Education Week - February 10, 2016 - (Page 14)

GOVERNMENT & POLITICS Views Clash On K-12 Law Rulemaking Next steps on ESSA mulled SOUNDING OFF The U.S. Department of Education got more than 350 comments on how it should regulate under the Every Student Succeeds Act. Some highlights: By Alyson Klein & Andrew Ujfiusa Everyone from governors and state lawmakers down to advocates and parents has an opinion on how the U.S. Department of Education should go about turning the sometimes-murky verbiage of the Every Student Succeeds Act into actual federal regulations-and more than 350 of them laid those opinions out during a quickturnaround written comment period. An Education Week review of selected comments found many respondents offering detailed-and often contradictory-advice when it comes to the law's provisions on accountability, test participation, assessment, teacher qualifications, and more. Some comments filed over the several-week period ending Jan. 21 were broad. For example, the California Federation of Teachers, the National Governors' Association, and others asked for a light federal touch in the still-tobe-written regulations. Others dove deep into the policy weeds. For instance, Disability Rights Arkansas, an advocacy group, asked the department to make sure states use research to back up their choice of 'n-size'-the term for the minimum number of students a school must have from a particular subgroup in order for that group to be considered for accountability purposes. " Regulation, guidance, and technical assistance must ensure that lowincome communities, communities of color, the disability community, immigrant communities, and tribes are included in decisionmaking." -The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, along with about three dozen civil rights, disability, and education redesign organizations " Parents, communities, and California educators are not interested in having highly prescriptive rules and mandates around pre-K-12 education from the federal government. This is especially true when it comes to requiring the use of standardized tests in making highstakes decisions in both school and educator accountability." " Recognizing each state's readiness to implement ESSA varies, the federal government should allow a flexible timeline to allow for early implementation or provide additional time for states to make necessary changes to state policy and improvements to state infrastructure." -National Governors Association " With regard to state accountability systems, the department should seek input from states and local school districts and provide explicit nonbinding guidance and best practices that can help states and school districts identify, set, and use a variety of student success indicators." -National School Boards Association -California Federation of Teachers SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education Still others dealt with practical questions. The Mississippi Department of Education, for example, asked for a list of which federal programs will continue under ESSA, so that the state can figure out its own staffing. In general, educators and the organizations that advocate for them favor a regulatory philosophy that puts a premium on local decisionmaking, while civil rights organizations and advocates for particular groups of students are pressing for a more stringent approach to accountability to maintain equity. It's clear that ESSA gives states much greater control over which low-performing schools to identify for improvement than they had under its predecessor, the No Child Left Behind Act. But there are questions about how far that new leeway goes. For instance, the law requires states to incorporate into their school-ratings systems both academic factors-such as test scores and graduation rates-and factors that get at school quality, such as teacher engage- ment and access to advanced coursework. And academic factors need to have "much greater" weight as a group than non-academic factors. It's unclear though, if the department will decide to provide more specifics on what "much greater" means. Guidance Sought Some commenters hope for federal guidance on the issue, including Mitchell D. Chester, the commissioner of education in Massachusetts. Without any sort of rules of the road, the interpretation of "much greater weight" is likely to vary widely, he reasoned-one state might think it means that academic factors need to account for 60 percent of a school's score, while another might decide it means 95 percent. But AASA, the School Superintendents Association, wants federal officials to give states as much leeway as possible in this area. One issue that came up over and over: testing participation rates. ESSA keeps in place the NCLB law's requirement that schools test 95 percent of students, both for the whole school and for subgroups of students. Under the NCLB law, schools that fell short of that threshold were considered automatic failures. Under ESSA, however, states get to decide what happens to those schools. The New York State Boards of Education, like other groups, finds that confusing. "This internal inconsistency only encourages parental refusal and places school districts throughout the country in an untenable position," the boards wrote. The NYSBE urged the department to make it crystal clear that states and districts can still pass laws that allow parents to opt out without penalties-and that school districts won't be punished if parents choose to exempt their kids from testing. 'Proficiency' Bars on State Tests Are Seen Heading Upward By Catherine Gewertz States are raising their expectations for student "proficiency" on tests of math and English/language arts, and making their tests tougher to pass. That's the conclusion of two new studies released late last month. They found that states have been adopting more difficult academic standards-in many cases, the common core-and then choosing or designing assessments that are more challenging as well. States are setting cut scores on those tests that produce much lower rates of proficiency than did their previous tests. One study was published Jan. 27 in the journal Education Next. The other was released Jan. 28 by Achieve and the Collaborative for Student Success, two groups that push for higher standards. Both reports mirror the trend reported by Education Week last fall, when it published its national database of states' 2014-15 test scores alongside their previous year's test scores. That database shows big drops in proficiency rates in many states as they adopted tests aligned to new academic standards. The Education Next study found that since 2011, 45 states have raised the performance levels for proficiency. Thirty-six of the 45 did so within just the last two years. The report is the seventh in a series that examines states' proficiency rates over the past decade. The newest analysis, by researchers from Harvard University's Program on Education Policy and Governance, compares states' test scores from 2014-15 with the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, in grades 4 and 8. It assigns each state a letter grade to reflect how closely its proficiency rates mirror those on NAEP, which is widely considered the gold standard in academic assessment. Twenty-four states earned A's overall for closely reflecting NAEP's definition of proficiency in 2015. In a 2011 version of the EdNext study, only three states earned A's. In the 2005 version, only six states did. Eighteen states' ratings jumped by two letter grades or more since 2013. "In short," writes researcher Paul E. Peterson, with co-authors Samuel Barrows and Thomas Gift, "standards have suddenly skyrocketed." The trend is "a hopeful sign that proficiency standards have moved in the right direction. If student perfor- 14 | EDUCATION WEEK | February 10, 2016 | www.edweek.org mance shifts upward in tandem, it will signal a long-awaited enhancement in the quality of American schools," they write. Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia got particularly low marks-C's and D's in 4th and 8th grade reading and math-for continuing to produce high proficiency rates on their tests, in contrast to NAEP's findings. Sixteen states got A's in both subjects and at both grade levels. Closing the 'Honesty Gap' The report by Achieve concluded that more than half the states have made their tests harder to pass, bringing proficiency rates more in line with NAEP. That means that proficiency rates in many states have dropped from the 70 percent and 80 percent ranges into the 20s and 30s. For some activists, that's a sign that education is being distorted by meaningless ways of gauging student learning. For others, the drop in proficiency rates paints a more honest picture of how well schools are serving students. Achieve is in that latter camp, and welcomed a narrowing of what it calls "the honesty gap" between what state tests have reported and what the NAEP shows. The Achieve report is an update of its work last May, when it reported that, in more than half the states, the proportion of students scoring proficient on 2013-14 state tests was 30 points higher than it was for the 2013 NAEP. The new report compares proficiency rates on state tests in 2014-15 to those on the fall 2015 NAEP in 4th grade reading and 8th grade math. Its study found that 26 states narrowed those gaps by 10 percentage points or more in either 4th grade reading or 8th grade math. Sixteen states erased, or nearly erased, the gaps between their own proficiency rates and those on NAEP in one or both subjects by narrowing the gaps to 5 percentage points or less. Three states-Massachusetts, New York, and Utah-earned praise for having NAEP-like expectations in both subjects. New York's expectations are even higher than NAEP's: Proficiency rates on its 4th grade reading and 8th grade math tests are 3 percentage points to 10 percentage points lower than those rates on the NAEP, Achieve reports. The report calls out four states with particularly big gaps between their definition of proficiency and the NAEP's: Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma, and Virginia. Texas was the biggest offender, with gaps of 40-plus points between its own proficiency rates and those on the NAEP. (Texas officials did not return a call seeking comment by deadline.) Since 2011-12, Texas has been planning to phase in higher cut scores on its state tests, but delayed that move until 2015-16. Georgia is a state that has drawn praise for raising its proficiency standards. In 2014-15, it switched to tests that required students to explain their thinking rather than answer only multiple-choice questions. Proficiency rates dropped from the 90s into the 30s and 40s, close to the state's NAEP proficiency rates. "I used to refer to Georgia as the land of proficiency: Come to Georgia and you, too, will be proficient," joked Melissa Fincher, Georgia's assessment chief, referring to the old test's high proficiency rates. "But really, we needed to make a change. It was time to recalibrate our expectations and be very thoughtful about what we wanted our students to achieve." Visit the CURRICULUM MATTERS blog, which tracks news and trends on this issue. www.edweek.org/blogs http://www.edweek.org/blogs http://www.edweek.org

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - February 10, 2016

Education Week - February 10, 2016
Federal Trade Regulators Target Brain-Training Product Claims
In States Hungry for Teachers, Policy Menu Expands
PARCC Scores Lower On Computer Exams
Equipping Parents on Spec. Ed.
Contents
News in Brief
Report Roundup
In Chicago, Schools’ Financial Crisis Deepens Divisions
Advocates’ Report Hits States For Overtesting, Other Policies
Blogs of the Week
Digital Directions: Partnership Boosts Data Privacy
Kindergarten: Less Play, More Academics (infographic
‘Proficiency’ Bars on State Tests Are Seen Heading Upward
Views Clash On K-12 Law Rulemaking
Blogs of the Week
Ed. Dept. CIO Grilled By Oversight Panel
State of the States
America’s ‘Edu-Masochism’
I’m Tired of ‘Grit’
Why Small Steps Are Better for Small Schools
Letters
TopSchoolJobs Recruitment Marketplace
In Low-Income Schools, Teachers Need Guidance

Education Week - February 10, 2016

http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12112019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12042019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11272019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11132019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11062019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10302019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10232019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10162019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10092019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10022019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09252019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09182019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09112019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09042019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08282019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08212019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07172019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06192019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06122019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06032019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05152019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05082019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05012019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04242019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04172019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04102019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04032019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03202019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03132019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03062019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02272019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02202019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02132019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02062019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01232019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01162019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01092019
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12122018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12052018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11282018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11142018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11072018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10312018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10242018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10172018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10102018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10032018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09262018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09192018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09122018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09052018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08292018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08222018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07182018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06202018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06132018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06062018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05302018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05232018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05162018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05092018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05022018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04252018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04182018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04112018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04042018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03212018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03072018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_03072018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02282018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02212018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02142018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02072018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01242018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01172018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01102018
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12132017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11292017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11152017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11082017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11012017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10252017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10182017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10112017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10042017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09272017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09202017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09132017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09062017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08302017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08232017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07192017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06212017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06142017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06072017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05312017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05242017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05172017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05102017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04262017specialreport
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04262017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04192017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04052017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03292017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03222017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03082017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03012017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02222017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02152017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02082017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01252017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01252017specialreport
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01182017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01042017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12142016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12142016v2
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11302016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11162016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11092016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11022016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10262016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10192016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10122016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10052016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09282016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09212016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09142016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09072016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08312016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08242016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08032016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08032016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07202016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01112017
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06082016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/tc_06092016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dc_06022016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06012016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05182016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05112016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_05112016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04272016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04202016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04132016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03302016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_03302016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03232016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03162016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03092016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02242016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_02242016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02172016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02102016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01272016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_01272016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01202016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_01132016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01132016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/qc_01072016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01062016
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12092015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12022015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_11112015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11112015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11042015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10282015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10212015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_10212015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10142015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10072015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09302015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_09302015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09232015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09162015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09092015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08262015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08192015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08052015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07082015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06102015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/tc_06112015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dc_06042015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06032015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05202015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_05132015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05132015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05062015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04222015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_04152015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04152015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04012015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03252015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_03182015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03182015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03042015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02252015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_02252015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_02182015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02182015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02042015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01282015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01212015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_01212015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01142015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/qc_01082015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01072015
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12102014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12032014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11122014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_11122014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11052014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10292014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10222014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_10222014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10152014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10082014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_10012014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10012014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09242014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09172014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09102014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08272014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08202014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_08202014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08062014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07092014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06112014_v2
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06112014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dc_06052014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06042014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05212014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05142014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05072014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_04232014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04232014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04162014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04022014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03262014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/tc_20140313
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03122014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_03052014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03052014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02262014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_02192014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02192014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01292014_v2
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02052014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01292014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01222014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01152014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/qc_01092014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01082014
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12112013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12042013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11132013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11062013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_10302013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10302013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10232013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10162013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10092013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_10022013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10022013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09252013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09182013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09112013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08282013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_08212013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08212013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08072013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_07102013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06122013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dc_06062013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_06052013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_05222013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05222013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05152013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_05082013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_04242013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04242013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04172013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_04032013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03272013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03132013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/tc_20130314
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_03062013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02272013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_02202013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02202013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_02062013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_02062013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01302013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01232013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01162013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/qc_01102013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_01092013
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12122012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_12052012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_11142012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11142012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_11072012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10312012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_10242012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10242012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10172012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10102012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_10032012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09262012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09192012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_09122012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08292012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_08222012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_08222012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_20120829
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_sr_08292012
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_20120822_v2
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_20120822
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/ew_test
http://ew.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/diplomascount_2012issue34
http://www.nxtbookMEDIA.com