PARCC data is up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Large EOTP non-charter High Schools scraping the barrel bottom with math scores in the 0% - 3% range.

Ballou: 5% / 2%
Cardoza: 13% / 4%
Dunbar: 16% / 0%
Eastern: 25% / 0%

Why isn't this the #1 story in the city?

Wow.

And incredibly those are the schools with $100M+ flashy new buildings. What a waste, and what incredible levels of corruption and incompetence.

Poor kids.

Most of the kids are extremely at risk. Are you saying they don’t deserve a new building? This is nothing new. There are extremely at risk kids all over the country that can’t pass a standardized test, particular kids of color. That doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a nice building to be in.

I agree that this should be #1 article in the WP! What is this city doing to educate its most at risk kids? Building shiny buildings is not enough.

The "city" does have schools where at-risk students are doing better; some of them:

Banneker - at-risk ELA 95% (too few math to release - likely because they took Alg 2 in MS)

Thurgood Marshall - Overall 47/26 At-risk 43/23

KIPP College Prep 32/26

McKinley Tech overall 65/31 at-risk 56/18

CHEC overall 34/7 at-risk 31/15

Thanks! Some of these numbers are just hearbreaking. What can we do?

Close down those schools, sell the buildings and the land, use the proceeds to 1) give $30k vouchers per kid so they can go to proper schools, 2) spend $20k per kid in social workers and wrap-around support.

Cheaper and better than what we do today, when locsl politicos simply see schools as a way to give jobs to friends and family.

Where’s your evidence that private schools do better?

If you start your answer by drawing on the power of the free market, just stop.

Evidence?

Simple. 99% private and parochial schools have better results than those.

I listened to a story about school vouchers in New Orleans on NPR yesterday. Apparently, kids with vouchers who move to private schools do about the same or even worse than their peers who stay in public schools. Here's the transcript:

http://revealnews.org/episodes/the-cost-of-school-choice/

It is absolutely true that vouchers sometimes work and sometimes don't, so you'd have to do it with care.

What is also absolutely true is that what we do now does NOT work, so I am not sure we need to have perfect data before trying something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Categorization Q: our daughter is Hispanic and white. I know those code separately, usually. Does OSSE or whoever runs this code her as Hispanic? I assume not "two races" (as Hispanic is not a _race_, but these are two "categories" here) or "Caucasian/white" (as I thought that was supposed to map to White/Non-Hispanic.

Anybody know this one definitively?

What did you say when you registered her? They follow whatever is on her school record.

DP
When registering, I think they ask both race and ethnicity. My family is a similar situation, and it can be confusing.

I think that the data is grouped by “non-Hispanic white”, “non-Hispanic black”, and Hispanic (any race).

I think we usually mark multiple races, Hispanic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Categorization Q: our daughter is Hispanic and white. I know those code separately, usually. Does OSSE or whoever runs this code her as Hispanic? I assume not "two races" (as Hispanic is not a _race_, but these are two "categories" here) or "Caucasian/white" (as I thought that was supposed to map to White/Non-Hispanic.

Anybody know this one definitively?

What did you say when you registered her? They follow whatever is on her school record.

Our child is the same, and I noticed recently that the school tagged her as Hispanic.

[Anonymous]

Here are OSSE's race and ethnicity data collection guidelines.

https://osse.dc.gov/service/race-and-ethnicity-data-collection-guidelines

Based on my read of them, your daughter should be reported BOTH as Hispanic and as white (unless you self-identify as multiracial).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Large EOTP non-charter High Schools scraping the barrel bottom with math scores in the 0% - 3% range.

Ballou: 5% / 2%
Cardoza: 13% / 4%
Dunbar: 16% / 0%
Eastern: 25% / 0%

Why isn't this the #1 story in the city?

Because it is not unexpected.

Because how can DCPS justify they are a high-performing school district, it doesn't fit the narrative !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Scott Pearson, who I am not a fan of, put it well today. Turning around performance for at-risk kids is the work of a generation, not a copule years.

FWIW at-risk students city-wide gained 3% in ELA over last year, and held steady in math. Not nearly enough, but surely better than a backslide.

WaPo: "Citywide passing rates for at-risk students — which means they are homeless or in foster care, their families qualify for public assistance, or they have been held back more than a year in high school — increased 2.7 percentage points in English and remained about the same in math."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/08/19/dc-students-make-steady-gains-english-portion-standardized-exam/

Then IMPACT is bull#### as is teacher churn & burn, if that is now the message! What # principal are we on now?

[Anonymous]

how do you get to the subgroup performance data?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:how do you get to the subgroup performance data?

From the dashboard https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34901704

Search for a school

Scroll down below the bar charts and click on 'special populations.' That gives you overall school subgroup data, not by grade.

If you want to break down further you use the spreadsheets here.
https://osse.dc.gov/page/2018-19-parcc-results-and-resources

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how do you get to the subgroup performance data?

From the dashboard https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34901704

https://osse.dc.gov/page/2018-19-parcc-results-and-resources

Thank you zir.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand--how does a school like McKinley, which requires students to score at least 4s on the PARCC to be admitted, have students scoring so at 1s and 2s in PARCC?

They let in a whole lot who don't score that level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand--how does a school like McKinley, which requires students to score at least 4s on the PARCC to be admitted, have students scoring so at 1s and 2s in PARCC?

They let in a whole lot who don't score that level.

They say that requirement but a lot of kids apply anyway and get waitlisted and then get in.

Also the requirement of 4s is new, so only the younger kids were ever subject to it at all.

[Anonymous]

most depressing experience so far is looking at the EOTP schools near me and seeing in the spreadsheets that of any group, the number of students that actually hit the exceeds category at the top reflects 1 student, sometimes 2 students.

[Anonymous]

i.e., 150 students in each grade took the PARCC and 2 maybe hit the "exceeds" category.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:most depressing experience so far is looking at the EOTP schools near me and seeing in the spreadsheets that of any group, the number of students that actually hit the exceeds category at the top reflects 1 student, sometimes 2 students.

I’m a teacher and I feel the same way. I think a lot of my kids should have done better, but they just had no interest in taking the test.

[Anonymous]

you ever think like - for each percentile group you get higher, there's cash could work? Like $20 for taking it, $25 total for the bottom percentiles, $50 for passing, $100 for the top percentile group?

I bet this has been studied; hope the results aren't depressing but I'm guessing that if I haven't seen it in action - something is bad about it.