The Iowa Department of Education released the State Report Card for No Child Left Behind on Thursday, September 8th. That's all well and good of course, but again we need to take the information that is included in the report and make sure it is presented in the appropriate context. This report is the one that is used to determine whether or not a school has met Adequate Yearly Progress, and if they haven't, they end up on the SINA list. Just to remind everyone reading out there, Hudson made AYP this year, so we are not on any lists. You may recall last year that we were on the Watch List because one of our sub-groups did not show AYP. Failing to meet AYP two years in a row is what results in designation as a SINA school.
To remind everyone, the premise behind whether or not a school makes AYP is dependent on whether or not the students tested have successfully achieved proficient status on the ITBS/ITED Tests in the area of math, science, and reading. Proficiency is calculated by ranking students from 1-100, and any student who achieves above the 41st percentile is considered proficient. Each year, the percentage of students who must achieve proficiency is raised, until such a time that 100% of all students are deemed proficient. The legislation has picked 2014 as the date to have all students reach that bar. I know, I can literally see the wheels turning in your head now: "Wait.....if we are ranking the students and everyone who falls below 41 is not proficient.......won't there always be students below that line?" Exactly right!
Everyone admits this is a flawed system, from Jason Glass to yours truly. This is one of the many problems inherent with our current "State Test". It is a 20th Century Test (maybe even a 19th Century Test), being delivered in the 21st Century that requires absolutely no critical thinking skills. In fact, you can Google the answers to most questions on that test in about 5 seconds. It is all factual recall.
Now that I am sufficiently off task, the point of today is the Annual Progress Report for the Hudson Community School District. In Hudson, we have long recognized all the flaws of the test, and the lack of value in measuring proficiency. (I won't get into the statistical flaws or we will be here all day...) We have taken the approach that every student is unique and will grow at different rates and can expect different results. One thing we can agree on is that every single student should meet targeted growth annually. That has become the basis of measuring our progress. In our school district, we have identified 15 benchmarks for student growth and achievement based on student growth. We are looking at where a student starts, and where the end up. If they have achieved what has been identified as targeted growth, well then mission accomplished. If they didn't, then we need to go back, figure out why, and take another shot. Of the 15 benchmarks, we met our target in 11! This is great news and time to celebrate, but we can't get too excited, because we still have work to do on the other 4. This week I have included for you what those benchmarks are, how we did, and what we expect to do this school year.
To remind everyone, the premise behind whether or not a school makes AYP is dependent on whether or not the students tested have successfully achieved proficient status on the ITBS/ITED Tests in the area of math, science, and reading. Proficiency is calculated by ranking students from 1-100, and any student who achieves above the 41st percentile is considered proficient. Each year, the percentage of students who must achieve proficiency is raised, until such a time that 100% of all students are deemed proficient. The legislation has picked 2014 as the date to have all students reach that bar. I know, I can literally see the wheels turning in your head now: "Wait.....if we are ranking the students and everyone who falls below 41 is not proficient.......won't there always be students below that line?" Exactly right!
Everyone admits this is a flawed system, from Jason Glass to yours truly. This is one of the many problems inherent with our current "State Test". It is a 20th Century Test (maybe even a 19th Century Test), being delivered in the 21st Century that requires absolutely no critical thinking skills. In fact, you can Google the answers to most questions on that test in about 5 seconds. It is all factual recall.
Now that I am sufficiently off task, the point of today is the Annual Progress Report for the Hudson Community School District. In Hudson, we have long recognized all the flaws of the test, and the lack of value in measuring proficiency. (I won't get into the statistical flaws or we will be here all day...) We have taken the approach that every student is unique and will grow at different rates and can expect different results. One thing we can agree on is that every single student should meet targeted growth annually. That has become the basis of measuring our progress. In our school district, we have identified 15 benchmarks for student growth and achievement based on student growth. We are looking at where a student starts, and where the end up. If they have achieved what has been identified as targeted growth, well then mission accomplished. If they didn't, then we need to go back, figure out why, and take another shot. Of the 15 benchmarks, we met our target in 11! This is great news and time to celebrate, but we can't get too excited, because we still have work to do on the other 4. This week I have included for you what those benchmarks are, how we did, and what we expect to do this school year.
Hudson Community School District
Annual Progress Goals 2011-2012
READING
1.
Historically, 68%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 69% of
Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth, which is what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that
meet targeted growth.
2.
Historically, 56%
of Hudson 9-10 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic Progress
Test. In 2010-2011, 64% of Hudson 9-10
grade students met targeted growth, which is what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 9-10 grade students that
meet targeted growth, with those students who achieve a ‘cut’ score figured in.
MATH
3.
Historically, 66%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 71% of
Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth, which is what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade student that meet
targeted growth.
4.
Historically, 58%
of Hudson 9-10 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 71% of
Hudson 9-10 grade students met targeted growth, which is what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 9-10 grade students that
meet targeted growth, with those students who achieve a ‘cut’ score figured in.
LANGUAGE
ARTS
5.
Historically, 72%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 76% of
Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth, which is what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that
meet targeted growth.
6.
Historically, 63%
of Hudson 9-10 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 76% of Hudson
9-10 grade students met targeted growth, which is what was expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 9-10 grade students that
meet targeted growth, with those students who achieve a ‘cut’ score figured in.
GENERAL
SCIENCE
7.
Historically, 71%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 67% of
Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth, which is not what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that
meet targeted growth.
8.
Historically, 54%
of Hudson 9-10 grade students meet targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 61% of
Hudson 9-10 grade students met targeted growth, which is what we expected.
•
In 2010-2011, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 9-10 grade students that
meet targeted growth, with those students who achieve a ‘cut’ score figured in.
SCIENCE
INQUIRY
9.
Historically, 72%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth on the Measures of Academic
Progress Test. In 2010-2011, 62% of
Hudson 3-8 grade students met targeted growth, which is not what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will exceed the historical percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that
meet targeted growth.
OTHER
LOCALLY DETERMINED INDICATORS: READING
10.
In 2009-2010, 49%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students showed at least one year of growth on the Reading
Comprehension portion of the ITBS, using the NSS score. In 2010-2011, 60% of Hudson 3-8 grade
students showed at least one year of growth on the Reading Comprehension
portion of the ITBS, using the NSS score, which is what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will increase the percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that show at least
one year of growth on the Reading Comprehension portion of the ITBS, using the
NSS score.
11.
In 2009-2010,
52.17% of Hudson 10th grade students showed at least one year of
growth or more on the Reading Comprehension portion of the ITED, using the NSS
score. In 2010-2011, 57% of Hudson 11th
grade students showed at least one year of growth on the Reading Comprehension
portion of the ITED, using the NSS score, which is what was expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will increase the percentage of 11th grade students that show at least
one year of growth on the Reading Comprehension portion of the ITED using the
NSS score.
OTHER
LOCALLY DETERMINED INDICATORS: MATH
12.
In 2009-2010, 61%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students showed at least one year of growth on the Reading
Comprehension portion of the ITBS, using the NSS score. In 2010-2011, 58% of Hudson 3-8 grade
students showed at least one year of growth on the Math Total portion of the
ITBS, using the NSS score, which
is not what we expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will increase the percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that show at least
one year of growth on the Math Total portion of the ITBS.
13.
In 2009-2010,
42.03% of Hudson 10th grade students showed at least one year of
growth or more on the Math Total portion of the ITED, using the NSS score. In 2010-2011, 66% of Hudson 11th
grade students showed at lead one year of growth on the Math Total portion of
the ITED, using the NSS score, which
is what was expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will increase the percentage of 11th grade students that show at
least one year of growth on the Math Total portion of the ITED using the NSS
score.
OTHER
LOCALLY DETERMINED INDICATORS: SCIENCE
14.
In 2009-2010, 58%
of Hudson 3-8 grade students showed at least one year of growth or more on the
Science portion of the ITBS, using the NSS score. In 2010-2011, 51% of Hudson 3-8 grade
students showed at least one year of growth on the Science portion of the ITBS,
using the NSS score, which is
not what was expected.
•
In 2011-2012, we
will increase the percentage of Hudson 3-8 grade students that show at least
one year of growth on the Science portion of the ITBS.
15.
In 2009-2010,
46.38% of Hudson 10th grade students showed at least one year of
growth or more on the Science portion of the ITED, using the NSS score. In 2010-2011, we will increase the percentage
of Hudson 11th grade students that show at least one year of growth
on the Science portion of the ITED. In
2010-2011, 69% of Hudson 11th grade students showed at least one
year of growth on the Science portion of the ITED using the NSS score, which is what was expected.
OTHER
LOCALLY DETERMINED INDICATORS
16.
All students will
use technology in developing proficiency in reading, math, and science. In 2010-2011, 100% of 8th grade
students were proficient on 80% or more of the District’s technology
benchmarks.
17.
For the 2011-2012
school year, we will increase the percentage of K-4 students reading on grade
level according to the Rigby Benchmarking component.
No comments:
Post a Comment