Reply to Latin replication pulled from PCSB agenda

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Latin replication pulled from PCSB agenda"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Just FYI - PMF tiers and PARCC proficiency are not the same thing.

PMF factors in PARCC 4+ achievement, PARCC growth for grades 3-8, student attendance, PARCC 3+ achievement ...

The concerns expressed about Latin by the PCSB Board members were about its black and at risk student 4+ PARCC achievement scores.[/quote]

Yes but recalculating the PMF for Latin for just those students shows that the PMF tier would also change -- to low performing. [/quote]

True. I think the point is that PMF is flawed. It masks struggling students at schools with low percentages of at-risk students (Basis, Latin, DCI) and perhaps understates performance of schools that are majority at-risk. [/quote]

+1 I think that Basis, Latin and DCI provide a good (great) school offering for many students. But there are schools with much lower PMF scores that are providing a good or even better option for other students. The PMF should recognize all of these schools. Schools should be rated on how they are contributing to student outcomes not on how student characteristics are contributing to the school.

No tool is going to be perfect. There will be flaws but what is absolutely shocking is that the PCSB knows that there is bias and isn't actively working to continually address the bias. Instead they are actively working to stop people from talking about it. Nowhere in the PCSB meeting materials can the public testimony and charts provided on the at-risk issue be found. They also will not produce their own studies on this. The first time the information on bias came out was because a lawyer for a closing school requested it as part of legal proceedings. The documentation showed that the PCSB had calculations proving bias in the PMF going back several years.

PCSB board members need to govern better. They need to be held accountable for allowing their staff to continue to advance a flawed tool as the main driver of high stakes decisions -- especially when adverse decisions primarily affect the most vulnerable kids.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics