By Antonio D. French
Filed Thursday, August 31 at 11:01 PM
The first thing to make note of about this year's Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) test scores is that the grading is different. Instead of the usual five Achievement Level categories (Step 1, Progressing, Nearing Proficient, Proficient and Advanced), there are now only four categories.
The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) explains that because of a state law enacted in 2004, the MAP exams were revised to align more closely with the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) exams. These are national tests in which all states must participate. Missouri's academic standards may not exceed those used in the NAEP tests.
Now the MAP tests for communication arts and mathematics are based on four achievement level categories instead of five to describe student performance. These categories (Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced) are identical to those used by the NAEP.
DESE advises that these changes make it difficult, if not impossible, to compare 2006 MAP results with previous years.
For example, on the previous MAP tests, a substantial number of students (based on state averages) scored in the "Nearing Proficient" category. This category has been eliminated with the four new achievement levels. Students who might have scored in the middle range could now be in any of the four new categories. The results may vary widely among schools and districts.
In the past, many school officials have looked at student performance in terms of the "top two and bottom two" levels. This kind of analysis may be less meaningful now as a result of the elimination of the "Nearing Proficient" category.
"There will be a natural tendency for people to try to compare this year's results with prior years. DESE discourages such comparisons," says the department's advisory. "Our advice to everybody is: Recognize the important changes that have occurred in the MAP program and be cautious about making comparisons."
And now St. Louis Public Schools' results:
In Communication Arts
Grade 3 - Below Basic (21.2%)/Basic (53%)/Prof (16.2%)/Adv (9.6%)
Grade 4 - Below Basic (25.6%)/Basic (51.4%)/Prof (16.4%)/Adv (6.6%)
Grade 5 - Below Basic (23%)/Basic (55.7%)/Prof (15.9%)/Adv (5.5%)
Grade 6 - Below Basic (36.8%)/Basic (47.7%)/Prof (12.6%)/Adv (2.9%)
Grade 7 - Below Basic (36.1%)/Basic (48.6%)/Prof (12.5%)/Adv (2.7%)
Grade 8 - Below Basic (25.8%)/Basic (58.4%)/Prof (12.2%)/Adv (3.7%)
Grade 11 - Below Basic (28.7%)/Basic (53.4%)/Prof (13.6%)/Adv (4.3%)
In Mathematics
Grade 3 - Below Basic (19.9%)/Basic (55.8)/Prof (20%)/Adv (4.3%)
Grade 4 - Below Basic (24.2%)/Basic (55.5%)/Prof (16.7%)/Adv (3.6%)
Grade 5 - Below Basic (23.4%)/Basic (55.1%)/Prof (17.5%)/Adv (4%)
Grade 6 - Below Basic (39%)/Basic (47.3%)/Prof (11.4%)/Adv (2.4%)
Grade 7 - Below Basic (48.3%)/Basic (39.8%)/Prof (10.2%)/Adv (1.7%)
Grade 8 - Below Basic (55.8%)/Basic (31.4%)/Prof (10%)/Adv (2.8%)
Grade 10 - Below Basic (60.5%)/Basic (26.4%)/Prof (11.2%)/Adv (2%)
SLPS has issued the following statement and analysis:
The St. Louis Public Schools today announced the preliminary results from the 2006 Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) tests which reveal increases in achievement among middle and high school students. While the majority of the District’s middle and high schools show increases, elementary school scores declined.
"We obviously have a great deal of work to do to ensure that all of our students are performing at advanced and proficient levels," said Dr. Diana Bourisaw, Interim Superintendent of St. Louis Public Schools. "The 2006 MAP scores make it clear that we must offer support, including professional development for teachers and more flexibility within curriculum programs, for teachers. We cannot continue to demand accountability without providing the necessary resources for teachers," she said.
A review of the 2006 MAP scores by grade level reveals:
"While the official results from the State of Missouri will not be available until November, these preliminary numbers suggest three elementary schools previously identified as 'Needs Improvement' by DESE may have made enough gains in student achievement to be removed from that status," Bourisaw said.
The MAP measures academic standards and determines the level to which schools enable students to become proficient. The tests are scored on proficiency standards of Advanced, Proficient, Basic, and Below Basic. The levels of Advanced/Proficient scores are used to determine each school's Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) required by the Federal No Child Left Behind law. New for 2006 was that all students in Grades 3-8 were tested in both Communication Arts and Mathematics. High school testing remained the same as previous years with 10th graders tested in Mathematics and 11th graders tested in Communication Arts.
As a result of the changes in the testing of student performance, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) discourages the comparison of the 2006 data to the test results of previous years.
"All St. Louis students must be given the fundamentals they need in order to demonstrate proficient performance in communication arts, math, and science. We must align our investments in curriculum and professional development for all grades," said Veronica O'Brien, President of the Board of Education. "It is clear that a top-down approach to curriculum development did not empower teachers to teach, or help students achieve," she said.
The MAP score information is preliminary, as the Federal government requires the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to provide districts a 30-day appeal process. Final determinations of MAP data and Adequate Yearly Progress will be made by DESE in November.
34 Comments:
Im gonna teach, The scores are ok. it not that bad. we all mess up. HEY I THINK WE SHOULD ALL MEET UP. Im tired. good night.
Friday, September 01, 2006 12:52:00 AM
So let me get this straight: DESE says that comparisons are not a good idea, because the tests were realigned to match the NAEP level of difficulty and the scoring has changed, right? So why are you are telling us that certain grades "went down" or "went up"? Also, aren't you comparing the kids who were in fourth grade in 2005 with the kids who were in fourth grade in 2006? They didn't go up or down - they're different kids!
Friday, September 01, 2006 7:14:00 AM
anonymous, that maybe the most rational posting I have read regarding the schools in a while. Those seem like excellent points.
Friday, September 01, 2006 7:41:00 AM
The already gone regime has been denied a chance to say 'we were doing better' and they were also spared 'you were doing worse'.
I wish I knew. I like to be an educated shopper.
Friday, September 01, 2006 9:51:00 AM
What needs most to be remembered, is this all happened under the mayor's board majority.
Friday, September 01, 2006 10:35:00 AM
Worried Citizen, what do you have to say about your mayor's slate now? They lost over 16 accreditation points and now this.
Not a good report for those who called themselves a reform slate.
Friday, September 01, 2006 11:41:00 AM
The "below basic" numbers at all grade levels and in both categories are just scary. To think that 21-36% and 19-60% of students are below level in communications and math, respectively, is just incomprehensible. How did we get here? Where do we go from here?
Friday, September 01, 2006 11:50:00 AM
Helen, I say that it wasn't good to start with and it isn't good now. I wish I could see a breakdown more comprehensive than the state's new breakdown, I just don't have the time to delve into it right now. Much work to do, so little time.
Friday, September 01, 2006 11:53:00 AM
Travis, where we go from here is that All of us must get involved with this new board and with the new superintendent, to understand and to provide a plan to move forward. We cannot rely on our board, our superintendent, our administration and our teachers alone. WE as PARENTS now have a responsibility to each and everyone of these kids to improve this situation. We can NO LONGER stand back in the shadows and hope that someone else is going to take this responsibility. I don't believe with the awful showing of involvement from most of the parents in this district that we can place blame ONLY on these other groups. These are OUR children, now we ALL must get involved and work together to improve this awful place we are in.
Friday, September 01, 2006 1:56:00 PM
Mr, your comment about "we should all meet up", what are you proposing-when, where, with whom and for what? I have to say that you appear less angry than usual, and the fact that you may appear to be wanting to make an effort in this endeavor to better our schools.....hmmmm?!
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:03:00 PM
Mr, your comment about "we should all meet up", what are you proposing-when, where, with whom and for what? I have to say that you appear less angry than usual, and the fact that you may appear to be wanting to make an effort in this endeavor to better our schools.....hmmmm?!
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:03:00 PM
sorry, didn't mean to post twice, just kind of did it by itself!
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:04:00 PM
Worried Citizen, I understand you may not have time to delve into it right now, but you have been very supportive of the board where most has been lost the quickest in the past three years while being very critical of the current board.
Just an observation. It is easier to blame than to try to understand the dynamics or to listen to the people in the field who have many of the answers.
Wouldn't it be great if private and charter schools had to take MAP tests.
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:08:00 PM
Helen - I'm pretty sure the charters have to take the MAP (and report their scores publicly). Correct me if I'm wrong though.
I'm also pretty sure the privates would "do better" -- but they're dealing with a different group of kids to begin with, so I'm not even gonna go there.
I think it was the SLPS comparing this year's score to previous year's, not Antonio. With the score recalibration -- and until we get some sort of "value-added" growth measures -- it looks like the district-to-state (or district-to-district or school-to-school) comparisons are the best we'll be able to get.
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:23:00 PM
Instead of comparing the numbers, let's try to focus on the below basic numbers, which is where we definitely need to improve. This is a very high percentage of students "falling through the cracks" or at the very least, getting ready to. We need a plan.
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:29:00 PM
Yes, Charter Schools take the MAP. Their results are available when St. Louis City is selected on the MODESE website. They are listed with the city schools under building results. They were also disappointing.
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:33:00 PM
Well said, Cletus.
Actually, as an education researcher, I'm just glad that you guys are taking test data seriously. I could care less whether they're charter, "regular public," or private, if they're teaching kids to read and do math, I'm happy with 'em!
Friday, September 01, 2006 2:59:00 PM
Helen, I have been less critical of the current Board than I was of the candidates themselves. Once they got on the board, I wanted to move on. You continue to bring up the past while talking of moving forward, I find that a little less helpful than you. I think if we are going to talk of moving forward, we should actually move forward. If you want to talk of past problems that is fine, I know of enough problems that we could talk for days, but I don't find that helpful. We now have a gauge for this new board, it is their job to improve these numbers. Everyone expected "Slay's Board" to improve numbers right away, and I hope the expectation of progress hasn't gone down just because "Slay's Board" has been removed.
It has been time to move forward for almost 5 months, can we now actually do it?
Friday, September 01, 2006 3:02:00 PM
"WE as PARENTS now have a responsibility to each and everyone of these kids to improve this situation."
The parents who believe this are not the parents I'm worried about. The parents who come on these comment boards and show up at school board meetings and parent assembly meetings and other meetings are fine. Their kids will do just fine.
It's the parents who aren't paying attention to any of this whose kids have to worry.
Are any of you, as parents, planning on chipping in to tutor or mentor a child who is not your own. Are you calling for after-school programs to help get families involved in their children's educations.
Check out Frank Van Bree and what he is doing with Urban Future at Fanning Middle School. There was an article in the South Side Journal about it this week.
Click here to read it.
We need more programs like these and more parents to become involved in them and help spread them throughout the city.
--Cletus
Friday, September 01, 2006 4:08:00 PM
Worried citizen, if you wanted to move on, why did you reach back to the past and Rochell Moore on the Arch City Chronicle blog in late July? You wrote: "As for Mrs. O'Brien, her conspiracy theories are reminiscent of Ms. Moore, and her hex on the Mayor. I hope that her paranoia doesn't interfere with her obligations to the children."
Now for some facts: The police went to the superintendent advising her Mrs. O'Brien needed security and should not be left alone. They actually had undercover policeman watching her place and became aware of much not made public. The superintendent recommended security for Mrs. O'Brien (she did not request it), and the board voted in favor of it. The police shared concerns with the superintendent, and we all know they probably have a lot more information than what reporters or anyone else has. And let's not forget a young man was executed.
So, do you still feel bringing up Ms. Moore from the past substantiates your most recent account?
Finally, the recent MAP scores reflect on the past three to four years of board rule. The new majority hasn't been in long enough to be held accountable for this.
Friday, September 01, 2006 5:54:00 PM
The 2006 MAP scores are the result of putting the Houston Curriculum in place for elementary schools at a high price, when the Missouri Show Me Standard Curriculum was available from the State for free. The Grade Level Expectations were the focus of the MAP and we should have deferred to the State rather than fattening the coffers of people from Texas (where the NAEP correlation was among the lowest in the nation).
Friday, September 01, 2006 8:21:00 PM
Amen Adric! - you seem to be the only one to really get it!! I'm stuck teaching Open Court and have fought it from the beginning because I know it is not a sound program. Open Court was developed for special education students who require constant repetition. After the 2001 Reading Panel(which was flawed from the beginning!) lead to "No Child Left Behind", McGraw-Hill(publisher of Open Court) rebilled Open Court as a reading curriculum for all students, especially urban students. Also, since Open Court is one of the few programs accepted under No Child Left Behind, districts, usually urban, short on cash saw a way to tap into Reading First money if they chose the Open Court program. It is a sin. Our scores will continue to go down, especially from 3rd grade on (and our District has it up to 6th grade!), if you look at unbiased research (meaning anything not done by Open Court authors or contributors). Also, our District is going to be using the Dibbles Assessment program that, by the way, is the product of some of the Open Court authors. Interesting, the authors are assessing was they deem important and this is where it gets dangerous. Open Court does not promote critical thinking and is extremely poor regarding comprehension. So, the district is going to spend money on the Dibbles Assessment accessory pad for all teachers so they can spend valuable teaching time assessing instead. Teachers will be assessing more than they will be teaching. Anyway, I find it very disheartening that I can easily find out this info, but nobody else seems to be aware of this. We will continue to go downhill if we don't get rid of Open Court. We need to get back to the State's standard curriculum and stop trying to pretend Open Court covers the material. I could go on and on about how developmentally inappropriate Open Court is, but the info is out there folks - or ask an early childhood teacher or any and all university education professors - please!
Saturday, September 02, 2006 6:28:00 PM
Does anyone else wonder about the connection between No Child Left Behind and Dubya's being a golf buddy of McGraw (yes, as in McGraw Hill)? Is that how Open Court qualified for Reading First grant money? Is that how CTB McGraw Hill got many of the State testing contracts?
Saturday, September 02, 2006 9:35:00 PM
Ok,Ok, sure that's how McGraw Hill got a cushy spot on NCLB - also Ron Paige, the past Educ Dir, was a Houston principal, oh - and big time buddy of Bush,Sr. - so to make a long story short - they puffed up Ron Paige's successes and made him super of Houston schools - skewed scores - and boom! Paige is "one hell of a superintendent" - he gets all sorts of national awards and guess what? Bush makes him the Educ Czar. So Paige, who by the way is also a good ol buddy of McGraw (Open Court), helps to get Open Court in the NCLB list of "acceptable" ("research-based")curriculums - which means that if you po folks want some money, buy our $4+ million dollar curriculum and you can get Reading First $$. This is totally insane - why isn't this first page news instead of the regular St. Louis Slay Dispatch biased school slamming articles? I'm so upset about the Post article today I feel like disconnecting from the news and just staying in my classroom and teaching - only thing is, I feel I need to support Purdy, O'Brien, Jones, and Downs - they really need us folks - GloryB
Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:51:00 AM
Good question, GloryB. If that reporter was a journalist rather than a PR mouthpiece for the Slay machine, we would get real reporting on education issues. Slay is just a Dubya Jr. getting his piece of the cash cow on the local level.
Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:20:00 PM
The following is for your information and reflection. Today there are two stories in the Metro Section of the Post-Dispatch,one by Steve Giegerich and the other by Shane Anthony and is entitled, "Lindenwood U.'s new leader shares Spellmann's vision."
In Mr. Giegerich's article, he states: "At the same time, they make it clear the actions of a School Board majority that hired Bourisaw as its sixth superintendent in three years - without a formal interview process - have eroded nearly all confidence in the district's ability to right itself after years of dismal test scores and financial upheaval."
In Mr. Shane's article, he simply states: "When Spellmann died on Wednesday, the school's Board of Directors named Evans acting president. How long Evans will remain president is unclear. Board chairman Jim Shoemake would say only that Evans had been named acting president, following the bylaws. Blanton and a university spokesman declined to say what the process will be for finding a permanent president. Evans said he expected to be acting president for at least the semester, if not longer. The Board of Directors can choose at any time to launch a search for a new, permanent president, he said. But Evans said board members told him there was no rush."
Now for my point. Interim and acting superintendents or university presidents are appointed quickly. When a leader has departed suddenly, either by death, resignation, or whatever, the board is forced to act quickly and according to the institution's by-laws or policies. Emergency situations are met with emergency actions.
Both Lindenwood University and the St. Louis Board of Education responded typically and according to their individual institution's legalities. One is allowed leeway while the other is publicly penalized for acting identically.
Neither the Post-Dispatch education reporter nor the editor has revealed the fact and the truth of the matter that the St. Louis Board of Education acted and did what it had to do under the circumstances, i.e., appoint an interim superintendent. Such action has taken place down through the years. This was not an unprecedented action on the board's part. It was exactly how William Roberti, a non-educator, was appointed interim superintendent.
You be the judge. Don't you wish intelligent journalists would reveal such facts in their articles and editorials? One other fact would also help, that is, they appointed a highly qualified and credentialed interim superintendent who has experience with the State's department of education as well.
Sunday, September 03, 2006 1:13:00 PM
Helen - I believe the only thing (person)that will save our District from a state takeover is our new super. Her relationships with the state people will come in handy and, hopefully, she will fill them in on what has really transpired in this District. I don't know how corrupt the State Dept. of Educ is - meaning I don't know how close they are with Slay -but I hope she is able to let them know just how messed up this District was with Williams. What is it with so many people anyway? If a person has a certain amount of charisma and talks the talk, people seem to buy it whether Mr. Smooth actually comes through with actions rather than just words. Some people don't take the time to look beyond the words - I guess it's just easier - you don't have to really think for yourself - you just listen to others. Hey - sounds like the real objectives of Open Court - to create units that don't think critically and question nothing - robots.
Sunday, September 03, 2006 3:00:00 PM
GloryB, permit me to say "Amen" and "Hallelujah." And I'm neither Pentecostal nor Charismatic!
Thank you for your insightful input.
Sunday, September 03, 2006 3:37:00 PM
No single person can save the SLPS from a state takeover. Giving one person so much credit (power?) always leads to disaster (Slay, Roberti, Williams). I think intense lobbying from those of us who want to avoid a takeover, and immediate positive results in the schools (well-publicized, of course) are our only chance.
If some people are correct about the extent of Mayor Slay's power and influence...then it is already too late. But I don't buy it.
Monday, September 04, 2006 4:55:00 AM
EVERYONE, THE SCHOOL YEAR IS ALREADY CRAZY, IM DATING ONE OF THE TEACHERS IN THE BUILDING AND LOVIN IT. ITS ALL ABOUT HAVING FUN!
Wednesday, September 06, 2006 12:01:00 PM
so what if the state takes over, I wont loose my job, Im a sub, subs cant be fired but always are needed, HAHAHA!!!
Wednesday, September 06, 2006 12:03:00 PM
Inspecteur Clouseau ici: Mon Dieu, God help the school district and the children if Mr. Fat Nutts is really a substitute teacher!
He can't even write English, and I say this as a Frenchmen. Now you see why other nations are ahead of the U.S. in education, n'est=ce pas?
Thursday, September 07, 2006 2:18:00 PM
Careful with downing U.S. education in total--look at how many students from other countries flock to our colleges and universities for a good education.
Thursday, September 07, 2006 2:21:00 PM
The amount of money put into education, the emphasis placed on education, and the respect given to educators in some of those other countries, might have something to do with it as well.
Sunday, September 10, 2006 9:29:00 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home