Graduation rates change every year, and the definition is not always exactly the same.
In the most recent federal survey of state graduation rates, published in October 2011, the data are correct as of 2009.
At that time, the average for all reporting states was 75.5% and the states with the highest graduation rates were:
Wisconsin (where 90.7% of students graduated in four years’ time);
Vermont, 89.6%
North Dakota, 87.4%
Iowa, 85.7%
New Jersey, 85.3%
New Hampshire, 84.3%
Missouri, 83.1%
Nebraska, 82.9%
Montana, 82.0%
South Dakota, 81.7%
Idaho, 80.6%
Pennsylvania, 80.5%
Kansas, 80.2%
Maryland, 80.1%
The states with the lowest rates were Nevada (56.3%), Mississippi (62%), and the District of Columbia (62.5%).
Now bear in mind that these are four-year graduation rates. Students who graduate in August are not counted; students who graduate in five years or more are not counted. Students who get a GED are not counted. If these groups were added in, the graduation rate goes way up.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It would be interesting to see these alongside, the % of kids who receive free or reduced priced lunch (NY 44%), % of ELLs and whether or not they have graduation tests.
LikeLike
Well, Walker is working on fixing that. With his help I’m sure WI will be heading down the scale and aiming for 50th. He seems to think big numbers are better than small ones!
LikeLike
In my school district here in Maine, we have a significant number of students who leave high school, usually for economic reasons, but return to our adult ed. program to get their GEDs. I’ve argued repeatedly they should be counted as graduates too.
In fact, I find it ironic that our Tea Party governor and his reformy, charter-school loving, K12 lackey Education Commissioner, both of whom spout the reformer party line about not using “seat time” as a measure of educational progress and the need for “student-centered” learning, rage about the four-year graduation rate and ignore how many kids actually return to complete their education.
Of course, in this case the real answer is simple: Our current economic situation and policies drive down graduation rates. When the kids have to take jobs to support their families, when turmoil at home because of lost jobs and lack of medical care and nutrition, or foreclosure, when families can’t get needed counseling, many teenagers can’t stay in school. But to recognize this would mean admitting that our 30-year love affair with laissea fare economics has been a failure; that won’t happen soon.
LikeLike
I assume these are high school graduation rates. The problem with such a metric is exemplified by the old codger driving a car who was asked by a passenger “Where are we?” and answered “I don’t know, I think we are lost . . . but we are making good time!” What each of those graduations stands for is quite varied.
The same thing goes for other education metrics like GPA. Exactly what does an A in a PE class have to do with an A in a chemistry class? The GPA is a measure of average grade but it doesn’t include any degree of difficulty measure. Interestingly, judges of diving seem to have worked this out, but we educators seemingly can not.
LikeLike
In my local high school there are three possible chemistry classes a student can take: general chemistry, advanced chemistry, and AP chemistry. All are graded on the same 4.0 scale, all count equally towards graduation.
LikeLike
StephenPruis,
I agree that the metrics are easy to game and skew, yet schools are being closed based on such metrics. Kids who don’t speak English may need a fifth year to graduate, but they aren’t counted. Kids who take fraudulent credit recovery classes are counted.
Moral of the story: don’t trust data, trust people.
LikeLike
Many schools have gone to weighted GPAs. An A in a basic class gets you a 4.0, whereas an A in an honors or AP class gets you more than 4.0. I personally favor such a system because it encourages taking harder classes. But even without such a system, anyone needing to compare students can still look at the transcript.
LikeLike
It seems to be hard to get the weights correct. The last time this was discussed here some AP teachers were concerned that students were attracted to the course simply because of the extra grade points available.
LikeLike
Grades, GPAs and all other attempts at quantifying the teaching and learning process are chimeras, ghosts, duendes, illusions, mirages, pipe dreams etc. . . . In other words the opposites/antonyms of truth and reality.
Until educators give up on this insane notion of being able to quantify the human interaction/activity that is the teaching and learning process we will continue to cause harm to the most innocent in society, the children.
Wilson has shown the epistemological and ontological errors that render quantifying the teaching and learning process totally invalid in “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at:
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
So, in my never ending Quixotic quest to rectify these educational malpractices here is a summary and my comments:
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A quality cannot be quantified. Quantity is a sub-category of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category by only a part (sub-category) of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as one dimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing we are lacking much information about said interactions.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. As a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms shit-in shit out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it measures “something” and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
LikeLike
Another consideration that affects “dropout” rates is the fact that some special ed students stay in high school beyond four years; in fact, they are entitled to a free and appropriate public education until age 21. Our administrators told us that those students who stay with us for a fifth year will count as dropouts and will lower our school report card score. Will schools feel compelled to be less welcoming to students with special educational needs?
LikeLike
this is the type of data we should be driving down the throats of the so called reformers
LikeLike
So good to see you back, rratto! (Tried to post this on an earlier comment you made on a previous post, but I’ve been having computer glitches…must be the NSA {or the NRA!}).
LikeLike
It is hard to interpret these rates without knowing the graduation requirements.
In my state the minimum requirement is 4 units of English, 3 of math (must include geometry and algebra), 3 in science (one must include a lab component), 3 in social science (a variety of different components including US history, civics, etc), 1 in physical education, 1 in visual or performing arts, and 6 electives for a total of 21 units.
Is this similar to other states?
LikeLike
TE,
In MO, The minimum number of credits needed to graduate is 24.
requiring 4 units of English and 3 units each in math, science and social studies and 1/2 credit each of health and personal finance.
LikeLike
I just looked up Montana.
They require 20 units, with 4 units of English language arts, 2 units of mathematics, 2 units of social studies, 2 units of science, 1 unit of health enhancement, with 1/2 unit each year for two years, 1 unit of arts,1 unit of career and technical education.
LikeLike
It looks like North Dakota required 22 units for graduation but no specific content to the units prior to 2011.
LikeLike
Thought I would add to the list. For South Dakota the minimum graduation requirements were (they changed recently) 4 units of English writing and communication, 3 units of social science, 3 units of math (must include algebra 1) 2 units of science, both including a lab component, 1/2 PE/health, 1/2 economics/personal finance, and two additional units of language or computer or technical training or math or science. They required a total of 22 units.
LikeLike
Graduation rates by themselves are a chimera of school success. They only consider students who graduate in their senior year. The reform movement typically uses this data to prove that charter schools have higher graduation rates than public schools in the same districts. Additionally, reformers often use chicanery to raise graduation rates in those districts where they have control as a propaganda tool showing the effectiveness of their programs. However, if one were to track graduation rates of all Freshmen as they progress through high school, the numbers change quit dramatically.
For example, in Hartford, CT, it is constantly reported that the charter schools have over 95% graduation rates, which is in stark contrast to the public high schools. But, if we track incoming freshmen to the charters, we have found that over 50% of them are dropped from the charters and sent back to the public schools for even minor disciplinary infractions as well as for academic problems. The public schools have no such recourse, but we public school teachers are castigated for our lower graduation rates in comparison with the charters.
When Stephen Adamowski was superintendent in Hartford, he threw out our district attendance policy, allowing students unlimited absences. He also enacted a minimum failing grade policy of 55%. This combination of questionable policies resulted in artificially inflated graduation rates throughout our district. In other words, students were allowed to pass a one-semester course by attending one quarter and earning a grade of 65 for that quarter; the second-quarter grade would automatically be adjusted to 55, averaging out to 60 for the semester. Similarly, should a student earn a grade of 75 in one quarter for a full year course, that student would pass for the year with a 60 average. Under Adamowski, students would pass for the year while attending only one quarter! The graduation rates sky-rocketed! But, did real education take place?
In other words, by themselves, graduation rates are not a real measure of school effectiveness. High graduation rates can (and often does) mean that numbers are being manipulated to show a false picture.
LikeLike
But sadly, Wisconsin also has the worst African-American graduation rate, resulting in the highest disparity between African-American and Caucasian graduation rates in the country, a direct connection between that failure and the highest incarceration rate of African-Americans in the country as well. http://systemschangeconsulting.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/putting-an-end-to-the-school-to-prison-pipeline/
LikeLike
Charters and vouchers are not going to close the achievement gaps. Rightwingers are cynically using the gaps to destroy public education.
LikeLike
While you are correct about that, that achievement gap has existed long before charters and vouchers existed. Milwaukee Public Schools has been a disaster for a long time due to many factors including institutionalized racism and lack of genuine accountability.
LikeLike
The achievement gap might better be called the opportunity gap.
To blame its existence on schools is to evade the source of the gap: poverty and segregation
LikeLike
The easiest way to close the achievement gap, depending of course on how you measure it, is to limit the achievements of strong students.
LikeLike
I do not accept that poverty and segregation are excuses for providing poor education. Yes, they make it harder, but they cannot be used as excuses. http://systemschangeconsulting.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/combating-the-racism-of-low-expectations/
LikeLike
Poverty and segregation make life far more difficult for children and, yes, they affect academic performance. Kids who can’t see the teacher because they never had an eye exam are disadvantaged; same for kids with asthma and kids who are homeless. Every testing program in the world reflects family income. It is not “an excuse,” but a harsh reality.
LikeLike
Teaching Economist,
Why limit ANYONE’S achievement?
Is your suggestion productive?
LikeLike
I wouldn’t. If you want someone to argue in favor of limiting students achievement, you should get into a discussion with carolcorbettburris. All her students follow the same curriculum through tenth grade, the same English classes through 11. Math study tops out with BC calculus. In my local high school, the very strongest math students are taking graduate math classes in their senior year of high school.
Her concern is “When you worry about “the strongest”, you leave everyone else behind.”
LikeLike
Harsh realities can and should be overcome, not by making excuses for what doesn’t work, but by working harder to overcome them.
LikeLike
Mr. Systems, no one here is “making excuses.”
Being homeless is reality, not an excuse.
Every standardized test in every nation shows that poverty hurts kids.
Call it an “excuse” if you wish.
I won’t.
LikeLike
systemschangeconsulting:
“Harsh realities can and should be overcome, not by making excuses for what doesn’t work, but by working harder to overcome them.”
The harsh reality is that some disabilities CANNOT be overcome. Not an excuse, a reality. And a harsh one at that. My students are some of the hardest working students ever seen. Their determination, desire to learn, and work ethic are a daily inspiration to me.
LikeLike
SystemChangeConsulting:
NO ONE here is making excuses.
To the contrary, we have been advocating for more of our hard earned federal and state tax dollars to trickle back down to schools to fund them properly rather leaving far too much of the financing to the socio-economic demographics of homeowners who pay a big part of the school tax bill.
Economic injustices and inequality must be produced simultaneously to educational opporunity and access. They are interdependent.
NO ONE here makes excuses . . . . . Except the corporate reformers who want our tax code, among other things to never be reformed.
Diane and 99% of her readers, are anything but excusionists . . . .
LikeLike
To “mykids”, as a tireless advocate for children with disabilities in school, I have never met a child with disabilities who cannot learn. Giving up is not in my vocabulary, nor is making excuses.
LikeLike
Yes you’re right. All children learn. However, a lot of what is learned cannot be measured. Teaching a child to stop picking his nose, putting it on his knee, then licking it off is an accomplishment. Learning?? Yes. How do you measure that knowledge?? I’m trying to not mis-interpret your reply. Were you implying that I give up on my kids?? Or have low expectations?? Poverty and segregation are directly tied to the “achievement” gap. So are disabilities.
LikeLike
SystemsChangingConsulting:
Major correction . . . Sorry:
“Economic justice and equality must be produced simultaneously to educational opporunity and access. They are interdependent.”
LikeLike
To Robert Rendo, while there is indeed a deep connection between economic injustice and educational success, for educators to wait for economic justice does an injustice to their students. None of us have the luxury of fixing all societies’ ills at once.
LikeLike
Systemschangeconsulting:
Who is waiting?
How are they waiting?
I am not falling for the “reformers who use civil rights fulfillment” as an excuse for privatizing education.
i am not falling for vouchers or charters.
Privatizing will help some, but it will never equitably address the masses. Real educators are interested of approaching education with long term and holistic solutions, not band-aids that benefit few and address the masses superficially.
The LAST thing you’d want is a system like most of Central and South America.
LikeLike
The various Pennsylvania schools for the deaf are charter schools with independent boards but public funding. Part of the problem?
LikeLike
TE,
Good try, but the deaf in PA are but a small segment of the masses. I don’t mean that at all dismissively toward deaf people. Most public schools are not equipped license-wise and financially to take on large co-horts of deaf children, but they should be.
The reform movement prevents this.
LikeLike
Scale becomes important here. Would you equipe each high school with a faculty that was cappable of teaching every student hat might show up at the door or would you take the less costly approach and say, as one poster here said recently, that some students will be all right even if we do not allow them to reach there full potential while in high school?
LikeLike
This is a very active post. Thank you Diane. I’ve tried to read them all, but I must have missed the one that said we do not want HS kids to reach their full potential. Which one was that??
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
LikeLike
That is across threads. Look at https://dianeravitch.net/2013/07/07/the-superintendent-of-a-high-performing-district-speaks-out/ beginning with Carol Burris comments at 9:30.
She states that “When you worry about “the strongest”, you leave everyone else behind.” This suggests that she has chosen not leaving everyone else behind over allowing the strongest to reach their full potential.
Do you have another way to interpret her statement?
LikeLike
TE:
How are we not allowing them to reach their full potential?
LikeLike
I don’t think there is a “we” in a meaningful sense, but at least in Carroll Burris’ high school students take BC calculus, while at my local high school, some students are taking graduate courses in mathematics.
She believes there is a trade off between allowing the strongest students to fulfill their potential and preventing others from falling too far behind. She has chosen to prevent students from falling to far behind.
LikeLike
Jepsmb@aol:
Teaching Economist (TE) posted this:
“The easiest way to close the achievement gap, depending of course on how you measure it, is to limit the achievements of strong students.”
I thought it was bizarre if not perverse. Why limit anyone’s achievement?
TE then wrote to me stating that he would not make such limitations, which I am still wondering if that was the case, why suggest it?
Is it me, or is TE somewhat cryptic?
When it comes to closing the education gap, “easy” has more to do with political will than all the accountability that has been pushed towards teachers in our new era of unreliable, invalid, too frequent, and high cost standardized metrics.
LikeLike
Thanks Robert. I did read that, but like most silly comments, I conveniently forgot. Not sure cryptic is the word I would use to describe TE. Trying to be nice. I don’t understand the attitude of some. We’re all trying to find answers to an ugly situation. Debate is good. Disagreement is too. The rest is middle school drama, which is why I’m transferring to a high school. 🙂
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
LikeLike
To continue, which student should we worry about, the strongest student or the student who would be left behind?
LikeLike
To “mykids”, I do not know you, so I do not judge you or your response. The examples you give are learning, and can and should be measured by achievement of appropriate goals written in good IEP.
LikeLike
It is astonishing to not acknowledge the small variations in human nature that permit virtually the same goals to be accomplished in varying (by not too much, though) amounts of time.
I was at the doctor’s office the other day, and he was telling me that for the vast majority of humans whose physiology is the same, there will always be slight variations. John Doe might have more asymmetry in his feet than me, but one of my eyes might be a little wider than the other. Human variation is the norm.
A system not acknowledging that it takes most kids 4 years, but others more time is inhuman. I understand that the ideal situation is to have everyone graduate at the same time with honors, a worthwhile goal. But it is by no means a failure when there is variation as to how a student achieves the HS diploma. Maybe a cutoff for GED’s, like 5 years after 12th grade should be factored in.
But with the current model, it almost makes me think of eugenics, where everyone’s proof of well being is characterized by everyone being the same at the same time.
What Carrol Burris said about ELLs is true. My district was cited one year by state education auditors because the ELL’s in the secondary grades were not doing well enough as measured by standardized tests in ELA. Other assessments showed rigorous and robust growth. Yet, many of our children were from Ecuador and brand new to the country, culture, and language. Their path to graduation is different, and even with an excellent comprehensive ESL and dual language program in my district, there wil always be a co-hort that needs catching up, as most longtitudinal research shows it takes anywhere from 5 to 7 or 7 to 10 years to fully acquire academic English. With the CCSS, I don’t know if “academic English” has become severely narrowed. The results of this are not in, as they will not be for quite some time.
It once again proves that the vast majority of the “education crisis” is manufactured by neo-liberals and people in their camp.
But we know neither they nor the private schools they send their own children to would ever approach education the way they want public schools to . . .
LikeLike
Is there a reason to think the variation is so much lower in New Jersey (at 85%) than Nevada (at 56%)?
LikeLike
Have you analyzed the population profiles in each state in this context?
LikeLike
No, that is why I asked.
LikeLike
So then why not answer your own question by reseraching it and than share out with the rest of us?
LikeLike
Generally a question is asked in the hope that someone else has the answer. Given the discussion of the uniqueness of students here, I had some hope that someone posting here was well informed. Perhaps it was a false hope.
LikeLike
TE:
Don’t despair. You never know who will post a response . . . .
LikeLike
“I was at the doctor’s office the other day, and he was telling me that for the vast majority of humans whose physiology is the same, there will always be slight variations. John Doe might have more asymmetry in his feet than me, but one of my eyes might be a little wider than the other.”
That’ll be $200.
LikeLike
“That’ll be $200”
What, are you representing RR now????
LikeLike
No, trying and failing to crack a joke about a doctor charging for the information that people don’t all look the same.
LikeLike
And I was just trying to make a crack at attorneys as FLERP! was doing with docs, nothing more or less. Tried to FLIP it back over on FLERP! (since he let us know the other day the occupation his training is in.) Just a little good natured humor, that’s all.
Y, sí, para mí, era obvio lo que ustedes estaban haciendo.
LikeLike
Flerp and Estimado Senor Swacker,
I can barely represent myself.
I decontexturalized a story to make a point about the ills of expecting a cookie cutter approach to graduation.
Significada nada mas….era obvioso, verdad?
LikeLike
Why are the other stats not reported to the public by states? SWD often stay longer and those stats need to be part of this. Reporting only the lucky kids who are successful in four years is not dealing with the PUBLIC in PUBLIC EDUCATION. We serve ALL! Unlike charter schools. Where can we find the all-inclusive data per state?
LikeLike
Well, according to the NJEA and as of 2012, NJ is #1 in graduation rates. The NJEA cites Education Week as their source for this claim. I have no idea what criteria or protocols were used to make such a claim. Take it for what it’s worth. From the NJEA web site (which also has links to Diane’s blog site): “High school graduation rate is #1 in the nation – New Jersey ranks first in the nation in the percentage of students graduating high school. ◾ Source: Education Week. Diploma Counts 2012: Trailing Behind, Moving Forward. June 2012”
Disclaimer: I am biased toward NJ, I am a NJ type of guy, you have a problem with that? Just kidding, I am not a NJ tough guy by any means, more like a NJ marshmallow.
LikeLike
The four year graduation rate also needs to be adjusted for students in special education and some ELL students that are entitled to remain in school until they are 21. If they take a diploma at 18, after 4 years of high school and fulfilling their graduation requirements, they are not able to take advantage of the extra 3 years of school. One federal law does not know what the other is doing.
Many students in my district do not take a diploma and do PSEO in the 18-21 year old program or take vocational classes that were not otherwise available. My students need to go to the 18-21 year old program because they do not qualify for day services through the county until they are 21.
LikeLike
Sheesh6
You are exactly right
Some students get their diploma in five years. Nothing wrong with that but the Feds count only a four-year diploma as genuine.
LikeLike
I hope all this celebration of student uniqueness carries over to our next discussion of how students should be assigned to a school because of geographic proximity.
LikeLike
TE,
What is the connection?
LikeLike
Just as some students might take a longer or shorter time to graduate from high school, some students might benefit more from a Montessori education, a progressive education, or a Waldorf education.
Do you think that unlikely?
LikeLike
Man, TE, your as Quixotic as I am (in my quest to eliminate educational standards and standardized testing and the “grading” of students) in your quest to rid this country of “geographical proximity” as THE determining factor to a student’s placement in school. I applaud your ability to steer the conversation to that end-ha ha!!
LikeLike
I guess I am just frustrated that in some threads each students must be treated as a unique individual and in other threads students must be sent to a school based on geographic proximity not their individual educational needs.
Someday folks might see that here is some tension between the two positions.
LikeLike
TE,
I agree that “there is some tension between the two positions”. I’m not sure of the answer, but the current educational “deforms” certainly do not contain any answers.
Some, perhaps you, have pointed out the inherent contradiction in pointing out the various sorting and separating ranking methodologies as not being valid but at the same time touting NAEP, PISA or other standardized test scores to counteract the edudeformers basic tenet of “failing schools”.
For me, it would be nice to get to the point where each student in tight conjunction with his/her parent/guardian would have their own “IEP” that was reviewed at least annually (preferably more often) to come up with a program that would help that student to learn to the fullest degree that they can.
LikeLike
Two put of the three children I have sent through public schools have had IEPs. Not really a magic bullet.
LikeLike
Yes, I understand that IEPs are not magic bullets. I meant it more as a general understanding of how the educational process could work more effectively and justly. I wasn’t talking specifically about IEPs and did not make that clear. I meant it as a concept of “individual” educational plan for all.
LikeLike
It install ways a trade off between returns to scale and customization.
LikeLike
In Clark County School District in Nevada, students need to pass 4 proficiency exams (the 3 R’s and science) in addition to earning all required credits. That will be changing to 2 end of year exams – 2 in English and 2 in math, which is still a mystery to us all. Students with disabilities must take and pass these exams to receive their “Option 1” diploma (reg HS diploma) and those that do not pass (hello??) recieve what’s called an Option 2 diploma (meaning they earned the required credits, but could not pass all 4 HSPE) As if that wasn’t enough abuse (yes, abuse) – Students that receive an Option 2 “diploma” are counted as drop outs. yes, DROP OUTS!! My kids don’t stand a chance.
LikeLike
I also teach in Clark County, Nevada. In addition to the difficulty of passing our proficiency tests, many of our students are ELL, for whom we received no funding last year, although that is changing for next. We also have several alternate routes for graduation, such as adult ed and summer graduation, which are not counted. We are a highly transient town, hit the hardest (besides maybe Detroit) by the economic down turn, and I suspect many of our students who leave the distract are not accurately tracked. Still, our rates are embarrassing. One problem is the huge class sizes we face in Clark County. 40 kids a class is not uncommon in secondary. My own children always have at least one class that big, and I have taught several English classes as large as 45. No wonder so many students do not connect well to our schools and drop out.
LikeLike
Another Clark County, Nevada teacher here. Our small rural school has done well so far, graduating classes of 20 plus. Our special education students were counted as drop outs as referenced above. Is there any good reason to punish the school because they can’t pass their proficiency tests? Of course not. You can fire us all and the situation will not change. If you want to fix the schools you must first fix the community. The schools just reflect the community, they can not fix it. When I first started in the district, 16 years ago, our school was the center of the community. We opened up at night to provide adult ed, had family movie nights, and we helped parents use the computer lab to write resumes and seek better employment opportunities. Our school has directly reflected the social and economic health of the community. There are always things we can do to improve, but alas, we can not do miracles. I am now going to the home of one of my students in the coming year, they are hurt and I need to work with them on their reading comprehension this summer. I will be teaching their older siblings to prepare for their math proficiency exams too. I can’t do more than this.
LikeLike
You left out my state! Massachusetts, 83.3%, right below NH (84.3%).
LikeLike
OY! systemschangeconsulting & TE: about the achievement gap as defined by results on “standardized” (NOT standardized–neither vaild nor reliable) testing w/regard to the poverty issue (involving an extremely wide range of negative situations–homelessness, neighborhood violence & crime, lack of parental guidance (2 parents working by necessity–never or rarely home, BTW–did any of you see tonight’s “Frontline?” If not & you have OnDemand, you MUST see it, and you will see what havoc has been wrought), breakdown of a child’s mental health & well-being due to family instability–& on and on…ad nauseum, for sure.
That having been said, look at what happened in Sandy Hook: due to the horrific events of last December, the State of Connecticut D.o.E. ruled that those students would be exempted from taking their state tests in 2013. Of course, this was the right thing to do. Given this example, however, WHY are our children who are almost constantly and consistently traumatized (in the aforementioned, multiple areas), subject to testing and responsible for their test results? WHY do children in stable middle-class (& we know–in 2013–that the middle class is less than stable these days–in fact, teetering, perhaps, on the brink of extinction) and high-income public schools consistently do WELL on such tests?
PLEASE STOP THIS INSANITY! Anyone with ONE ounce of common sense knows that the “achievement gap” exists only due to poverty and its numerous and horrific consequences for children and families.
NO OTHER ARGUMENT MAKES SENSE.
And nothing will do but to eradicate poverty in the wealthiest country in the world, where it should be non-existent in the first place. End of discussion!
LikeLike