Page One

After 20 years in Berkeley schools, Kay Sims, special education teacher at Washington Elementary, has mastered the gentlest techniques for making children behave.  

“What does cooperation sound like?” she asks her class of eleven students neatly assembled on the classroom rug. “Cooperation sounds like quiet with one person talking,” she says slowly turning to a boy speaking out of turn. 

Sims’ classroom is sunny and inviting, its walls covered with posters and student projects.  

Her students—grades three through five—all perform at least two grades below their grade level. Instruction time can be trying for both students and teacher. During math class, a fifth grader insisted four times four equaled 18; his classmate, a fourth grader, asked the sum of five and 15, answered 25. 

Because special education students come from across the district to participate in the Washington program, the school has almost no shot at satisfying the No Child Left Behind law. Last year all 13 students opted out of standardized tests, causing participation levels to plummet below the 95 percent required by the federal law. Had the students taken the test, they risked dropping test scores below federally mandated proficiency levels. 

“We’re in a bind,” Kay said. If they take the test it pulls the school down. “If they don’t take it, it pulls the school down.” 

All of Kay’s students have gone through special education assessments: Though one is classified as mildly retarded, the rest have been diagnosed only with learning disabilities or behavior disorders. They have been placed in special education, not because of low I.Q.’s, but poor performance. 

Thumbing through the fifth grade standardized math test, Kay settled on a question that asks students to perform a series of multiplications and divisions. “There’s no way my kids could do this. This may be fine for some fifth graders, but most of my kids are still learning addition and subtraction.” 

Dave Griffith of the National Association of State Boards of Education said the special education requirements included in the 2002 law have caused good schools to be labeled failing. 

“We’re seeing this in a lot of different places,” he said. “You look at the law and it’s obvious they didn’t think this all the way through. There needs to be more wiggle room for schools who have these programs.” 

On the whole, Washington is a solid school. Since 2000 it has improved state test scores by 40 basis points from 689 to 729, though for two years its socio-economic subgroup failed to reach proficiency levels. Last year two Washington teachers won Prudential Teaching Awards for excellence, 

out of five awards given out in the district. 

In 2003 Washington students surpassed federal standards, with 31.9 percent achieving proficiency in English and 44.4 percent in math. But under No Child Left Behind, participation counts as well. If 95 percent of the entire student body or students from any statistically significant ethnic subgroup—African Americans, Latinos, etc—fail to take the test, the school fails. 

Under such stringent rules, it’s easy for a good school to flunk, but for Washington, failure is all but guaranteed. Since Washington has 130 African American students, according to district records, and all 13 students in the special education class last year were African American, the school could not have reached the 95 percent threshold.  

“We failed before our kids even took the test,” said Washington Principal Rita Kimball.  

Last year Washington didn’t fail solely based on its special day class. Participation rates for Latinos, English Learners and socio-disadvantaged students all barely missed the 95 percent threshold. 

But Washington Magnate School Coordinator Bruce Simon said getting an extra couple of those students to take the test wasn’t the issue: “Under African Americans we had 13 kids not take the test. That’s the special day class.” 

Janet Canning, a special education consultant with the California Department of Education, defended the federal guidelines, saying it was implemented to protect “at risk students” by pressuring schools to offer them highly qualified teachers and rigorous curriculum. 

In Berkeley, however, the practice has always been not to test students so far below grade level. 

“Our feeling is it’s immoral to give them the test just to meet a standard dictated by the federal government,” Simon said. 

But with the factors in place for a repeat of last year, Berkeley Special Education Coordinator Alan Joy said the district will now encourage parents of special education students to let their children take the tests, despite repeated concerns from parents that the tests are too stressful on the students. 

Federal rules allow special education students some leeway. Though they must take the test for their grade, they can get extra time or the opportunity to work through problems with an instructor. 

“The content hasn’t been taught to them,” Kay said. “I can break it down and adapt it to their level, but that’s not the test. It’s not a teaching tool.” 

?