I just scooped the DCPCSB - 2018 tiers
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
How fair is the PMF really? Schools like Bridges and Creative Minds with higher populations of special needs and other schools with higher at-risk don't seem to get the same credit on the PMF as schools with lower populations of SPED or at-risk kids. This isn't just sour grapes (ok, maybe a little). But it is what seems apparent to me in looking at OSSE's averages for PARCC growth for different groups. PARCC Growth Percentiles, Math, Reading All Students, 50, 50 Econ Disadvantaged, 47, 47 Special Education, 44, 40 Black, 46, 46 White, 65, 63 https://osse.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/osse/publication/attachments/2017_Equity_Report_Citywide_District%20of%20Columbia.pdf (page 5) If a school serving SPED kids has average growth for their students, they'd earn 10.5 points on the growth section of the PMF. A school serving Black kids with average growth for their students, would earn 14 points. A school serving White kids with average growth would earn 29.7 points. The PMF calculator is online and you can enter the numbers yourself and see what I mean. https://www.dcpcsb.org/performance-management-framework-pmf/performance-management-framework-pmf-calculators |
Anonymous
I don't know the ins and outs of how it works. But the focus on growth, as opposed to final outcomes, is intended to do EXACTLY what you want it to- focus on how an actual school impacts the kids attending, no matter who they are. The idea is to level the assessment playing field so that if you have a bunch of already smart kids getting 80s on the test, you don't score as well as a school which saw a kid go from 40 to 60. So I while I don't know exactly how the scoring works, I have confidence that the issue you are worried about has been addressed and "baked in" to the PMF. That's exactly why they make growth such a big component of the overall score. |
Anonymous
| PCSB has been pretty effective in messaging that the focus is on growth "as opposed to final outcomes." But if you look at the actual weight of the metrics, growth and achievement are weighted equally (the Gateway metric basically just adds another achievement data point). |
Anonymous
Okay, I looked a bit more and now see what you are talking about. The fact that the different groups have different growth percentiles doesn't say anything about those groups per se. But it does show how white students, who in DC are almost entirely middle/high income, grow in school performance at a faster rate than the average black student in DC, who, on average, are significantly lower income. This is the achievement gap, playing out over time as the two groups grow further apart. So focusing on schools which are better able to actually show growth among lower income students, is an appropriate focus for the PMF. I do wonder if they do an "in-group" growth percentile analysis? This has to be in education statistics literature somewhere. It's a very interesting point, thanks for noticing that! |
Anonymous
This is a really good point. At the same time, these two schools' growth numbers this year are lower than they should be, even taking into account the makeup of their student bodies. |
Anonymous
|
How fair is the PMF really? Schools like Bridges and Creative Minds with higher populations of special needs and other schools with higher at-risk don't seem to get the same credit on the PMF as schools with lower populations of SPED or at-risk kids. This isn't just sour grapes (ok, maybe a little). But it is what seems apparent to me in looking at OSSE's averages for PARCC growth for different groups. PARCC Growth Percentiles, Math, Reading All Students, 50, 50 Econ Disadvantaged, 47, 47 Special Education, 44, 40 Black, 46, 46 White, 65, 63 https://osse.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/osse/publication/attachments/2017_Equity_Report_Citywide_District%20of%20Columbia.pdf (page 5) If a school serving SPED kids has average growth for their students, they'd earn 10.5 points on the growth section of the PMF. A school serving Black kids with average growth for their students, would earn 14 points. A school serving White kids with average growth would earn 29.7 points. The PMF calculator is online and you can enter the numbers yourself and see what I mean. https://www.dcpcsb.org/performance-management-framework-pmf/performance-management-framework-pmf-calculators I don't know the ins and outs of how it works. But the focus on growth, as opposed to final outcomes, is intended to do EXACTLY what you want it to- focus on how an actual school impacts the kids attending, no matter who they are. The idea is to level the assessment playing field so that if you have a bunch of already smart kids getting 80s on the test, you don't score as well as a school which saw a kid go from 40 to 60. So I while I don't know exactly how the scoring works, I have confidence that the issue you are worried about has been addressed and "baked in" to the PMF. That's exactly why they make growth such a big component of the overall score. Not true. The PMF isn't showing the school's contribution to performance. If my white kid has growth of 55, which is 10 points lower than his subgroup, the school gets more points for that kid than it does for a black kid that has growth of 51, which is 5 points higher than his subgroup. The school is growing the black kid faster and isn't serving the white kid as well. |
Anonymous
This is a concept getting at a way to analyze this: https://community.nwea.org/docs/DOC-1630 Looks like the key is to not just analyze against a norm group solely by grade, but also by student characteristics (race, income, SPED). Would have to dive in deeper into how the MGP is calculated to understand if they already do some version of this. |
Anonymous
Link to their pmfs? I can't access them. |
Anonymous
You can access them using the Sela link earlier in the thread, but replacing the school name in the link. https://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2018-10-29%20Creative%20Minds%20International%20PCS%20PK3-8%20PMF.pdf https://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2018-10-29%20Bridges%20PCS%20PK3-8%20PMF.pdf |
Anonymous
|
The press release is out:
More Students Than Ever Attend a Top-Ranked Public Charter School WASHINGTON, DC –The number of DC students attending top-ranked public charter schools increased for the fourth year, according to the School Quality Report released today by the DC Public Charter School Board (DC PCSB). This year, 48% of public charter school students, or 20,985, are attending high-performing, Tier 1 schools, up from 45%, or 19,498 in the 2017-18 school year. 54 public charter schools earned a Tier 1 ranking, compared to 51 schools last year. Of those, BASIS DC Public Charter School (PCS) earned the highest School Quality Report score for the third consecutive year with 97.3% of possible points on the framework. Washington Yu Ying PCS earning a 93.8% , the second highest score; followed by Washington Latin PCS - Upper School scoring 93.4%; Cedar Tree Academy PCS scoring 89.4%; and DC Prep PCS - Benning Elementary earning the fifth highest score with 86.9%. Ten schools made the jump from Tier 2 to Tier 1 this year, with Shining Stars Montessori Academy PCS improving by 31 points. In addition, nearly nine out of the ten public charter high schools either earned a Tier 1 rank or improved overall from the previous year. “This is a comprehensive look at schools and public charter education in the District,” said Rick Cruz, Board Chair, DC PCSB. “Our ratings look beyond test scores and include academic growth, graduation rates, family satisfaction, and much more. For families attending or considering a public charter school, this is a valuable and easy-to-use tool.” Families use this important annual School Quality Report to evaluate the diverse public charter schools throughout the city. The Report (formerly known as the Performance Management Framework or PMF) evaluates 123 public charter schools educating students in grades pre-kindergarten (PK) through 12 and adults on common factors. These factors, accessible on our website, include college and workforce preparation, English and math achievement, and year-to-year student academic growth, as well as family satisfaction as measured by re-enrollment rates. Individual school reports are available at www.dcpcsb.org/schoolquality. “This is yet another sign that DC’s public charter schools keep getting better,” said Scott Pearson, Executive Director, DC PCSB. “Our top priority is making sure every student has access to an excellent school no matter where they live.” The School Quality Report scores schools between 0-100, placing the school in one of three tiers with Tier 1 schools being top-performing. The Report also includes a description of each school’s unique mission along with other useful information to help families evaluate every public charter school. Ranking of PK - 12 schools by School Quality Report Score and Tier DC PCSB also evaluates the performance of adult public charter schools. The Adult Education School Quality Report measures program effectiveness by tracking student progress, student achievement, progress on mission-specific measures, and indicators such as attendance and student retention. These schools only receive a Tier. Adult Education Schools By Tier For more information about the rankings, click here. For PK-12 school highlights, click here. For adult school highlights click here and for alternative school highlights, click here. |
Anonymous
I think it is a worthy goal to close the achievement gap by growing low income, black, special ed, etc. kids faster. The PMF is the basis for a lot of high stakes decisions -- closure, replication, etc. A Tier 2 school that is serving at-risk, low-income black kids in Ward 8 isn't going to be eligible for replication even if they are outperforming other schools in their area and their students are outperforming similar students. |
Anonymous
| WHAT: Rocketship PCS-Legacy Prep (located in Ward 7) has the highest score at 94.6% for the PK-8 framework. This is the highest score of any first-year school. (As a first-year school, Rocketship PCS - Legacy Prep did not receive a Tier.) |
Anonymous
Agreed. But if you look at the PCSB manual for how they calculate the MGP for grades 4-8, it does use growth compared to students who scored similarly on last years test: "Progress Measure for grades 4-8 a. Measure: MGP captures the median growth of all public school students’ progress by comparing changes in students’ PARCC scores to changes made by other students with similar score histories on the PARCC in the previous year. Calculating MGP is a three-step process: (1) A student growth percentile (SGP) is calculated for each student, which shows how that student performed in this year’s assessment compared with other DC students who had similar performance in the previous year’s assessment. For example, if 20 students had a score of 340 in last year’s PARCC test, a student who did better than 15 of those students in this year’s test would have an SGP of 75, since that student did better than 75% of the students with a similar score on last year’s assessment. Scores from all District students, including those at DCPS schools, are used to determine an academic peer group and to calculate SGPs. (2) All of the students’ SGP scores for a school are arrayed from high to low and the midpoint, or median, of these scores becomes the school’s median growth percentile, or MGP. The higher the score, the more students are improving compared with students attending other public schools in the District. (3) DC PCSB calculates a two-year weighted average (by n-size) by averaging the school’s MGP values from two consecutive years. The two-year weighted average is used to mitigate fluctuations in scores from year to year. " So this is an "apples to apples" comparison. If my kid grew by 10 points, and kids who did similarly last year grew 10 points, my kid gets an SGP of 50. But if my kid grew by 7, and kids who did similarly last year grew by 5 points, my kid gets an SGP of maybe 75 (? not sure how the math is done exactly), because he grew by more than similar students grew. So, yes, white (i.e. richer on average in DC) students grow faster on average. But since it's about each individual student's growth compared to the growth of similarly scoring students, that is taken into account. I am not sure I am explaining it 100% correctly, let me know if that makes sense. |
Anonymous
Also CMI parent, not worried. Its not apples to apples -- CMI was accessed PK3 -7 almost all the other schools only go to 5th grade. A |
Anonymous
No students took the PARCC test at Rocketship last year (it went through 2nd grade). Not knocking the school. I think that the comparing and ranking schools based on PMF score is a worthy goal - but the apples are really not apples in some cases. |