You may think I am spending too much time discussing Central's declining test scores. One the one hand, test scores are but one measure of student achievement and it is easy to place too much emphasis on them. On the other hand, it is really all we have that allows us to compare student achievement over time and between schools and school districts. So how does Central compare to other districts of similar size and with a similar demographic profile?
The figures given are the percentage change in the number of students meeting or exceeding the state benchmarks from 2005-2006 to 2008-2009. The data can be found on the Oregon Department of Education website.
Reading
Central - declined 6%
Cascade - increased 5%
Sweet Home - declined 4%
Dallas - increased 3%
Philomath - increased 3%
North Santiam - increased 5%
Lincoln County - declined 1%
Scappoose - increased 3%
North Marion - declined 1%
Math
Central - declined 12%
Cascade - increased 2%
Sweet Home - declined 5%
Dallas - declined 2%
Philomath - declined 7%
North Santiam - increased 1%
Lincoln County - declined 2%
Scappoose - increased 1%
North Marion - no change
Of all these districts, Central has the lowest percentage of students passing the state tests and the largest drop in both reading and math. These other districts are struggling with the same economic issues and budget problems. Why are they doing better at meeting those challenges?
There are many variables that affect student achievement some of which have nothing to do with schools (family income, parental education, poverty levels, access to health care, the economy, etc.) The schools can only control what happens at school. Teachers, for example, have no control over whether students come to school, do their homework, get adequate sleep or nutrition, have supportive parents, and so on. Teachers can fail students who refuse to do their school work but they can't force them to learn. It is unfair to measure student achievement simply by their performance on standardized tests; it is even more unfair to measure a teacher's performance simply by the test scores of their students.
Nonetheless, test scores can function as the "canary in the coal mine" of education. By that measure, we are in real trouble here in Central 13J.
Throughout my time on the Board, we were told that the superintendent was "turning things around" and leading us out of "AYP hell." There was new curriculum, new programs of staff development, and more emphasis on "teaching teachers how to teach." None of which seems to be working.
I've written before about the superintendent's apparently low opinion of our community and teachers (see "The Local Yokels" below). One way of spinning the current mess is to place the blame on the "passive resistance of whiny teachers" to the well-researched, scientific reforms attempted by the superintendent. Or it could be that the reforms themselves that were unnecessary and counterproductive. I have to admit there seems to be a kind of faddishness that reigns in public education. Every few years, a new fool-proof pedagogy comes along only to be abandoned a few years later in favor of the next fad. There is no magic formula. We need well-trained teachers who are empowered to teach. Every teacher should be encouraged to identify their own strengths and to make the most of them. Trying to force everyone into the same mold never works because education is not like an assembly line.
One definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. The leadership of this district has failed. District teachers and classified staff are deeply unhappy; test scores are falling. How long will the insanity continue?
Could you please post the specific demographics and related numbers for each district that you are using in your comparison?
ReplyDeleteI for one, feel that Central's student population contains several challenging categories not present to the same extent in other districts cited.
For instance, Central and Sweet Home districts are two completely different animals, IMHO.
Thank you!
What the districts have in common is that they are all about the same size and located in small, non-urban communities. They have roughly equal percentages of students in special education. One significant difference, which you are right to point out, is the proportion of students who are ESL. Most of these districts have less than 5% of their students designated as ESL. In that regard, Central most closely matches No. Marion. Central has 19.2% of its students in ESL compared to 20.2% for No. Marion. I have not been able to track down stats on the proportion of students in poverty for each district although that is also relevant. What I find alarming is that No. Marion's test scores have held steady over the past few years while Central's have dropped. No. Marion spends about $1,400 more per student and a higher proportion of that in direct classroom and building support. Central spends a bit more on administration. Lincoln County also spends more per student ($8,176) while the others are within $300 of Central's per pupil spending of $7,192.
ReplyDeleteSmall districts are not able to achieve the economies of scale found in places like Salem-Keizer or Portland. Given our large number of English language learners it is to be expected that our test scores will be somewhat lower than average. That doesn't really explain, however, why they are dropping so much further than other districts with some of the same budget constraints and demographic characteristics.
I did find some info. on poverty rates in the district warrents for the State School Fund. 18% of Central's students are in poverty compared to 23% for No. Marion. 53% of Central's students are either ESL, in poverty, have IEPs, are pregnant or parenting, or in foster care or neglected or delinquent. The rate for No. Marion in 55%. Both districts have challenging student populations to educate.
ReplyDeletewarrant not warrent
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting fact might be in the comparison of the student contact days. In our District (Central, that is), teachers work 190 days, but elementary students are in session 168 days, middle 167 days, and high school 169 days. Plus, students have early release EVERY Monday so teachers can focus on professional development. What are the teacher contract days vs. student contact days like in the school districts you compared ours to?
ReplyDeleteI know Salem-Keizer has a 192 day teacher contract with 177 days of school for ALL students (not divided differently among grades). I also know we do not have the same resources available to us that a larger district has, but it's interesting that our teachers have 7 less student contact days in our District than in Salem-Keizer PLUS we have early release weekly and if any elementary schools in Salem have early release it's only 1 time a month.
As a teacher in our district, I appreciate how KS has dealt with both the concern for our low test scores and our percentage of students that reflect special populations. It isn't fair to put the blame on any one group but that doesn't mean that we (school personnel) shouldn't all bear some responsibility.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the guidance of a well intentioned leadership is crucial to making these necessary improvements and I for one don't see that our superintendent has demonstrated an honest, trustworthy work ethic. I hope to be wrong but given how he's spent money and his behavior towards the teachers and local school administrations, it seems he wants an autocratic culture where he can intimidate others and use his position to his benefit. This has been our situation for the last several years and I have become very disillusioned.
I was raised to respect and look up to those in a leadership position and I very much value the students who treat me with respect. Yet I also am grateful to students who feel safe enough to point out when I make mistakes and have a patient and cooperative attitude in the process. Not being able to talk to our Board Members regarding issues of concern and having our frustrations ignored and rejected is the opposite of the environment I try to create in my own classroom.
The numbers I gave for the total percentage of students in a disadvataged category (53% for Central, 55% for No. Marion) are too high. I arrived at those figures by adding up all students in one of the named categories but many students (I don't know how many) fall under more than one heading. While the proportion given is not very accurate it does give a sense of the overall profile for each district's students.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the student populations in the North Marion district vs Central? In a smaller district it is MUCH easier to track and redirect students than in a larger district.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I can tell, (and correct me if I'm wrong), No. Marion SD is about a 1/4 the size of Central SD.
That's a BIG difference. When you walk the halls of a school that the sizes in the No. Marion district suggest, you know EVERY student's name that you see. Not so in Central SD.
The point is that you cannot compare the two districts in any meaningful manner. You MUST be careful in that aspect. I have experience in BOTH types of districts. They are "apples and oranges".
In my view, Central SD is unique. What other district in the state CLOSELY matches our demographics?
No. Marion has around 2,000 students while Central has around 3,000. Smaller schools and districts do have an advantage when it comes to forging close relationships with students although they typically have fewer financial resources. I think our staff in Central 13J does a good job creating strong relationships with students. Kids know them not just as teachers but also as neighbors, parents of friends, coaches, etc. In that regard, Central may have an advantage over No. Marion whose district is composed of a number of small communities. Monmouth-Indpendence is really one town these days which creates a greater density of social interactions. I think that benefits kids. The point is not to to find and compare Central to its "perfect match" but to point out that we could be doing better. Falling test scores are a cause for concern. It's important to acknowlege that but its also important to identify our strengths and try to build on those. Overall test scores are but one indicator of how well we are doing. There are a lot of kids who have gotten a terrific education in our schools. They have gone on to success at well-regarded univerisities and in challenging careers. None of that happens by accident. They acquired the necessary knowledge and skills under the guidance of our teachers and staff. Unfortunately, those teachers and staff are unhappy with the current administration and feel discontented, disrespected, and disempowered. That's not a good situation for our kids and I think our test scores demonstrate that. The real question is "How do we turn this around?" We certainly have the capability to do so!
ReplyDelete