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.