Great Website

Posted by cloetz on Nov 20, 2007

I attended a conference recently where the following website:   http://www.studentprogress.org  was referenced.  I know many of you may be familiar with this website but some of the things I like best include:

• Home tab:  A great review for understanding “What is progress monitoring?”  This would be recommended  to review in order to be knowledgeable about an integral part of what makes up a holistic RtI process.  


• Web Library tab:  One of my favorite tabs!  This tab has impressive array of articles and research, online training, FAQs and archived newsletters.


• Tools tab:  rates and compares many reading intervention programs…VERY interesting when positioning and understanding RtI products.


• Summer Institute tab:  this tab has ALL the ppts. and hand outs around RtI and progress monitoring – WOW.

Every tab has merit – I have spent more than my fair share of time “surfing” this site.  It has a logical layout, is easy to navigate, and a wealth of information.  Enjoy!

The Measurement Gap

Posted by Machele Stefhon on Nov 20, 2007

A recent Education Weekly Commentary by Jennifer Booher-Jennings, Closing the Measurement Gap- Why ‘risk adjustment’ could work for education is stirring up discussions around the age old adage of comparing “apples to apples” with accountability measures.

The candid comparison Booher-Jennings references around hospital accountability adjustments that are not considered in our schools caught my eye. This key concept is the consideration of “risk adjustments.” Booher-Jennings identifies that in medicine, the government recognizes that hospitals should not be blamed for patients’ characteristics for which they do not have control; therefore, “risk adjustments” are built in so that measurements are comparing “apples to apples.” What a novel concept!  Throughout the article Booher-Jennings champions for the consideration of “risk adjustments” for schools who serve a higher number of students with at-risk factors outside of their control such as poverty, disability, mobility, and language. Her premise for this argument is to change the national conversation from being one around the problematic and systemic approach of determining AYP accountability to one of a radically different nature. Booher-Jennings maintains that the national discussion needs to be one around about what investments (financial and otherwise) are being made in order to give all children (disadvantaged, At-Risk, SPED) a fair shot at truly accessing the curriculum.  Would equalizing schools using “risk adjustment” have a greater impact on closing the achievement gap? I am not sure.  I welcome your thoughts!