Guy Brandenburg is a retired teacher of mathematics who taught in the D.C. public schools. He was very likely the first person to publicly explode the myth of Michelle Rhee, having pursued her initial claims about miraculously raising the scores of the students she taught as a new TFA teacher from the 13th percentile to the 90th percentile.
He continues to watch the D.C. schools, and he recently attended the public unveiling of NAEP scores for 2017. He was reviewing them in separate posts, and I invited him to combine them into a single post. He generously agreed to do so.
For his diligence and persistence as a researcher and whistle-blower, I name Guy Brandenburg to the honor roll of this blog.
He writes:
NATIONAL TEST SCORES IN DC WERE RISING FASTER UNDER THE ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD THAN THEY HAVE BEEN DOING UNDER THE APPOINTED CHANCELLORS
By Guy Brandenburg
Add one more to the long list of recent DC public education scandals* in the era of education ‘reform’:
DC’s NAEP** test scores are increasing at a lower rate now (after the elected school board was abolished in 2007) than they were in the decade before that.
This is true in every single subgroup I looked at: Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, 4th graders, 8th graders, in reading, and in math.
Forget what you’ve heard about DC being the fastest-growing school district. Our NAEP scores were going up faster before our first Chancellor, Michelle Rhee, was appointed than they have been doing since that date.
Last week, the 2017 NAEP results were announced at the National Press Club building here on 14th Street NW, and I went in person to see and compare the results of 10 years of education ‘reform’ after 2007 with the previous decade. When I and others used the NAEP database and separated out average scale scores for black, Hispanic, and white students in DC, at the 4th and 8th grade levels, in both reading and math, even I was shocked:
In every single one of these twelve sub-groups, the rate of change in scores was WORSE (i.e., lower) after 2007 (when the chancellors took over) than it was before that date (when we still had an elected school board).
I published the raw data, taken from the NAEP database, as well as graphs and short analyses, on my blog, (gfbrandenburg.wordpress.com) which you can inspect if you like.
I will give you two examples:
• Black 4th grade students in DC in math (see https://bit.ly/2JbORad ):
o In the year 2000, the first year for which I had comparable data, that group got an average scale score of 188 (on a scale of 0 – 500). In the year 2007, the last year under the elected school board, their average scale score was 209, which is an increase of 21 points in 7 years, for an average increase of 3.0 points per year, pre-‘reform’.
o After a decade of ‘reform’ DC’s black fourth grade students ended up earning an average scale score of 224, which is an increase of 15 points over 10 years. That works out to an average growth of 1.5 points per year, under direct mayoral control.
o So, in other words, Hispanic fourth graders in DC made twice the rate of progress on the math NAEP under the elected school board than they did under Chancellors Rhee, Henderson, and Wilson.
• Hispanic 8th grade students in DC in reading (see: https://bit.ly/2HhSP0z )
o In 1998, the first year for which I had data, Hispanic 8th graders in DC got an average scale score of 246 (again on a scale of 0-500). In 2007, which is the last year under the elected board of education, they earned an average scale score of 249, which is an increase of only 3 points.
o However, in 2017, their counterparts received an average scale score of 242. Yes, the score went DOWN by 7 points.
o So, under the elected board of education, the scores for 8th grade Latinx students went up a little bit. But under direct mayoral control and education ‘reform’, their scores actually dropped.
That’s only two examples. There are actually twelve such subgroups (3 ethnicities, times 2 grade levels, times 2 subjects), and in every single case progress was worse after 2007 than it was beforehand.
Not a single exception.
You can see my last blog post on this, with links to other ones, here:
https://gfbrandenburg.wordpress.com/2018/04/20/progress-or-not-for-dcs-8th-graders-on-the-math-naep/ or https://bit.ly/2K3UyZ1 .
Amazing.
Why isn’t there more outrage?
*For many years, DC officials and the editorial board of the Washington Post have been bragging that the educational ‘reforms’ enacted under Chancellor Michelle Rhee and her successors have made DCPS the fastest-improving school district in the entire nation. (See https://wapo.st/2qPRSGw or https://wapo.st/2qJn7Dh for just two examples.)
It didn’t matter how many lies Chancellor Rhee told about her own mythical successes in a privately run school in Baltimore (see https://wapo.st/2K28Vgy ). She also got away with falsehoods about the necessity of firing hundreds of teachers mid-year for allegedly being sexual predators or abusers of children (see https://wapo.st/2qNGxqB ); there were always acolytes like Richard Whitmire willing to cheer her on publicly (see https://wapo.st/2HC0zOj ), even though the charges were false.
A lot of stories about widespread fraud in the District of Columbia public school system have hit the front pages recently. Examples:
• Teachers and administrators were pressured to give passing grades and diplomas to students who missed so much school (and did so little work) that they were ineligible to pass – roughly one-third of last year’s graduating class. (see https://bit.ly/2ngmemi ) You may recall that the rising official (but fake) high school graduation rate in Washington was a used as a sign that the reforms under direct mayoral control of education had led to dramatic improvements in education here.
• Schools pretended that their out-of-school suspension rates had been dropping, when in actual fact, they simply were suspending students without recording those actions in the system. (see https://wapo.st/2HhbARS )
• Less than half of the 2018 senior class is on track to graduate because of truancy, failed classes, and the like. (see https://bit.ly/2K5DFx9 )
• High-ranking city officials, up to and including the Chancellor himself, cheated the system by having their own children bypass long waiting lists and get admitted to favored schools. (see https://wapo.st/2Hk3HLi )
• A major scandal in 2011 about adults erasing and changing student answer sheets on the DC-CAS test at many schools in DC in order to earn bonuses and promotions was unfortunately swept under the rug. (see https://bit.ly/2HR4c0q )
• About those “public” charter schools that were going to do such a miraculous job in educating low-income black or brown children that DCPS teachers supposedly refused to teach? Well, at least forty-six of those charter schools (yes, 46!) have been closed down so far, either for theft, poor performance on tests, low enrollment, or other problems. (see https://bit.ly/2JcxIx9 ).
**Data notes:
A. NAEP, or the National Assessment of Educational Progress, is given about every two years to a carefully chosen representative sample of students all over the USA. It has a searchable database that anybody with a little bit of persistence can learn to use: https://bit.ly/2F5LHlS .
B. I did not do any comparable measurements for Asian-Americans or Native Americans or other such ethnic/racial groups because their populations in DC are so small that in most years, NAEP doesn’t report any data at all for them.
C. In the past, I did not find big differences between the scores of boys and girls, so I didn’t bother looking this time.
D. Other categories I could have looked at, but didn’t, include: special education students; students whose first language isn’t English; economically disadvantaged students; the various percentiles; and those just in DCPS versus all students in DC versus charter school students. Feel free to do so, and report what you find!
E. My reason for not including figures separated out for only DCPS, and only DC Charter Schools, is that NAEP didn’t provide that data before about 2011. I also figured that the charter schools and the regular public schools, together, are in fact the de-facto public education system that has grown under both the formerly elected school board and the current mayoral system, so it was best to combine the two together.
F. I would like to thank Mary Levy for compiling lots of data about education in DC, and Matthew Frumin for pointing out these trends. I would also like to thank many DC students, parents, and teachers (current or otherwise) who have told me their stories.
Wonderful research. Definitely worthy.
I do wonder how Ms. Rhee came up where her 13th to 90th numbers. The Reformers are such great marketers.
when ‘marketer’ is a prettier word than ‘liar’
Like!
The real observation here is that the difference in these scores, especially the 242-249 scores for 8th graders, is no real difference at all. Further, this method of comparing schools is deeply flawed. Education success should not be measured by these one dimensional test scores. We must find a better, more accurate and fair way to assess Education.
“Education success should not be measured by these one dimensional test scores. We must find a better, more accurate and fair way to assess Education.”
Negative and positive in your statements, altate 1122. Nothing is “measured” in the teaching and learning process. Things are assessed, evaluated and judged, but never measured*. The abuse and misuse of the term “measure” is the negative in your statement.
The positive is stating “. . . way to ASSESS Education”. Using the right words to deliver that right meaning is one of the most important concepts that we need to utilize** in attempting to counteract the edudeformers’ agenda and the falsehoods that are the standards and testing regime of malpractices.
*see comment below.
**see second comment below.
You are right, ‘altate1122’, these differences in scores are not large over time; which is why I used a full 0-500 scale to show precisely that. And I agree wholeheartedly that using single test scores like these to measure actual progress is worse than flawed. Is it evil? Perhaps. But it’s the yardstick that the Democratic and Republican ‘reformers’ have been using for so many years to claim that ‘traditional’ public schools are horrible and should all be closed and turned into charter schools or vouchers or whatever.
What I’m showing is that BY THEIR OWN YARDSTICKS, THE “REFORMERS” HAVE FAILED.
One variable to consider in all this data is the impact of gentrification which can skew results. Washington DC has undergone a tremendous upward trend in real estate. More middle class white families are moving into the city and using the vouchers available in DC to underwrite part of their private school tuition. The public schools, while still mostly minority, have had more white students entering the system, but the charters tend to be mostly minority. To get a more complete picture of what is happening, you would have to disaggregate the data by subgroups. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/02/what-could-reverse-dcs-intense-school-segregation/516783/
Right. That’s why I disaggregated by black, white, and hispanic subgroups. I’m doing some more of that disaggregation and will post my results soon.
I left a comment for Guy inquiring whether he had looked at how the direction and rate of change in the data.
The comment rests in pre-moderation as does this additional comment left shortly thereafter:
I just looked at the NAEP “difference from large cities” results for 4th grade math for DC and find:
2003 -19
2005 -16
2007 -16
2009 -11
2013 -6
2015 -2
2017 -1
Comment?
I’m curious why the period you presented for the elected school board is so brief… Is it because it’s hard to get earlier data via the NAEP interface? I’d like to have been able to go further back with the above set of data, which seems to show startlingly good progress after mayoral control, but don’t immediately see how to do so.
FWIW, after leaving that 2nd comment I took a subsequent look at the same comparison for 4th grade reading:
2002 -12
2003 -16
2005 -15
2007 -11
2009 -7
2011 -10
2013 -7
2015 no significant difference
2017 no significant difference
ooops… meant to say I left a comment for Guy inquiring whether he had looked at how the direction and rate of change in the data compared to elsewhere in the nation…
There are lots of things one can look at. It seems to me (without having actually crunched all the exact numbers yet) that throughout the nation, in the past ten years, the rate of change on NAEP’s 4th grade math scores (which had been rising pretty steadily – tho slowly – nationwhide) have definitely taken a turn for the worse (meaning less growth) in the past 5 to 10 years — which is precisely the period of time during which the ‘reformers’ have consolidated their control of nearly every school district in the nation.
Reading scores have been pretty flat overall for a very long time. Despite some grumbling, teachers nationwide have mostly been doing what they were told to do, following the ‘reformed’ Common Core Curriculum. It has NOT been a smashing success, using NAEP as a yardstick.
If the scores in Washington DC had continued rising after 2007 in the same way that they had been rising before 2007, then DC would probably be the highest-scoring city in the nation.
That did not happen.
So it’s your impression, Guy, that relative to the rest of the nation, Washington DC has progressed faster since mayoral control, than prior to it in respect to student NAEP scores?
Overall, in respect to urban school districts, do you see a correlation between implementation of what you’d call ed reform and greater increase in NAEP scores? If you compare cities such as Baltimore and Cleveland and Washington DC, in which city has there been more “ed reform” and in which do you see greater progress in NAEP scores? Thanks for any insight.
Stephen,
Why don’t you write Guy Brandenburg on his blog and stop cluttering my space?
Stephen,
Despite your many posts here in the fall of 2016, Question 2 was overwhelmingly defeated in Massachusetts. Tough.
DC is still one of the worst performing districts in the nation and still has the largest achievement gaps in the nation.
As measured by NAEP quite rapid progress in recent years relative to other jurisdictions, yes?
http://educationnext.org/urban-school-districts-moving-right-direction-naep/
https://edexcellence.net/articles/naep-2017-americas-lost-decade-of-educational-progress
“the actual score increases have generally far outpaced the gains predicted by demographic change alone. For example, in fourth-grade math, demographics predicted a four-point increase, but scores increased 17 points.”
https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/does-gentrification-explain-rising-student-scores-washington-dc
But still one of the lowest performing districts in the US. Mississippi also made gains.
Mississippi and D.C.!
“MissIssippi and D.C.!”
Indeed. All the yellow elsewhere on this chart “Table 2: Statistically significant changes for each state from 2013–17” certainly highlights the insufficiencies of Brandenburg’s analysis:
Did D.C. results appear nearly so relatively verdant in the decade or two prior to mayoral control?
DC is nothing to boast about. The achievement gaps there between blacks and whites, between Hispanics and whites are the largest of any city tested by NAEP.
“In 2003, black and Hispanic students in DC performed worse on the NAEP than students of color in any state or city that participated in the NAEP. Since then, the average math scores for black and Hispanic fourth graders in DC have increased more than any jurisdiction in the country. In fact, five times more black and Hispanic fourth graders in DC scored proficient in math in 2015 than did in 2003. Students of color in DC have also performed strongly in reading as Hispanic and black fourth graders had the highest, and second highest, increase in scores of any city or state between 2003 and 2015.”
https://www.dcactionforchildren.org/blog/dc-posts-strong-gains-2015-naep
I answered Stephen Ronan’s question on my blog, and I’ll post it here:
Much of the data on these subgroups in 4th grade math was simply missing before 2000, so that’s why I stopped there,.They simply didn’t report it on the NAEP database. Feel free to search for yourself if you like.
The Washington Post and DCPS administrators have already widely publicized that DC is no longer the worst city in the nation in terms of overall NAEP test scores (though they leave unsaid that it still has the widest gaps between whites and other groups). Detroit has apparently now fallen into last place in the league tables.
DC is also one of the fastest-gentrifying cities in the nation. I’m a DC native, and have taught in 3 out of the 4 quadrants during my 30 years in the employ of DCPS.
I am astonished every single time I drive on a road or street here in DC that I haven’t been on in a few years: vast numbers of expensive high-rise condos, vast numbers of white families with little kids — in neighborhoods that used to be mostly poor and black. Schools that I used to teach in, like Francis JHS (later MS, later EC) that served black and hispanic neighborhoods, have seen the entire neighborhood from which they drew students, turned into regions with high-priced condos and multi-million-dollar homes.
I hear, but haven’t yet verified with Census bureau statistics, that it is the very poorest black families that are being forced to flee to Prince George’s County, which is across the border in Maryland, leaving behind a relatively wealthier black DC school population than we had when I started teaching roughly 40 years ago. As we know, there is an extremely strong correlation between family income & education (on the one hand) and kids’ test scores (on the other). So that economic factor might be part of the DC growth in scores — which is actually not all that impressive.
(Let me add that based on my own personal pro-bono and paid tutoring since I retired, and my own classroom observations in DC’s charter and public schools, I am not at all impressed with the mathematics that is now being taught here in DC. It’s definitely worse.)
Detroit is now at the very bottom of the US city league tables. Almost all of the major factories there that built the cars I saw on the streets and roads of this country? Closed. Good paying jobs there? All gone. Tens of thousands of abandoned houses, offices, stores, schools, and so on. Is it a major surprise that their scores are now at the very bottom?
*Continued from above:
The most misleading concept/term in education is “measuring student achievement” or “measuring student learning”. The concept has been misleading educators into deluding themselves that the teaching and learning process can be analyzed/assessed using “scientific” methods which are actually pseudo-scientific at best and at worst a complete bastardization of rationo-logical thinking and language usage.
There never has been and never will be any “measuring” of the teaching and learning process and what each individual student learns in their schooling. There is and always has been assessing, evaluating, judging of what students learn but never a true “measuring” of it.
But, but, but, you’re trying to tell me that the supposedly august and venerable APA, AERA and/or the NCME have been wrong for more than the last 50 years, disseminating falsehoods and chimeras??
Who are you to question the authorities in testing???
Yes, they have been wrong and I (and many others, Wilson, Hoffman etc. . . ) question those authorities and challenge them (or any of you other advocates of the malpractices that are standards and testing) to answer to the following onto-epistemological analysis:
The TESTS MEASURE NOTHING, quite literally when you realize what is actually happening with them. Richard Phelps, a staunch standardized test proponent (he has written at least two books defending the standardized testing malpractices) in the introduction to “Correcting Fallacies About Educational and Psychological Testing” unwittingly lets the cat out of the bag with this statement:
“Physical tests, such as those conducted by engineers, can be standardized, of course [why of course of course], but in this volume , we focus on the measurement of latent (i.e., nonobservable) mental, and not physical, traits.” [my addition]
Notice how he is trying to assert by proximity that educational standardized testing and the testing done by engineers are basically the same, in other words a “truly scientific endeavor”. The same by proximity is not a good rhetorical/debating technique.
Since there is no agreement on a standard unit of learning, there is no exemplar of that standard unit and there is no measuring device calibrated against said non-existent standard unit, how is it possible to “measure the nonobservable”?
THE TESTS MEASURE NOTHING for how is it possible to “measure” the nonobservable with a non-existing measuring device that is not calibrated against a non-existing standard unit of learning?????
PURE LOGICAL INSANITY!
The basic fallacy of this is the confusing and conflating metrological (metrology is the scientific study of measurement) measuring and measuring that connotes assessing, evaluating and judging. The two meanings are not the same and confusing and conflating them is a very easy way to make it appear that standards and standardized testing are “scientific endeavors”-objective and not subjective like assessing, evaluating and judging.
That supposedly objective results are used to justify discrimination against many students for their life circumstances and inherent intellectual traits.
**Continued from above:
What is meant by fidelity to truth, that of being faithful/true to truth? Preliminarily and primarily, Comte-Sponville states “All fidelity is—whether to a value or to a person—is fidelity to love and through love.” Since he considers love to be the greatest and hardest to achieve virtue that statement rightly precedes all his other thoughts on the subject. We can follow that up with the consideration that fidelity is the “will to remember” truthfully and that fidelity “resists forgetfulness, changing fashions and interests, the charms of the moment, the seductions of power.” Fidelity to truth means “refusing to change one’s ideas in the absence of strong, valid reasons, and. . . it means holding as true. . . ideas whose truth has clearly and solidly established.” At the same time fidelity to truth means rejecting discourse that has been shown to have errors, falsehoods and invalidities. However, “Being faithful to one’s thoughts more than to truth would mean being unfaithful to thought and condemning oneself to sophistry.” To be unfaithful to truth, to be in error, then is to reject that which makes honest communications, policies and practices cogent and a human good, a virtue.
• Speech and/or writing accurately describes policies, practices and outcomes (discourse).
• Using the correct/intended meaning of a word in light of the context.
• Discourse serves to enlighten and not obscure meaning.
• Discourse is free of contradictions, error and falsehoods.
• The “control of belief by fact” (S. Blackburn).
• Discourse is based in skeptical rationo-logical thought processes in which a “scientific attitude” holds sway.
• Discourse based on/in faith conventions is eschewed and rejected outright due to separation of church and state constitutional concerns.
• Discourse of expediency based on the rationalizations of “Everyone is doing this”, “It is dictated by the State Department of Education” or “NCLB mandates that we have to do this” is firmly and rightly rejected. (from Ch 2 “Fidelity to Truth in Educational Discourse” of “Infidelity to Truth: Education Malpractice in American Public Education”
Until we quit using the edudeformer false language that distorts the meaning of words and meanings, such as using NAEP scores for anything, we will be fighting on our heels, giving ground to falsehoods and idiocies.
NAEP scores are as COMPLETELY INVALID as all other standardized test scores. We’ve known this since at least 1997 when Noel Wilson totally destroyed the onto-epistemological (foundational conceptual) underpinnings of the standards and testing regime.
But almost all turn a blind eye to his (and my) work proving without a doubt the total invalidities involved in those malpractices and continue to be GAGA* Good German implementors of malpractices that harm many, if not all the students. Good job, educators! (said with all the snark and disdain I can muster)
GAGA = Go Along to Get Along
“Standardized Testing”
What does it measure?
What does it gauge?
Testing endeavor
Mirage of the age
“Diseased Forest”
Missing the Forest
For the trees
Demands to ignore this
Test disease
Like I said, I’ll do some more work on other subgroups in DC, and will post it soon, but it takes some time.
Stephen Ronan is repeating the same propaganda about amazing progress in DC that has been propagated by the Editorial Board of the Washington Post and the amazing fakers and liars Michelle Rhee and Kaya Henderson, but that’s what it is: cherry-picking propaganda.
Regarding ‘Education Next’: Source Watch says,
“Education Next is a propaganda outlet for corporate education reform policies such as charter schools, school vouchers, and merit pay. Its editorial board consists of the members of the Koret Task Force, the education task force of the conservative think-tank the Hoover Institute. Although it purports to be free of ideology[1], it frequently takes the conservative point of view. For instance, it is critical of unions[2] and opposes attempts to increase or equalize funding for schools.[3]”
Who funds you, Stephen Ronan?