[NLA] 1999-2000 OVAE Report
tsticht at aznet.net
Mon Jun 10 22:22:24 EDT 2002
In his recent post, Larry Condelli said, "If the 1999-2000 report claims
to be an analysis of NRS data, it is incorrect." From this I infer that
Larry has not read the subject report or he would know what it claims
(though I have posted most of what it claims on the NLA list).
That he has not read the report is also suggested by his statement that
" One obvious clue that this an error: There are 6 educational
functioning levels each for ABE and ESL in the NRS (12 total). In the
1999-2000 report, which uses the old reporting system, there are only 4
levels for ABE and ESL (8 levels total)." However, in the subject
report only 7 levels of educational functioning are reported.
Presumably, the subject report has been prepared by the U. S. Education
Department, and not by Larry and his fellow contractors who presently
work on the NRS for the USED. If an egregious error has been made by the
ED, as Larry suggests, then it would be reasonable for him to contact
the Secretary of Education and Asst. Secretary for OVAE and tell them
that they have incorrectly called the reporting system of 1999-2000 the
National Reporting System. Though Im not sure just how this information
would be received at the ED, it might lead to a statement of
clarification on the part of ED so that the field would know for certain
what to believe about the NRS and the PY 1999-2000 report to Congress.
Meanwhile, until I see some sort of statement from the ED saying that it
was in error in its report to the Congress for PY 1999-2000, I will
continue to accept the report at its face value as a report of data
based on the NRS that existed at the time (PY 1999-2000). And no matter
what the reporting system is eventually called, the data analyses it
presents that I have worked from and reported on stay the same.
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
More information about the Nla-nifl-archive