- ~75% of the students at Cooper and Armstrong took the ACT test !!!
- They scored (22.6) slightly higher than last year (22.4), even though the demographics continue to shift !!!
- The avg score (22.6) is just slightly below the MN state average. (22.9) However the differences are probably statistically irrelevant. (ie very small compared to noise factors)
- Minnesota scored (22.9) higher than the national average (21.0)
- Minnesota scored higher than all of our neighboring states (see MN Dept link below)
Sun: 281 Students' ACT Scores Improve
MN Dept of Ed: MN Students Lead on ACT Scores
MN Office of Higher Education: ACT Scores
Insight: ACT Scores and College Readiness
ACT: National and State Scores by Year
Now for the thoughts and questions from a guy who thinks too much:
- 75% (~8,250) of the RAS students are interested enough in their education to take the ACT, and their average score is at approximately the MN state average
- The average MCA score of 100% (~11,000) of the RAS students is below the state average (G2A Data Manipulations)
- Does this mean that 25% of the RAS student body is dragging down the average score for the district?
- Does this mean that RAS is teaching the 75% differently/better?
- Does this mean that the 25% are not as teachable? (ie capability, interest, behavior, etc)
- Does this mean the 25% have non-school factors that are impeding their success? (ie minimal home support, shortage of academic resource, little for good role models, etc)
- What can we do to help the 25% reach the average academic success that is being attained by the majority (ie 75%) while enticing the majority students/families to stay in the district?
Have a great Labor Day Weekend !!!
19 comments:
(ARGH - It's back. Why is that still connected to my e-mail address. Sorry Give!!!)
Give - we both know that mathematically it's most likely not the case that the 25% is actually "dragging" down the numbers that much. Do they represent a portion of what you classify as "drag" - most likely.
I think the more telling thing that is there are 25% of students who have no intention of additional eduction. Granted, some of those who took the test will not go to college. Also, it should be noted that I'm sure there is a percentage of that 25% who did not take the ACT because they took the SAT instead (small I know - but a chunk of them).
I think the last part of the post is the most accurate. It all starts at home. What can be done there is the real question.
DJ
Of the 25% that did not take the test, it is likely that many went to Community College or Technical college. So estimating that the 25%are not planning on pursuing further education is likely high. I think this data is indicative of what we already know, we have an achievement gap. Our problem is not that we do not offer great educational opportunities as evidenced by the many highly successful students in the system. Our challenge is in helping more of our struggling students to succeed. The Superintendent recognizes this and in my observations is working hard to ensure that we working hard to increase achievement by students on all end of the spectrum. I was told the principals were all wearing t-shirts that said said "raising the bar, closing the gap" at the teacher gathering Monday. T-shirts of course do translate to results but the message is right on.
DJ, No problem... Nice to have you back...
The reality is that the 25% would be dragging the average down. It is a simple weighted average problem. Here is a simple example using 100 students:
(25(50%)+75(80%))/100 = 72.5%
If the state and the 75 kids avg is 80%, then it is performance of the 25 kids that accounts for the difference between the school avg (72.5%) and the state average (80%)
I agree we have a gap. Just wanted to quantify how many students are needing to jump the gap... (ie 25% x 11000 = 2750 students) We had better get busy.
Another quick note: the challenge is that a student in this 25% group already receives more funding and resources than a student within the 75% group.
This is driven by state and federal funding formulas, and the extra needs of this group. (ie Northport/Lakeview receives much more funding per student than RSIS/ZLE) This is especially noted in the area of compensatory dollars that are available to the schools.
I am not saying this is wrong, it seems very necessary to spend the money where the biggest gap resides. The challenge is how to ensure the 75% receive enough funding and resources so they remain satisfied.(they are a fussy and engaged group) Otherwise they pack up their toys and leave, thereby complicating the problem further.
I think the Board and Administration are on the right track. The challenge for all of us is to not let the pendulum swing too far or too fast in any particular direction. The above mentioned balance needs to be kept in focus.
In my opinion,the best way to to close the gap is to improve the effectiveness of the dollars that are being spent. This means removing the processes, systems and people that are not getting the job done, or tied to the core goals. Now is the District and Union ready to make that kind of change? Time will tell.
Wow, are you people COLD! I don't see how you can so casually flush 25% of your children down the terlet of life as if they were just so many dead goldfish. Since when did "a little below average" become an acceptable standard of educational excellence? Say what you will about the actual legislation, but No Child Left Behind is at least a proper condemnation of the current system and the starting goal for education reform.
You do know that, if the 75% who took the ACT test do get into college, 1/3 will need some remedial education before starting? And you realize that an "average" means that roughly half of those 75% were below, and the rest above? For those few who did very well, congratulations. For the rest, which if it were football would give the school something like a 1-4-7 record, I say it's time to look for a new coach.
J. Ewing
J - I don't think anyone was flushing any kids down the toilet. The question was, is the 25% the cause of bad scores (I'm summarizing at the 10,000 foot level there).
My argument is that to a degree that it could cause some drag. Not enough to get us to 30% of students passing certain MCA exams. But statistically, it would reduce it some. Give's example shows that 80% going down to 72.5%.
My argument is that parental involvement is the key to more kids taking exams, better test scores and a better education system as a whole.
I'm going to take one of our local charter schools as an example. Beacon - their test scores continue to improve year after year. Now, why is it they are getting better results. They use the same math curriculum as the district does and I believe the same reading curriculum now as well. The average salary of teachers are about the same. The average salary of administration is about the same. They are getting the same per-pupil dollars. Comparing to a RAS middle school, the only big differences is higher free/reduced lunch 19% to 37% and teachers at Beacon are younger. Only 10% of teachers are reported to have over 10 years experience compared to 57% in RAS.
So why the better and improving scores? I would argue that because they get to play by a different set of rules. Those rules include how parents have to give back to the school (basically mandatory volunteerism), grading their students papers, etc, etc, etc. Parents don't have a problem with this of course because they choose to have their students attend that school. That increased role and and participation is key.
My last note of things that are being done right. This week Mr. Favor (Cooper Prin.) went on to speak about this idea of participation and involvement with students. It was the responsibility of the high school to make sure those students got engaged at the lower levels to empress the importance of schools. Off to the twins game shortly with the family but I leave you with what were his words (paraphrasing - speaking to the teachers).
"You are Cooper and we Lakeview, Forest, Northport, Meadow Lake and RMS. Together we can accomplish this goal."
J,
I have only heard of one person that was willing to sacrifice the poorly behaved unlucky students that have deadbeat parents, and that was yourself awhile back... G2A Poor Kids
J's Statement
"You know what? I don't particularly care where those kids go. My vision of universal vouchers includes a strong discipline policy centered around a "contract" between school and parent for educational services, and with the stipulation that sufficiently disruptive students break that contract and can no longer attend. If the parents had to pay extra to find a school willing to take the kid, there might be less trouble, and those few who are gaining nothing and being disruptive can suffer real consequences."
I am overjoyed that the gap and these ~2,750 kids are being focused on. I am just noting this is an "AND" situation and not an "OR" situation. People need to keep their eyes on both the 25% AND the 75% balls.
Also, we would need to know the std deviation to know how many need remedial classes. Odds are it is not a normal distribution. Probably most are near the average with a some high above the average. And very few significantly below the average since they must have felt fairly confident to take the test in the first place. (ie 25% opted out) I do not have that data, do you have a source to back up your 1/3 statement?
Finally help us understand the 1-4-7 rationale. Maybe I could see 2-1-1 from your numbers. (ie 2 win, 1 tie & 1 loss) Whereas my numbers say 3-1...(3 win & 1 loss) Let's make it 4-0 !!!
The 1/3 who need remedial ed to get into college isn't my number, it comes from the U of M.
I stand by my previous statement that those students who are not just "not getting it" (of which there are far too many in the current system) but those who are actually disruptive and preventing others from getting an education NEED to be removed. In an environment where they and their parent(s) had other but more costly alternatives, there would be a disincentive to disruptive behavior, with a corresponding "parental involvement" to avoid the cost. Also please remember this was in the context of schools a) doing a much better job of high-content individualized instruction, b) having an effective discipline policy, and c) being based on vouchers so that the entire burden didn't fall on "bad parents," just the differential.
I don't want to think of it as 25% putting a "drag" on the other 75%. I want to look at this as the school failing to properly educate at LEAST 25 of every 100 individual children, and that to me is unacceptable. To tell me that, collectively, 100 of 100 students can do no better than "a little below average" is unacceptable when the average itself is unacceptable. The public schools have to do better and perhaps, faced with REAL competition from charters, etc. (say, for example, through universal vouchers) they might. Until then, I refuse to hold parents accountable for the poor educational outcomes of their children.
I still believe that all children can learn, given proper educational processes. I will concede, which I would not have yesterday, that there are some children-- not many, certainly not 25%-- who are prevented from achieving very much because of their home situation, or because of very real learning disabilities like dyslexia. Again, while public schools have a monopoly, they have no particular incentive to treat the "25%" with any particular care, nor do they have much if any incentive to see the 75% do better than "just below average." They get paid the same regardless of how much any particular kid, or all kids in general, may learn under their tutelage. Test scores, IMHO, are more by accident than by design, and that seems to be the way they are treated by the education establishment. Blaming parents is just one part of that irresponsibility.
OK, the 1-4-7 record:
75% of the kids took the test, and collectively scored just below average. By a standard distribution, that means about 7 were "average" between the 1 sigmas (a tie), and 1 was a clear win (above +2 sigma). Below 1 sigma there are another 15%, so that's a loss, but there were 25% of the kids that didn't take the test, so 15% + 25% is 4 total losses in the 12 games (total of fractions does not equal the actual total). Hey, it's a rough cut, OK? Besides, I learned my math in the public schools! :-)
J. Ewing
So were the "75% RAS kids" slightly below average (ie MN avg), or significantly above avg (ie ACT overall avg)?
Better yet what should be the ACT score goal?
Interesting....
The question isn't "how high should the [average] score be" but rather "how high can we get?" In international competition, the best US students beat just about everybody, but our average students do not. Our fourth graders are a little above average, our 8th graders are down in the bottom quartile, and 12th graders come in something like 3rd from the bottom, beating educational powerhouses like Slovenia and Burkina Faso. The longer our kids stay in school, in other words, the less they seem to have learned relative to students from our global competitors. That is the yardstick, not the MN average or even the US average. Being the best of the worst doesn't warrant any celebratory fireworks, and RAS isn't even THAT.
J. Ewing
Let's stick to the ACT topic for now... The world can wait a little while... Also, provide your links --- this is a place of higher learning. (ie not just opinion)
Here are some links regarding what we have been discussing. Looks like a 22 will get you into some schools, but don't set your hearts on the Top Schools.
I wonder how the Universities determine which incoming students need remedial classes? They must be kids with lower test scores in those areas. I mean looking at their transcripts would show the class and a "good" grade. (ie no remediation required...)
Understanding the numbers
U of MN
U of ND
No scores required
Good ACT Scores
Remedial Ed: Getting Prepared
Remedial Education: Writing
By the way, we disagree again... I believe in celebrating whenever possible. It helps people to keep hopes up, which enables them to persevere and keep working towards the long term goals. Without celebrations and praise, apathy and enmity grows and hope dwindles. Ask any good coach.
Yes, we disagree about attitude. You are correct that, as far as the players go (or students in this case), positive reinforcement is important. The reality of the game (or test) is sufficient reality, for the most part. It was reported after the last international (TIMSS) testing that, while American 12th graders came in almost last, they believed they had done better than anyone. That isn't an adequate perception of reality and it isn't properly motivating. They should have hope, but not be so overconfident. It's a fine line.
But it seems as if you also want to celebrate the coach's sterling record of 1-4-7, and I don't. If the coach doesn't recognize what a dismal failure his program has been, playing against teams in his own league, he (or she) needs to be reminded of it in the strongest possible terms, and that only a radical improvement will avoid the natural consequences of such failure. Just so the analogy is clear: RAS should threaten to fire itself and get somebody that can do better. That's the sort of feedback they need to hear and accept, and "celebration" doesn't describe it at all.
Yes, colleges use entrance exams to determine who needs remedial ed. Odd, that, since HS kids take tests that OUGHT to tell us how well their schools have prepared them for college.
OK, confine the discussion to ACT scores. Why should that be any different? RAS is still 1-4-7 against their peers. Whom is to be celebrated and feted in this scenario? I know we recognize National Merit Scholars, as we should. Their success SHOULD be celebrated. But what about the other 99% of students, for whom the RAS process was not as effective? Can we really credit RAS for the 1% and yet not blame them for the 99%?
J. Ewing
"Also, provide your links --- "
Sorry, but I rarely do that. I read things and remember them but I do not remember where I read them. Feel free to challenge my assertions at any time, if you believe they are without basis. I believe you can distinguish statements of fact from statements of opinion, but both are fair game, regardless.
Yes, we disagree about attitude. You are correct that, as far as the players go (or students in this case), positive reinforcement is important. The reality of the game (or test) is sufficient reality, for the most part. It was reported after the last international (TIMSS) testing that, while American 12th graders came in almost last, they believed they had done better than anyone. That isn't an adequate perception of reality and it isn't properly motivating. They should have hope, but not be so overconfident. It's a fine line.
But it seems as if you also want to celebrate the coach's sterling record of 1-4-7, and I don't. If the coach doesn't recognize what a dismal failure his program has been, playing against teams in his own league, he (or she) needs to be reminded of it in the strongest possible terms, and that only a radical improvement will avoid the natural consequences of such failure. Just so the analogy is clear: RAS should threaten to fire itself and get somebody that can do better. That's the sort of feedback they need to hear and accept, and "celebration" doesn't describe it at all.
Yes, colleges use entrance exams to determine who needs remedial ed. Odd, that, since HS kids take tests that OUGHT to tell us how well their schools have prepared them for college.
OK, confine the discussion to ACT scores. Why should that be any different? RAS is still 1-4-7 against their peers. Whom is to be celebrated and feted in this scenario? I know we recognize National Merit Scholars, as we should. Their success SHOULD be celebrated. But what about the other 99% of students, for whom the RAS process was not as effective? Can we really credit RAS for the 1% and yet not blame them for the 99%?
J. Ewing
Interesting and thought-provoking post, Give. I appreciate your thorough backgrounds on these topics to go along with your opinions analysis.
As I've said before, it makes me sad that the world/economy/culture has shifted so that it's now pretty much impossible for someone to have a rich, full, satisfying life with just a HS diploma. A couple of generations ago, a couple could generally own a home, raise a famiy, and send their kids off to college on one middle class income from a HS graduate. I just saw the "Greatest Generation" exhibit at the History Museum recently and it made me a little sad. A good work ethic and a friendly demeanor could take you far in the world fifty years ago. Now you'd better be a darn good test taker.
As far as the RAS results. I'm pleasantly surprised at the top end and just as pleased at how the leadership is focusing attention on bring up the bottom end. Not everyone can be "above average", naturally (the complainers realize that, right?--NCLB never did), but here's hoping they have some success with raising the bar.
--Annie
Well, let's check the accuracy of J's comment.
"In international competition, the best US students beat just about everybody, but our average students do not. Our fourth graders are a little above average, our 8th graders are down in the bottom quartile, and 12th graders come in something like 3rd from the bottom, beating educational powerhouses like Slovenia and Burkina Faso. The longer our kids stay in school, in other words, the less they seem to have learned relative to students from our global competitors."
IES TIMSS 2007 Highlights
Here is a paragraph from the executive summary. It appears J may be incorrect, at least about the 4th and 8th graders.
"In 2007, the average mathematics scores of both U.S.
fourth-graders (529) and eighth-graders (508) were higher
than the TIMSS scale average (500 at both grades).3
The average U.S. fourth-grade mathematics score
was higher than those of students in 23 of the 35 other
countries, lower than those in 8 countries (all located in
Asia or Europe), and not measurably different from those
in the remaining 4 countries.4 At eighth grade, the average
U.S. mathematics score was higher than those of students
in 37 of the 47 other countries, lower than those in 5
countries (all of them located in Asia), and not measurably
different from those in the other 5 countries."
As for Seniors, I did not find the international comparison, however here is the 12th grade report card. It is somewhat disturbing.
Nations Report Card: 12th Grade
Apparently I was incorrect to some degree. What I said about "the longer our kids are in school..." seems to be correct (in math). The part about "our best students beat everybody" is NOT.
http://4brevard.com/choice/international-test-scores.htm
If you are looking for good news, then perhaps it is that our scores in science are considerably better than our scores in math. And we know why! We haven't had "new science" or "new new science"" or "Chicago science" as we have done with the teaching of mathematics-- something that ought to be as simple as 2+2.
One more way of looking at this-- a more general one. We all complain, I think, about NCLB because the detailed way of looking at student achievement assumes that race and class and other such things matter to the point that a few poor-performing students in one classification pushes a whole school into "failing" status. That's unfortunate for those few kids, because they really are not learning as well as they should, but it's also unfortunate that the rest of the school gets labelled, regardless of how everyone else fared. What is more disturbing is that, because the "bar" gets raised every year, more and more schools get pushed into "failing" status, including schools that by almost any assessment are "good schools," in districts into which you would move your family if you could afford it. Our schools are failing to make AYP-- Adequate Yearly Progress in NCLB terms-- but in general they are failing to make yearly progress, adequate or otherwise. Small improvements are not good enough when every passing year adds millions of very real children to the "inadequate" list.
J. Ewing
Brevard Intl Test Scores
The odd thing is that this source uses 1999 data. It seems things have gotten better since them. Though there is still plenty of room for improvement.
TIMSS Results Page
Yes, what I remember is from "a while back." I can't believe that the 2007 data results actually show US improvement to that degree, however. I think it is due to some degree of "apples to kumquats" factors that are not obvious in a quick glance. The science scores show that some countries are improving much more rapidly than we are, and that could be true, but we apparently aren't improving against what we ourselves did 10 years earlier.
We are right back to the same basic argument, only with different standards and different competitors. You seem to want to celebrate small improvements and overall mediocrity. I claim that since the US spends more on education than almost every other country (depending on which survey you read), we should expect much better results or our education system is failing to deliver on its promises.
J. Ewing
Post a Comment