd id="AN0019364026-5">Setting Goals Lower than States Report</hd> <p>Besides states failing to provide accurate graduation rates, Hall is also disappointed in the kind of graduation rate goals states are setting. "A majority of states set a goal lower than what they are reporting. I think that, in the law, there's flexibility, and states have run with this to water down accountability," she said.</p> <p>"The majority of states have also set progress targets that are around 0.1%. And a handful of states have defined progress as not falling backwards. It's a matter of being safe."</p> <p>Looking at key Hispanic states, Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, New York, and Texas have all set graduation rates that are lower than what they are reporting, according to Hall. In addition. New Mexico is defining progress as not falling backwards; California says that improvement of 0.1% is progress; and Texas claims that, as long as the state makes progress, that's sufficient.</p> <p>"Some states had systems of accountability in place before NCLB and this has now helped them focus more on underrepresented populations," said Hall. "Other states are seeing this [NCLB] as a burden and something to get around. They could be spending time on improving results for kids."</p> <p>Some states with high Latino populations, such as Florida and New Jersey, can be commended for their work. "Florida has lower graduation rates [66% reported in 2002-03], but it is doing a better job at accurately tracking. It's a state that is honestly confronting its problems," said Hall. "New Jersey seems to have a high graduation rate and lines up well with what independent analysts are saying." (New Jersey reported 89% overall, and 80% graduation rates for Latinos.)</p> <p>Despite numerous states continuing to report inaccurate graduation numbers under NCLB, Hall is hopeful that they will ultimately take responsibility and account for all of their students. And much of any progress may be due to the very fact that outfits like the Education Trust and leaders and members of the community are paying closer attention to the numbers.</p> <hd id="AN0019364026-6">Writers Hit on Education Departments</hd> <p>"We had a lot of response to this last report, especially since high school reform has been a big issue this past year or so," said Hall. "A lot of journalists have responded to this and are calling up their local departments of education. We have also gotten responses from parents and communities.</p> <p>"A week after releasing the report," she said, "New Mexico committed to reporting more accurate data on how students are progressing through the high school system. And the National Governor's Association signed a compact to improve reporting on rates of graduation. They've agreed to have policies in place that assume students are non-graduates unless they get information on them. This places responsibility on tracking students better."</p> <p>On the federal front, the Education Trust was dissatisfied with the way the U.S. Department of Education responded to the inaccuracies of the first reports. The government said it would convene a task force to examine the results of the graduation rate reports, but "in our mind, that was not enough. We wanted them to come down on the states to respond to their numbers," said Hall.</p> <p>This time around, the federal government has committed not only to reporting information that states provide, but also to releasing independent graduate rate estimates that the Education Trust has reviewed. "They are going to attempt to get more accurate information to the public," she added.</p> <p>"I do feel hopeful. There really is an understanding of how important this issue is and the magnitude of its consequences. Educators, local parents, and community members understand the consequence of these students not graduating," said Hall. "I think there is a movement on a lot of fronts, from governors and journalists to advocates. But we need to remain vigilant. We need to continue to put sustained pressure on educators and policymakers. There's a lot of work that needs to be done."</p> <aug> <p>By Michelle Adam</p> <p></p> <p>Michelle Adam is a Contributing Editor for The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education. Condensed from The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 16 (November 7, 2005), 13-15. Published at 210 Route 4 East, Suite 310, Paramus, NJ 07652.</p> </aug> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ740989 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: States are Faking Minority Progress for No Child Left Behind – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Adam%2C+Michelle%22">Adam, Michelle</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Education+Digest%3A+Essential+Readings+Condensed+for+Quick+Review%22"><i>Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review</i></searchLink>. Jan 2006 71(5):18-23. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Prakken Publications, 832 Phoenix Dr., P.O. Box 8623, Ann Arbor, MI 48108. Tel: 734-975-2800; Fax: 734-975-2787; Web site: http://www.eddigest.com/. – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 6 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2006 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Graduation+Rate%22">Graduation Rate</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hispanic+American+Students%22">Hispanic American Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Minority+Group+Children%22">Minority Group Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22State+Agencies%22">State Agencies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Statistics%22">School Statistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Deception%22">Deception</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+Legislation%22">Federal Legislation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Compliance+%28Legal%29%22">Compliance (Legal)</searchLink> – Name: SubjectThesaurus Label: Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22No+Child+Left+Behind+Act+2001%22">No Child Left Behind Act 2001</searchLink> – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0013-127X – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: In looking at recent graduation rates reported by states, Latinos should be proud. For the 2002-03 school year, North Carolina reported a 94% graduation rate for Latinos, while New Mexico claimed an 89% rate, and Indiana, an 85% rate. Unfortunately, these numbers are not only deceptive, they are, according to the Education Trust, wrong. Under the "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) Act, states were required to report graduation rates to the U.S. Department of Education in 2003 and, most recently, in 2005. But most states, during both periods, have reported numbers that overestimate graduation rates far beyond reliable estimates provided by independent agents. This article discusses the discrepancies found by the Education Trust in the graduation rates the states have reported to them. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: ERIC – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2006 – Name: URL Label: Access URL Group: URL Data: <link linkTarget="URL" linkTerm="https://www.eddigest.com/index.php" linkWindow="_blank">http://www.eddigest.com/index.php</link> – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ740989 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ740989 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 6 StartPage: 18 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Graduation Rate Type: general – SubjectFull: Hispanic American Students Type: general – SubjectFull: Minority Group Children Type: general – SubjectFull: State Agencies Type: general – SubjectFull: School Statistics Type: general – SubjectFull: Deception Type: general – SubjectFull: Federal Legislation Type: general – SubjectFull: Compliance (Legal) Type: general – SubjectFull: No Child Left Behind Act 2001 Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: States are Faking Minority Progress for No Child Left Behind Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Adam, Michelle IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2006 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0013-127X Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 71 – Type: issue Value: 5 Titles: – TitleFull: Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
