Comments on: Imperfect list of ‘worst’ schools http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/ Analysis, opinion and ruminations on California education policy Wed, 30 May 2012 07:31:37 +0200 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: CarolineSF http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7140 CarolineSF Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:16:33 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7140 I learned (by asking a school board member) that small schools are not included on the hit list. That's why the persistently lowest-performing high school in my district, San Francisco Unified, isn't listed, and higher-achieving schools are. It also meant that many low-performing charter schools aren't on the list, because they tend to be small. I learned (by asking a school board member) that small schools are not included on the hit list. That’s why the persistently lowest-performing high school in my district, San Francisco Unified, isn’t listed, and higher-achieving schools are. It also meant that many low-performing charter schools aren’t on the list, because they tend to be small.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Eric Larsen http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7130 Eric Larsen Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:24:12 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7130 Great post as always, John. Thanks! Great post as always, John. Thanks!

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Doug McRae http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7063 Doug McRae Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:30:28 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7063 Caroline and John are both correct that using another metric to check on the validity of the statutory-based metric used to construct the "persistently low-achieving schools" list released by CA yesterday is a reasonable thing to do. One of the standard ways to check the validity of educational tests is to use another test intended to measure the same thing to establish validity -- it is called "concurrent" validity and has been widely accepted as a good way to check validity since tests were introduced to schools 80 years ago. Using API data such as Deciles to check the validity or credibility of the method used to construct the "persistently low-achieving schools" list has solid educational measurement justification. Having schools in API Deciles 3-4-5-6 on a lowest 5 percent list constructed using other metrics just doesn't pass the sniff test . . . . . Doug McRae, Retired Test Publisher, Monterey Caroline and John are both correct that using another metric to check on the validity of the statutory-based metric used to construct the “persistently low-achieving schools” list released by CA yesterday is a reasonable thing to do. One of the standard ways to check the validity of educational tests is to use another test intended to measure the same thing to establish validity — it is called “concurrent” validity and has been widely accepted as a good way to check validity since tests were introduced to schools 80 years ago. Using API data such as Deciles to check the validity or credibility of the method used to construct the “persistently low-achieving schools” list has solid educational measurement justification. Having schools in API Deciles 3-4-5-6 on a lowest 5 percent list constructed using other metrics just doesn’t pass the sniff test . . . . . Doug McRae, Retired Test Publisher, Monterey

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: CarolineSF http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7050 CarolineSF Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:51:13 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7050 It's interesting, though, because when you're familiar with the schools in the district, you can see how off-base these lists can be. For example, one of the SFUSD schools (Phillip and Sala Burton High School) on the list is ALREADY the focus of a special project (New Day for Learning, funded by the Mott Foundation) aimed at replicating features of the renowned Harlem Children's Zone there -- providing a wide set of social services and support to the students and their families. So are they required to tear the school apart despite -- and undermining -- the work that's already going on? It’s interesting, though, because when you’re familiar with the schools in the district, you can see how off-base these lists can be. For example, one of the SFUSD schools (Phillip and Sala Burton High School) on the list is ALREADY the focus of a special project (New Day for Learning, funded by the Mott Foundation) aimed at replicating features of the renowned Harlem Children’s Zone there — providing a wide set of social services and support to the students and their families. So are they required to tear the school apart despite — and undermining — the work that’s already going on?

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Suz http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7048 Suz Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:32:38 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7048 Gah! One would think with our redundant layers of education leadership (SPI, SBE, CDE) that new legislation would take into account things many of us saw looming. Flawed bills pass and unintended consequences have real consequences for kids. Gah! One would think with our redundant layers of education leadership (SPI, SBE, CDE) that new legislation would take into account things many of us saw looming. Flawed bills pass and unintended consequences have real consequences for kids.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Robert http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7040 Robert Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:37:58 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7040 So do the charter schools that made the list have to convert to public schools? So do the charter schools that made the list have to convert to public schools?

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: John Fensterwald http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7037 John Fensterwald Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:37:24 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7037 Just to be clear, Caroline. The state used a different measure than the API to come up with its list: the percentage of proficiency on the CSTs in English language arts and math, so there would not be a direct correlation with API. However, the Legislature then ordered schools with an API growth of 50 points in five years to be pulled from the list. That's a weak measure of progress and created some of the problems. However, you are right that once you see schools in the second and third decile, with relatively high API scores, on the list, you can safely bet that they aren't in the lowest 5 percent and probably shouldn't be on the list. Just to be clear, Caroline. The state used a different measure than the API to come up with its list: the percentage of proficiency on the CSTs in English language arts and math, so there would not be a direct correlation with API. However, the Legislature then ordered schools with an API growth of 50 points in five years to be pulled from the list. That’s a weak measure of progress and created some of the problems. However, you are right that once you see schools in the second and third decile, with relatively high API scores, on the list, you can safely bet that they aren’t in the lowest 5 percent and probably shouldn’t be on the list.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: CarolineSF http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7036 CarolineSF Tue, 09 Mar 2010 16:40:24 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7036 It's true that this list is erroneous. Just to check, I sorted SFUSD high schools by API, and the consistently lowest-API school (and dropping year by year), June Jordan, is not on the list. Higher-API (and improving) schools like Philip and Sala Burton are. I haven't had time to do this quick check with middle and elementary schools yet. If the entire list is this error-ridden, shouldn't it be pitched and redone? ... And that's not to address the proposed solutions, either. As charters do not show higher achievement than comparable district schools, why would that be a solution? Why not just require that the school be painted blue, since that has no less impact than converting to a charter school? It’s true that this list is erroneous. Just to check, I sorted SFUSD high schools by API, and the consistently lowest-API school (and dropping year by year), June Jordan, is not on the list. Higher-API (and improving) schools like Philip and Sala Burton are. I haven’t had time to do this quick check with middle and elementary schools yet. If the entire list is this error-ridden, shouldn’t it be pitched and redone? … And that’s not to address the proposed solutions, either. As charters do not show higher achievement than comparable district schools, why would that be a solution? Why not just require that the school be painted blue, since that has no less impact than converting to a charter school?

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Doug McRae http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/03/09/imperfect-list-of-worst-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-7035 Doug McRae Tue, 09 Mar 2010 16:12:56 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1467#comment-7035 John, thanks for an accurate and insightful description of the "persistently low-achieving schools" list for the federal School Improvement Grant program, particularly the complication caused by the low "recent growth" standard (50 API points over 5 years) used to construct the list. There is a simple remedy to the use of a low growth standard -- instead, use the well established growth target system from CA's API system [that is, 5 percent of the difference between the initial API and the statewide goal of 800]. This growth standard would result in a "recent growth" criteria of 75 to 100 API points for most of the lowest performing schools in the state, and provide for far fewer exclusions of very low scoring schools [thus substantially reducing the number of higher achievement schools on the list]. The SBE acting in concert with the SPI have the statutory authority to do this via SBx5 1 (Steinberg). Also, your last sentence on exit criteria from the program is important. Good identification criteria also include program exit specifications. The fact that state and federal law do not require exit criteria does not prevent the SBE from following good practice and establishing exit criteria on their own. A logical exit criteria would be when a school improves such that they now longer qualify for the "persistently low-achieving schools" list that is computed on an annual basis, then the school has the option of leaving the program at the beginning of the following school year [thus forfeiting funds from the program and allowing those funds to go to schools still on the list]. Doug McRae Retired Test Publisher Monterey, CA John, thanks for an accurate and insightful description of the “persistently low-achieving schools” list for the federal School Improvement Grant program, particularly the complication caused by the low “recent growth” standard (50 API points over 5 years) used to construct the list.

There is a simple remedy to the use of a low growth standard — instead, use the well established growth target system from CA’s API system [that is, 5 percent of the difference between the initial API and the statewide goal of 800]. This growth standard would result in a “recent growth” criteria of 75 to 100 API points for most of the lowest performing schools in the state, and provide for far fewer exclusions of very low scoring schools [thus substantially reducing the number of higher achievement schools on the list]. The SBE acting in concert with the SPI have the statutory authority to do this via SBx5 1 (Steinberg).

Also, your last sentence on exit criteria from the program is important. Good identification criteria also include program exit specifications. The fact that state and federal law do not require exit criteria does not prevent the SBE from following good practice and establishing exit criteria on their own. A logical exit criteria would be when a school improves such that they now longer qualify for the “persistently low-achieving schools” list that is computed on an annual basis, then the school has the option of leaving the program at the beginning of the following school year [thus forfeiting funds from the program and allowing those funds to go to schools still on the list].

Doug McRae
Retired Test Publisher
Monterey, CA

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]>