|
|
|  | |||
|
|
|
| |||
Washington Legislative ForumOn September 21-22, 2005, in Washington, DC, participants gathered for the first Washington Legislative Forum, an event focused on the public policy actions in Washington impacting the educational industry and how to best positively influence these actions. Read below for an article about the forum. Whitehurst, Others Discuss SBR at Legislative ForumSeptember's Association of Educational Publishers Washington Legislative Forum featured Russ Whitehurst of the U.S. Dept. of Education, Rep. Mike Castle (R - DE), Gerald Sroufe of the American Education Research Association, and Senatorial Staffer Roberto Rodriguez. Each of their presentations indicated that there is the potential for greater flexibility in the scientifically based research provision of the No Child Left Behind Act. The forum, which was attended by about 25 members and friends of AEP, provided background and future steps in their fight to modify the scientifically based research (SBR) provision of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), which favors the use of educational materials that have been proven effective through randomized trials, the so-called gold standard of research. Rep. Mike Castle (R - DE), a key AEP supporter on other legislative issues, expressed admiration for both the teachers and administration officials charged with carrying out NCLB, and was cautiously optimistic about the future of the scientifically based research provision of the Act. "It takes a while to do research," he said. "The bottom line benefits have not been realized yet." Still, some unintended consequences of the SBR provision have taken place, including some school districts refusing to purchase materials that have not been subjected to gold-standard testing. Supplemental publishers, whose products often do not warrant trials that can last for years and cost millions of dollars, have supported the push for SBR, but voiced concern over the one-size-fits-all approach. In the past, administration officials have been firm in their endorsement of randomized clinical trials. But at the forum, Institute of Education Sciences Director Russ Whitehurst said that there is a place for other types of research. While confirming that his What Works Clearinghouse focuses on randomized clinical trials, Whitehurst said that there were other types of studies that the clearinghouse will consider when listing educational materials backed by SBR. "One other design we admit into the What Works Clearinghouse is something called a quasi-experiment," Whitehurst said, referring to a more flexible version of a controlled experiment in which the main difference is the absence of random assignment. This was not a departure from the text of the No Child Left Behind Act, which says that materials can be evaluated using "experimental or quasi-experimental designs...with a preference for random-assignment experiments..." But Whitehurst's statement should serve as a guide for states and local education agencies that have been hesitant to purchase products that were tested using methods other than random assignment experiments. That kind of flexibility represents what legislators envisioned when NCLB was enacted, according to Roberto Rodriguez, senior education advisor to Sen. Edward Kennedy (D - MA). "There were some concerns that our members raised at senate committee hearings and we began to get concerned about how this standard of scientifically based research was going to be implemented and interpreted," Rodriguez said. "We received certain reports from state and local communities that said, 'We've been using this with our students for three or four years and we know that it works, but now that we have this new standard for scientifically based research, we're concerned because this instructional approach...doesn't have randomized clinical trials behind it." "Our response was, 'Keep using it, because we know that the standard in the [No Child Left Behind] law requires peer review.'" Rodriguez said that the senate will begin delving into various issues concerning NCLB in 2006, in preparation for the law's scheduled reauthorization in 2007. "I anticipate that scientifically based research is going to be one issue we're going to take a close look at," he said. Gerald Sroufe, senior advisor for the American Education Research Association, outlined several steps that AEP should take in trying to modify what happens with the SBR provision of NCLB. Among them was the suggestion that AEP emphasize the authoritative definitions of SBR other than those restricted to randomized controlled trials. He also suggested that AEP continue to provide a rich theoretical basis for the applications and benefits of [supplemental] materials, and champion multiple methods to presenting evidence of effectiveness. Sroufe said that although research is the best way to determine whether something works, research is not the only answer. "Policies are more powerful than any research," Sroufe said. "We know a lot about our children's reading and how they learn. But if you don't have a policy change it doesn't make a difference." | |||||
|
© 2008 The Association of Educational Publishers | |||||
