From the PG:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09224/990186-53.stm
The article notes that 7 of 9 middle schools made AYP, but only one high school made AYP.
And, that 16 of 18 K-5 schools made AYP, but only 5 of 14 K-8 schools.
So, in terms of making AYP, the most successful configuration seems to be K-5 and 6-8- even while middle schools are being eliminated.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
It is very difficult to consider all the variables contributing to making or not making AYP, made harder still by a format like blogging. What recent posts to this blog (made since the information trickle started on July 23rd) can provide is great preparation for the PSCC meetings held in each of our buildings. The number of targets to be met for each building varies depending on the population, size and grades covered. A K-5 will have to meet fewer targets than a K-8 in most cases just based on the number of grades tested, correct?
The PSCC meetings where my kids' principals have explained how their buildings did have been most helpful. Numbers are tricky. For example, you might read, "X School had 5% of its 8th graders scoring below basic on the PSSA." 5% might sound high, but depending on the munber of 8th grade students tested, say 80 tested, that would be 4 kids. Helping 4 kids WHO WANT HELP sounds easier than helping 5% of our unnamed number of 8th graders.
If parents attend only one PSCC meeting of the year we should make it the meeting where the PSSA results are explained by our principals.
I agree with Mary's comments.I am surprised Carrick is still in CA II. They improved greatly this year. I am going to be interested in seeing the plan that pushes high school reform farther.
K-5 schools would not seem to have fewer targets to meet than K-8 schools since the calculation for a school averages results of all its grades. AYP subgroups are only for categories such as African American students, Asian students, etc., not grade levels.
Even missing one sub-category could have caused Carrick to miss AYP. So more information will definitely be welcome!
The NCLB structure is so arbitrary that it would be nice to establish some other way of deciding whether the district is making progress we are happy with. There were the EFA goals, but now we are told that those were aspirational rather than realistic goals.
I think A+ will be using PVAAS this report. That usually comes out in November.
The issue with PVAAS was that it focuses on whether students make a year's worth of progress in a school year. So if students who perform at a basic and they make a year of progress a "green arrow" shows on the report, even if they are still at the basic level. Many who went to the PVAAS presentation felt that this data would be most useful to a school internally.
Unless I am mistaken--and that could be---you comment about Carrick is accurate. As stated at the press conference in July, they made AYP in Reading at 60%. They missed AYP in Math at 48%. Then, the overall AYP must take into account 18 benchmarks, I believe. The school had a great showing and will need to continue to show improvement, that's all.
Carrick probably made AYP via SAFE HARBOR.
Post a Comment