I've written in several threads about my dismay when my child's elementary school dropped all Science and History curriculum, because teachers and the school were being evaluated primarily (perhaps exclusively) on their students' scores on standardized math and reading tests. In the "What's Coming Down the Pike Next" discussion thread, I wrote: > "I've heard reports (yes, anecdotal, hopefully exaggerated) of schools where teachers were urged to focus mostly on specific students whose scores were "just below" a benchmark, since it would be easier to push them up -- at the expense of ignoring students who were further behind." < http://forums.atozteacherstuff.com/showthread.php?t=130739 I was actually surprised at the immediate, honest responses from several teachers: > "This was common practice at the middle school where I student taught." < > "This was the practice of my former district as well. We called them "bubble" students, and they were even isolated in to specific classes! When the admin looked at projected scores for the upcoming year, they would focus on these "bubble" kids. We knew exactly who they were and spent a great deal of time and money on educating them..." < > "Oh yes, They certainly did this in the district where I was an intern teacher. Also, we spend copious amounts of time determining which students fell into the most categories, because a poor, biracial, english language learner was "worth" four students toward the AYP. We also spent a ridiculous amount of time matching the standards the students did the poorest on with the standards that garnished to most weight on the year end test. That was how we were to decide what to teach during the re-teach days. It was all a gigantic waste of time and did NOTHING to improve education for the students." < Isn't anyone outraged about this? We're not talking about focusing on "remediation" for all students who are "not yet proficient," but instead, disproportionately allocating resources to "bubble children" whose test scores appear to be the "easiest to bump to the next level," denying comparable services to students whose proficiency level is not "just below" the next level. Is there any chance at all that this practice is legal?