Schools fare better this year, tests show.

Byline: Anne Williams The Register-Guard

Despite considerable hand-wringing last spring about the potential impact of a hasty switch from computerized to paper-and-pencil assessments, Oregon schools fared better than in previous years on one critical academic measure.

Nearly three of every four schools made "adequate yearly progress" under the federal No Child Left Behind law, according to a preliminary report released Thursday by the state Department of Education.

The 74 percent success rate - which may rise or fall a bit when the final report comes out in October - is the highest in the five years of federal ratings. In 2005-06, 70 percent of schools passed muster, up slightly from the previous year.

Among local schools, there were few changes in ratings. Slightly fewer middle and high schools - 28 vs. 33 - missed the mark this year compared with last year, and no elementary school did so.

Three Eugene-Springfield area middle schools - Kelly and Cascade in Eugene and Fern Ridge in Elmira - made adequate yearly progress, or AYP, for the first time. For Cascade, in the Bethel district, it was especially sweet. The school, where 74 percent of students qualify for the federal subsidized meals program, is one of just a handful of local schools ever to earn a "low" rating through the state's own accountability system. (The rating came in 2000, and was due more to low attendance than student achievement).

"They're pretty excited about it, but it probably hasn't sunk in," Principal Glen Martz said of his staff, who reported back to school this week. "I think it's beginning to. (Assistant Principal) Chris (Kibbee) and I have had time to reflect on it, and it's huge for us."

Students have made big gains in reading and math, he said, due in part to a schoolwide focus on reading and the launch of extra targeted reading and math classes that took the place of some electives. Martz noted that Cascade's special education students did especially well in math compared with their district counterparts.

The law requires the department to rate schools each year based on whether they hit targets for academic performance on state reading and math tests, test participation rates, attendance and, for high schools, graduation rates. For the past three years, the required passing rate has been 49 percent for math and 50 percent for reading; that bumps up 10 percentage points next year, and the law calls for 100 percent success by 2014.

Progress must be measured and reported by subgroups: students from six major racial/ethnic groupings, as well as students who are disadvantaged, those with disabilities and those learning English as a second language.

To make AYP, schools must hit targets in every category - a stipulation that makes it most difficult for larger, more diverse schools and infuriates many educators, particularly when it comes to students with disabilities. The law grants some leeway for students with the most severe cognitive delays, but holds the majority of students with learning disabilities to grade-level standards.

At Springfield Middle School, students with disabilities passed the reading test at a rate of 49.69 percent, said Rob Hess, the Springfield district's student achievement coordinator - just below the 50 percent target. That's the only reason it missed AYP, he said.

Missing AYP is more significant for Springfield Middle School than it is for most other area middle schools because it receives federal Title I financial aid. Only schools receiving those funds, aimed at boosting achievement at high-poverty schools, are subject to the consequences outlined in the No Child Left Behind law.

After consecutive years on the "needs improvement" list, schools face sanctions such as providing transportation for children to attend other schools, retooling the curriculum or replacing staff.

Most districts channel their Title I funds to elementary schools, but when a school's subsidized meals rate exceeds 75 percent - as is the case with Springfield Middle - it must receive some of those dollars.

While Hess said he appreciates that No Child Left Behind has drawn attention to the achievement of subgroups, he doesn't like the way it penalizes only high-poverty schools. Nor does he like the fact that the scores of students who have been in a school less than half the year are not counted in AYP calculations.

"Those kids are learning in our schools, they're getting good results and we can't count them," he said.

Many educators questioned whether this year's ratings could legitimately be compared with previous years.

Last spring, after many students had started taking state exams by computer, a contract disagreement between the state and its testing system vendor led to an abrupt halt in testing. The two parties severed ties, forcing the state to use paper exams and requiring students to use an unfamiliar format. With the computer tests, students could take the exam up to three times, but with paper, they had one shot.

Some wondered what the effect would be of scoring changes that made it slightly more difficult to pass the elementary exams but slightly easier to do so on the middle and high school exams. In addition, for the first time this year, the state counted exams given to students in grades 4, 6 and 7 - not just 3, 5, 8 and 10, as had been the case. It also dropped the writing test from the calculations, using only reading and math.

Tony Alpert, the state's director of assessment and accountability, said his department believes that this year's ratings and school-by-school test scores, to be released next month, are indeed valid for comparison, despite the changes. He noted that an objective, peer-reviewed analysis found the computer and paper tests comparable.

"I think given that almost 90 percent, about 87 percent, of schools stayed the same, I think that's a strong indication of stability and consistency," he said.

No Child Left Behind is due for reauthorization this year, although there's speculation that it won't happen until after the 2008 presidential election, said Pat Burk, the state Department of Education's chief policy adviser.

A draft released this week by the House Education and Labor Committee included some promising changes, he said, including an option for states to use a "growth model" that would measure academic progress by tracking individual students.