John Stossel - Stupid in America

 

OhioStorm also wrote, "What about the performance of Central Academy. . . it obviously is not meeting the standards of education that have been set."  Central Academy's grade of F for Value Added is definitely a concern and it is being addressed. It is not consistent with past results; Central has generally in the past been one of the highest scoring elementaries in Middletown.  This year's results varied greatly depending on the grade level.  Central's 3rd grade and 7th grade both out-performed the district average by large margins in both reading and math. (83.3% of Central 3rd graders scored proficient or higher on reading, compared to 73.6% district-wide; 91.7% of Central 3rd graders scored proficient or higher on math, compared to 69.5% district-wide; 90.3% of Central 7th graders scored proficient or higher on reading, compared to 67.2% district-wide; 74.2% of Central 7th graders scored proficient or higher on math, compared to 63.8% district-wide.) (All 4 of those results also exceeded state-wide averages, btw). In 4th grade, however, the opposite happened (72.9% of Central 4th graders scored proficient or higher in reading, compared to 82.3% district-wide; just 54.2% of Central 4th graders scored proficient or higher on math, compared to 70.6% district-wide). Central's results for grades 5, 6 and 8 compared to the rest of the district were more mixed.  So, there were definitely some issues last year that the district has made moves to fix, but where some of these results exceed 90% passing, the data does not support your conclusion that the school "is not meeting the standards of education."

 

I encourage any one who is interested in more detailed breakdowns of scores by school or by grade level to go the Ohio department of education web site; there are links on the home page to search for state report card results that include lots of charts and graphs.

 

As to the suggestion that money could be saved by closing Central, I don't think that we could close the building. The elementary buildings are full as we already reduced the number from 8 to 7 a couple of years ago, when we closed Verity and re-purposed Highview as the 6th Grade Center.

I agree with others that say a large part of the reason for our standardized test results is our kids not the teachers, the teaching methods, or the options.  I suppose SOME of those things play a role.  And improvements should always be sought but to pretend that the test data is some sort of indictment of the district's staff is not realistic.

 

It is not my view that Value Added is the only measure that matters.  Each of the grades tells us something. I will readily admit to being stubborn and argumentative as well.  However, I try to keep an open mind and not jump to conclusions until I have all the information.

 

I did not come up with this state grading system and don't defend it.  However, as to why it is helpful to look at progress of the same student from one year to the next, let me throw out another analogy.  Say you were going to buy stock.  Company A and B both have earnings per share of $40.  But Company A's earnings per share have risen steadily from $25 to $40 over the last 3 years, while Company B's earnings per share have dropped over the same time period from $55 to $40.  Trend data tells you a different story about those two companies that you won't see if you only look at a snapshot of how they did in the most recent year.

 

As a golfer, do you think it would be fair to judge your ability level as a golfer by your score on one particular day, regardless of how you were feeling that day?  Don't golfers keep a lifetime handicap based on the average of their scores over dozens, if not hundreds of rounds? 

 

Do you think it would be fair to judge how your ability to play golf has improved or declined year to year by looking only at your score on that one particular day each spring, but making you play a different course each year while giving you only some vague information about which course you would play on the day that counted for your annual score?

 

Let's say you take lessons from a pro.  Do you think it would be fair to judge his ability as a pro by whether and how much your handicap improves?  Do you think it would be fair to judge his ability as a pro by whether and how much the handicap of all of his clients improves, even if he can't choose who to take on as his client, and his client base includes golfers with physical and mental disabilities and others who have no hand/eye coordination and only show up at the golf course under threat of punishment?

 

My questions may sound ridiculous, but this is how public education is judged in the U.S.