Reply to New ESSA Star Framework for DC Public and Charter Schools

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "New ESSA Star Framework for DC Public and Charter Schools "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I think actually there has been quite a lot of discussion of growth scores on here.

Thing that bothers me is when I see PARCC a bit over valued. I wish we had other metrics as well aside from things like attendance, re-enrollment. We're really putting a lot of weight on this one metric. [/quote]

Such as?[/quote]

I'm honestly not sure, I was hoping one of the education wonks had an idea.

At the least, I think the scores should be broken down by not only growth but things like number of at-risk and FARM students, so that the raw PARCC score is used in conjunction with these factors. It's like someone said - we're just going to end up with a list that tracks perfectly with the socioeconomic background of the students.

I have a friend whose heart is set on one particular school, and because of PARCC won't consider even any charter schools. I've had a hard time explaining why I think this is misguided. [/quote]

What if you could see things like:

“School A is really good at teaching kids with special needs, but only average at teaching ELL students.”
“School B has really high growth at bringing kids from way behind grade to grade level.”
“School C has really high growth with students who are starting the year at or above grade level.”[/quote]

Wouldn't that be so great! That is what parents seem to want - to know what school is ideal for THEIR kid.

What about a short narrative:

School A teachers SN kids particularly well, is very diverse, has high re-enrollment, and uses an alternative or nontraditional teaching method. Staff turnover is high, but parent re-enrollment also high. Compared to other schools it has better than average growth scores for students who score 4 or 5 on PARCC. However, it had very few students score 5 in math on PARCC.

I guess this is what a parent is supposed to piece together themselves from the card, but, instead I bet they basically look at the star rating and then maybe the race and at risk, then move on.

[/quote]

But what entity would be in charge of writing that narrative? And who gets to edit it?

[/quote]

I think it could include things that are in the data, so would not require editing and could even be automated. In fact in some ways it's just a different way to present the same information and highlight pros and cons better of individual schools....[/quote]

10:16 here

The point is to present data in an understandable form, although I think that having a subjective explanation from the school could be useful too.

So, for example, if the data shows that kids grow on average one grade level per year, you could call that normal growth.  If kids grow on average 1.5 grade levels per year, it would be showing strong growth.  Or, that could be compared to average growth in DC.

All that is to say that a single star rating is the opposite of helpful.  What parent wants to send their kid to a 2 star school even if the data shows they would do well there?[/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