Reports Purged From the Website of the Civil Rights Commission

[Quetzal]

Reports Purged From the Website of the Civil Rights Commission

As of 7 January 2005, the website of the US Commission on Civil Rights has been purged of 20 reports that didn't meet the approval of the agency's Republican majority.

Fortunately, the Memory Hole managed to save 19 of the 20 documents

Here is a link to the documents

http://www.thememoryhole.org/usccr/purged.htm

[teach1st]

1. Gee, I wonder why these two papers were purged?

http://www.thememoryhole.org/usccr/usccr_carolinas.htm

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Education Accountability and High-Stakes Testing in the Carolinas
Briefing Summary
February 2003


CONCLUSION

The results of recent federal and state education reform measures remain to be seen. Many education policymakers are concerned that the reform measures may not deliver on the promise of closing the achievement gap that exists between students of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. In order for No Child Left Behind and other standards-based reforms to finally close the achievement gap, our panelists concluded that the reforms should ensure that:

challenging content and performance standards are put in place so that students are engaged in real learning and are equipped with the basic skills necessary to function fully in today’s society;

curriculum is aligned with performance standards;

tests used to measure student learning accurately measure the learning of all students, including that of students with limited English proficiency and disabilities;

data on student performance are disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, income, language, and disability;

appropriate accommodations are available for students with disabilities;

appropriate remedial assistance is available to low-performing students and schools and that remediation does not become the code word for retaining students in grade;

all schools, but especially those at risk of failing or being designated as low performing, be provided highly qualified and experienced teachers and administrators; and

sufficient funding is made available to fully implement No Child Left Behind.

These issues, and others, will continue to shape the debate on education reform as the full impact of the No Child Left Behind Act is realized in the years to come. As for the discriminatory effects of high-stakes testing, some argue that testing institutionalizes the past effects of segregation and unequal funding of the public education system. It was noted that research indicates that high-stakes tests are used mostly in high-minority and low-income schools and that testing disproportionately adversely affects these students.

There appears to be general consensus that training and hiring highly qualified teachers are crucial to improving the education of America’s children. However, there are different opinions regarding the cause of the shortage of qualified teachers. Some researchers even assert that there is no shortage, only an unequal distribution of existing qualified teachers. As a result of a combination of factors, a “shortage” of qualified teachers appears to exist, especially in disadvantaged and underserved communities.

Teachers and administrators urge administrators to reduce the burden placed on teachers by decreasing student load, paperwork, and the “hoops that teachers must jump through for licensure.”<111> According to Dr. Pughsley, the superintendent of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Public Schools, more control and flexibility at the local level and less state and federal intervention are necessary.<112> He observed that the local control promised by No Child Left Behind has not materialized.

Lastly, funding will continue to be debated and litigated as reforms are implemented. The issue will move from seeking equity in funding to seeking funding sufficient to provide all students with an adequate basic education or a minimally adequate education. Funding, including the effective use of existing funds, will have to be addressed as schools are asked to provide remediation to low-performing schools and students. As noted earlier, remediation must not become a code word for grade retention and failure to graduate low-performing students. Tutoring, teacher hiring, increased teacher pay, better classroom resources, and appropriate accommodations for LEP students and students with disabilities require that funding be sufficient and that it be used effectively.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/usccr/...closing_gap.htm

Closing the Achievement Gap:

The Impact of Standards-Based Education Reform on Student Performance

Although it is common sense that children should not be promoted to the next grade if they are not ready, Heubert testified that the evidence is clear that students who are required to repeat a grade are worse off academically and socially and more likely to drop out than similarly low-performing students who are promoted to the next grade.

Heubert’s overall conclusion is that high-stakes testing has a disparate impact on the most vulnerable students, and data show that as standards get higher, the disparities get larger.

What is clear, is that most proponents and opponents of high-stakes testing agree that protective measures must be implemented before the testing, so that students are not held responsible for material they have not been taught. Certain conditions, such as quality teachers, adequate training, adult accountability, parent empowerment, and diagnostic studies are necessary for the successful implementation of high-stakes testing. Some diagnostic strategies may include testing early to identify weak student performance, providing remedial education to help students acquire the skills to pass the test, and allowing students opportunities to retake the test or different forms of the test.

In conjunction with high-stakes testing, it is also critical that teachers receive the training and support they need to help students meet the new goals, and that students are provided quality teachers, a curriculum that is aligned to the standards, and regular feedback and extra help when needed.

Data show that the quality of instructors is the most important factor...

[DrDebug]

3. This one is even more interesting

The trouble with Civil Rights and Race Equality is not the obvious descrepancy it is the collection of Race Data. So if you are not going to ask for somebody race then it is not possible to determine the racial effects in Civil Rights studies.

So let's ban the collection of Racial Data because that asking somebody about their race is not politically correct anymore. According to the report you are not allowed to ask about it in studies anymore. The real advantage is that if you don't ask, then you don't know...

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Briefing on the Consequences of Government Race Data Collection Bans on Civil Rights

May 17, 2002



Executive Summary



As part of its continuing efforts to inform itself of emerging civil rights issues, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights periodically holds briefings in conjunction with its monthly scheduled meetings. On May 17, 2002, the Commission held a briefing on “The Consequences of Government Race Data Collection Bans on Civil Rights.” The briefing was held to discuss the relevancy of race and ethnographic data collection to the development of civil rights, and the effects that proposed bans on the collection of such data would have on the enforcement and assessment of the nation’s civil rights laws. Spurred in part by the ballot initiative in California seeking to approve a state constitutional amendment banning the collection of race data by government and public entities, the Commission was concerned, according to Chairperson Mary Frances Berry, with the practical research, enforcement, and policymaking consequences of such bans.

The Commission invited five panel members who had recognized expertise or experience in various aspects of the uses of race and ethnographic data in the civil rights enforcement and policymaking context. The Commission carefully selected the panelists to ensure that it was informed about the effects of racial data bans over a broad range of disciplines and services, as well as to ensure that it was exposed to a broad spectrum of views on the issue. The panel members testified generally on the impact that racial data bans would have on research and policymaking, such as in the areas of education and health care; civil rights law enforcement; and individual privacy and government coercion concerns.

After carefully considering the testimony of the panelists and examining proffered evidence, the Commission determined that bans prohibiting government or public entities from collecting racial data would be ill-advised. Though coming from different perspectives, all the Commissioners agreed that a ban on the collection of racial data would be detrimental to the study and safeguarding of civil rights.

(...)

CONCLUSION

At the conclusion of the briefing, the Commission considered the testimony and evidence proffered and reached a general consensus opposing bans on racial data collection. Although the Commissioners approached the analysis of racial data bans from different viewpoints and perspectives, all were concerned about the detrimental consequences of racial data bans and opposed the California initiative.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/usccr/usccr_race_data_collection_summ.htm

So let's delete the report as well.

[MichiganVote]

2. The reports deny the possibility of the educational rapture due

by 2014.