Though thin on the details of the waivers, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan says too many schools will not make adequate
yearly progress measurements this year, and the law needs to be overhauled.
For example, we strongly support doing away with the adequate
yearly progress measurement, and agree that requiring states to adopt unreliable test - based principal and teacher evaluation will only lead to an overemphasis on standardized tests and the further narrowing of the curriculum.
Not exact matches
What No Child Left Behind did was mandate the
yearly measurement of
progress toward meeting those standards and then to report the results publicly.
A look at a forthcoming study by researchers at Western Michigan University and the National Education Policy Center shows that only a third of K12's schools achieved adequate
yearly progress, the
measurement mandated by federal No Child Left Behind legislation.
That's why it's important to fix how we are measuring Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP)-- so that schools are not unfairly punished by
measurements that do not take account, for instance, where a particular student started at the beginning of the year and whether the school moved students closer to proficiency targets.
States start by defining adequate
yearly progress — the
measurements of academic improvement a school must achieve to ensure that, at the end of 12 years, every student graduating will have a mastery of the basics.
The U.S. Department of Education has blocked an attempt by Pennsylvania's Education Secretary to evaluate state charter schools using a more lenient method for calculating AYP, the «adequate
yearly progress»
measurement that determines whether schools have met the minimum academic standards under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).
NCLB's
measurement of proficiency, or «Adequate
Yearly Progress» (AYP), has largely been discredited due to its inability to measure growth and account for increasing performance targets.