It looks like County Commissioner Tony Gurley wants to play being a school board member.
At Gurley's urging, the county commissioners had scheduled a presentation on the SAS report at today's work session. The presentation was delayed when William Sanders from SAS was unable to attend.
At least some of the Democratic commissioners are unhappy that Gurley is pressing them to discuss the SAS report instead of leaving it to the school board. The report is perfect for Gurley, a Republican commissioner and frequent critic of the outgoing school board.
Comments
So...
Mon, 11/09/2009 - 17:41 — Bob_SconceI know that Wake is making EVAAS available to all schools. Does that mean that it's dropping its own parallel program? If so, then Gurley may be validly inquiring whether the district is spending money duplicating what it can get for free.
That's a reach, though. I think he's just putting Norwalk on the hotseat.
not parallel, pretend
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 00:42 — klanders65They don't have a parallel program; they have a pretend program.
Very telling that David
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 09:16 — CaryCurmudgeonVery telling that David Holzcom skipped out on the meeting when the SAS folks came in to present their report. I'm sure he would have been uncomfortable sitting in the room while they explained how he had presided over a system which inflated results and fostered discrimination. But he sure didn't give any early signs of embracing the program.
Exactly the opposite - early resistance
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 09:33 — SDR256No signs of early adoption would be one thing. In fact it was more like early resistance. I heard that he was LIVID when EVAAS was brought up - I believe it was over the summer or even last spring - at one of the BAC meetings. When the chair wouldn't back down, there was an effort to have them removed specifically because of this topic. Very revealing, don't you think?
Holdzkom is notorious for
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 09:39 — woodstockHoldzkom is notorious for being an unconventional, arrogant and hot-headed know-it-all; and it is my understanding he has been fired more than once for it.
He was fired in Durham from
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 11:07 — klanders65He was fired in Durham from this position.
Go figure
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 11:18 — louiselee44So Wake hires him - just great...
easy fix for that problem.
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 11:30 — CaryCurmudgeoneasy fix for that problem.
Go Gurley! He is not
Mon, 11/09/2009 - 16:40 — woodstockGo Gurley! He is not "playing a school board member," he is, as AngelaW points out, trying to understand what it is he and the other CCs are funding.
What are the Democratic commissioners unhappy about? They should be just as interested.
Well, Stan Norwalk and Lindy
Mon, 11/09/2009 - 17:05 — CaryCurmudgeonWell, Stan Norwalk and Lindy Brown are both busy attending protest meetings and talking about lawsuits against the school system, so maybe they have not had a chance to discover that the SAS report in question demonstrates that the system they are advocating for is discriminatory.
Go Tony, Go Tony!
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 07:50 — g88ky07Stan Norwalk, aka: Rev. Barber #2, when it comes time we are going to have so much fun getting to know each other again. When your time is up I suggest you follow the same paths as the departing school board members that you so loved, QUIT!
If you don't, you too will be fired and we'll have such fun making that happen! As the matter of fact, I can't currently think of anyone who deserves it more! Well, maybe Lindy! ;c )
So True
Mon, 11/09/2009 - 23:12 — TrailerParkGirl"so maybe they have not had a chance to discover that the SAS report in question demonstrates that the system they are advocating for is discriminatory."
So true and that's certainly less scary than the thought that they have discovered that and chose to ignore it.
knew and ignored
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 07:17 — klanders65I think the folks in the school system knew and not only ignored, but covered up as long as they could. Their little gap maintaining model, called the Effectiveness Index, has built in low expectations for ED students. They knew they were limiting opportunities for these students. I think that was the goal. Not only are there not enough seats in the advanced classes, access to those courses is the ticket to being elite. EVAAS shines the light of day on this system of unequal access to rigorous courses for equally qualified students. So, rather than fix the problem that is revealed, E&R tried to get rid of EVAAS in WCPSS so that it would be hard for anyone to verify or clearly understand what is going on. I don't think you have to look very hard to see not only have they know, but they tried to cover up the problem rather than fix it.
(Sorry to scare you.)
My post
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:39 — TrailerParkGirlMy post was actually referring to the County Commissioners, not those within the school system.
EVAAS
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 10:01 — exYank_WCprinAs one who has been trained in both systems....I used the HSEI since its inception in WCPSS and EVAAS for the last 2-3 years, and as one who has read these blogs for the past 2-3 weeks ago, I can categorically say that most of you have no earthly idea what you are talking about. I will write a tutorial on HSEI vs EVAAS when I have some extra time....so at least you will know the facts and usefullness of from a principal's point of view
"the school system....covered up..."...so you think 9/11 was a conspiracy too??
that is not a real
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 00:44 — klanders65that is not a real principal. I wonder why he calls it HSEI?
I can't wait to see the tutorial. I think we already have it posted on E&R's website. This is what the SAS Report was in response to.
Please do....
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:55 — Bob_SconceI'd be interested to see how these are used. Which do you find more useful? Is one a substitute for the other? Have you been using EVAAS in Wake or elsewhere?
As to a cover-up.... The core question is: why did the administration not present the report to the board in June when it was received? I don't know if it rises to the level of a "cover-up," but it's a pretty glaring omission, especially when it undermines the district's commitment to diversity. The "Well, we generate lots of technical reports and don't present most of them" argument was pretty weak.
How they are used
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 01:33 — klanders65I'll tell you how they are used and try to give you enough information to compare the two.
Effectiveness Index refers to a regression analysis that is run by E&R using the last EOG test score, to predict the next score, using only WCPSS data. Because WCPSS knows that their low income and SWD (students with disabilities) score lower on average, they adjust the prediction to be lower for students in these categories. They know from their data that gifted students and high income students score higher on average, so they adjust the predicted scores for students in these subgroups up.
They present to principals a roster of names on a spreadsheet with a decimal number, like 2.37 for a student--to indicate that the student scored about 2.37 scale score points higher than expected. If this is a low income student, he may have gone from Level 4 to Level 3, but we expected him to go to Level II because he was low income, in a high poverty school, and SWD. So, he never should have been Level 4 in the first place and the fact that he went to Level 3 is better than we expect for him. The principals get a roster of names with these decimal scores.
Principals also get a list of teachers with the average "residual" for each teacher. A teacher with low income students might have them all learning nothing and have a high average residual because the model expects them to lose ground, not learn nothing. This teacher would be seen as pretty effective. The Effectiveness Index was designed to not punish or look down on teachers who had to teach poor or minority students, simply because their students didn't learn anything.
What does EVAAS do?
EVAAS is a tool. It is nothing like the E.I. The E.I. is a list of residuals based on one score. It is not a tool. It is information that is hard to use and no one understands, and it is racially biased.
EVAAS is a data system. A principal can log in then run queries. SAS provides Data Analytics tools. This is what they do. They provide information about how to optimize for success. EVAAS provides what SAS provides to businesses... How to optimize for success. They do not have an agenda for schools any more than they do for Walmart. They analyze the data and find what works.
They compute probability of success on various paths for students, based on their past academic mastery. Unlike Effectiveness Index, they do not predict next math score based on last math score. They predict math score based on all known academic information on this student.
EVAAS allows the principal to produce a query and show... say all students who are highly likely to succeed in Honors Chemistry. This tool is interactive. He can click on any student in the list and see is entire academic history, including all the schools he has attended, all scores, comparisons with the schools attended, etc. It provides information for making decisions about individual students to optimize success. He can ask for predictions in how the student would do in advanced classes.
The principal can run a report that shows graphically whether advanced, average, and low scoring students are doing as expected, better, or worse, and can run this report by subgroup. He/she may find that low income black Level 4 students are doing worse than expected. They might then look to see if they are being tracked high.
In contrast, the Effectiveness Index is not a tool. It is just a number produced that tells if a student did as expected or not. If poor in a poor school, it reports that all is well when kids lose ground, because that is expected. It doesn't not treat students as individuals. Principals cannot ask questions, cannot produce reports, and usually have no idea what the spreadsheet of numbers mean so they assume negative is bad, positive is good, and judge their teachers and students accordingly.
Some people in WCPSS fear that EVAAS may be used for judging teachers. The Effectiveness Index is used for that although no one understands it. A teacher of all high income kids who got labeled gifted may be doing fine and it will show she is awful because they should be way way ahead and they are only way ahead. On the other hand, a teacher of poor black kids who are almost all SWD in a high poverty school may be awful and teaching the kids nothing. They only lose one year of growth because their parents care. The Effectiveness Index shows they exceed our expectations, and they are identified as effective teachers.
E&R's website explains this well and this is how they conduct their research.
In answer to your question, EVAAS is a tool for examining data and treats students as individuals. Effectiveness Index is a list given one time, based on really bad stats, and treats students as expected to perform based on subgroup membership.
Teachers are judged with Effectiveness Index, even though their principals don't understand. WCPSS only has the ability to use EVAAS for student predictions, not teacher value add, because WCPSS did not purchase those reports. So, teachers are judged with EI but not with EVAAS. Ask any teacher.
Does this help?
Yes.
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 09:58 — Bob_SconceThank you. It appears that they're used in two different ways. EVAAS is predictive -- "Based solely on his academic history, if you put student X in class Y, he'll probably succeed." E.I. is retrospective "Student X did as well in class Y as we would have expected from somebody in his demographic group."
Since E.I. works on EOGs, it's really only useful in 4th to 8th grades. EVAAS uses all academic scores, and is helpful in deciding student assignment, which generally happens in 6th to 12th grades. (Before 6th grade, WCPSS doesn't really have the option to assign students to advanced/remedial classes except in very limited circumstances.)
Do I have that right?
More clarity
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 11:43 — klanders65What you say is partly right. I think they use End-of-course in E.I. also but I am not sure how.
EVAAS and EI are two totally different animals. When Holdzkom says he can't support them both (which I've heard as a reason not to let anyone use EVAAS), I think people mistakenly think he means "provide technical support" for people using these. He confuses and misleads on purpose, I think. And he is good with words. Support in this instance could only mean "believe in" or something. He can't support both belief systems: Belief system required for using EVAAS is that past performance can be used to predict how to optimize the students' success, based on statistical analyses that shows what is optimal. Belief system for EI is that low income students can't learn as well as higher income students EVEN IF they have outperformed high income students in the past. So, we should not expect much of them or of the teachers who have to teach them, and we should provide remedial interventions for them and certainly not allow them to enroll in advanced courses, regardless of what their past performance has been.
Those two belief systems are in contrast and he can't support both of those belief systems.
Effectiveness Index is not a "system" that is used by school staff. Recall that at the school board meeting where Dr. Sanders demonstrated how to use EVAAS, Brad did not demonstrate how to use EI. He showed some PowerPoint slides of graphs of AYP data and talked about some "research" done by E&R using EI. No one "uses" EI. It is not a tool for educators. It is rather a way to report whether in the past, teachers have done okay or not with the students they have. They even say in their write up it is not to be used to know things about individual students because the error is too large. It is more or less a Teacher-Value-Add model.
They used EI for what they call the Algebra Study. You can get this off their website. They did a Biology Study also. They looked for teachers with the consistently high average residuals from EI and identified them as the best. They also looked for the consistently low average residuals. The best teachers identified could include teachers in low income schools teaching ED kids who learn almost nothing, but EI predicted them to lose ground. (I am not kidding.) They then surveyed and observed the highest and lowest teachers and wrote a paper about how they differ. Then they travel around the country going to conferences to present this. This is how they use E.I. They don't publish their papers in peer reviewed journals because no peer reviewed journal would publish such nonsense.
They also "used" EI to determine whether there are "effective practices" for teaching ED students. This is their most insulting and ridiculous paper. They identified a handfull of kids who had 3 consecutive positive residuals and kids with 3 consecutive negative residuals. (This is nonsense on many levels. They say correctly in their explanation of EI that you cannot use it for individuals. But they do here. A positive residual does not mean success. Kids lose ground and have positive residuals. Positive residual for low income means they didn't do as bad as WCPSS expects them to, but may have done poorly.)
Then they looked at differences between the kids with pos residuals and those with neg residuals and conclude that the kids with positive residuals must have some sort of resiliency that the other kids don't have.
Then they wrote 3 papers to say they discovered that low income kids do better if they are resilient so we should foster resiliency.
This is total nonsense. This is how they spend their time. This is how they use EI. They think it helps inform educators because now we know that we should foster resiliency in ED kids. They probably traveled to conferences in CA and NY to present their resiliency research findings.
EVAAS on the other hand is a tool that a principal could use to run a report to show which 6th graders are already on the path to success in 8th grade algebra with no additional support, and then make sure to keep them on that path.
EVAAS is a tool for educators to use to predict who would succeed on the most rigorous path already, and who needs additional support to succeed. EI is a tool for E&R folks to use to write crazy papers and then travel around the country going to conferences to present them. They are two totally different animals.
And EI is more or less a Teacher Value Add report. EVAAS is a tool like SAS would provide to a business to help them optimize success.
EI predictions
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 11:09 — lferreriSomeone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think EI also has to generate predicted scores. In order to compute a residual, it would have to have a predicted score to compare to the actual score. The schools or teachers may not get those predicted scores (it would be interesting to know if they do), but EI would have to compute them. I don't know how much data is needed, but if multiple years of EOGs are required, it would seem that neither system could be used until at least the fifth grade. At that point, the system would have two years' worth of EOG scores. (The EVAAS literature says they need three years' worth of data.)
In our experience, tracking of students in math and English classes begins at least at early as the fourth grade. I don't know what basis they use to do this, possibly teacher judgments and maybe the third grade EOGs.
You are part right here. EI
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 12:14 — klanders65You are part right here. EI does have to predict to compute a residual. In the past, they did it like this example: 5th grade students take math EOG. They have the scores. They run regression using 4th grade math EOG and compare what this predicts to what the student actually scored and that produces the residual. It is not used in a predictive way because it was done after the students took the 5th grade math EOG. It was used only to determine whether they did "as expected," "better" or "worse."
Originally, these residuals were used to report by school by grade whether say, 4th grade math did "expected," "above," or "below." It was reported in the School Profiles that used to be available on the web. (They quit making these.) Reading scores were used to predict reading.
Then, they quit making those School Profiles. A few years ago, they started providing student data to principals in the form of a spreadsheet with a row for each student. All sorts of data is there. Included in this data are EOG scores and the student residual for tests already taken. A prediction model was used to compute those residuals, but it is done and provided after the fact. Only one score is used to predict. They provide this data for individual students then say not to use it because it is not valid at the individual level. Looking at this data you can see (very commonly) things like
Johnny: EOG 4th grade math: 245, EOG 5th grade math: 243, Residual: +4 (He only lost 2 points and we thought he'd lose 6)
Susy: OG 4th grade math: 245, EOG 5th grade math: 255, Residual: -1 (She only gained 10 points and she would gain 11)
They also provide to principals average residuals for the teachers.
This was all done to show what has already happened. They did not provide any info about predictions in the future.
This year, that changed--probably because of EVAAS. This year they generated "target scores" for students using the EI to predict. This breaks all their own rules. You can't use EI for individual students but they did. I know some teachers compared "target scores" to what the kids did last year (by looking it up--the info was not provided with the target scores) and saw that many kids had "targets" under where they currently were.
EVAAS uses all prior test scores to predict all future. So, all reading, science, math, writing together are used to predict the next math score. It is a much more sophistocated model. SAS has more talent than E&R and can do better prediction models. They would only predict kids to go backwards if the data from the past showed that kids with this academic profile go backwards. They predict based on what the data says happens in reality in NC, looking at past data. It is a whole system that principals can log in to and use.
EI uses one prior score and the belief that certain subgroups should score lower, so they adjust the prediction for sub-group membership--not based on data but based on their beliefs. It was designed to be a Teacher Value Add model, and they did not want to punish teachers who are teaching certain subgroups, just because their students don't learn. It was never intended to be used at the student level. And it is not appropriate for that.
Thanks
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 13:30 — lferreriThanks. This is really helpful in understanding what's going on. I have to admit that I find it fascinating. I wrote my dissertation on incentive systems. Two cardinal principles of good systems are that the people being evaluated must understand how the evaluation is being done and that the evaluations must be perceived as fair. EI seems to violate both of these. It doesn't make it clear how the expected scores are developed (for example, how much of a reduction is done to a free or reduced lunch student's score). So teachers don't know where the residual used in the evaluation is coming from. And other interested parties like parents and taxpayers don't know how teachers are being evaluated either. In my opinion, the system should be transparent. (I don't mean everyone should know what evaluation individual teachers are being given, but that they should understand how the system works.) I am also guessing that, given the strange way of calculating residuals, the system may be generating what are seen as unfair results. I've never taught in a public school but, at the colleges where I've taught, we usually had a pretty good idea who among our colleagues were good teachers. EI seems as if it probably frequently mislabels teachers. As you said in your post above, a teacher who teaches nothing could be labelled as doing a good job if not much is expected of her students. It's appalling to know that the WCPSS may then be presenting these teachers' techniques as "best practices." I agree that this wouldn't get published in a peer review journal.
Great info. Seems that
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 11:48 — DrActualFactualGreat info. Seems that WCPSS paid a lot of money for junk science and travel expenses to promote bad practices. Peer reviewed journals add the credibility of other folks reviewing, critiquing, and commenting on how to improve your work, where it is flawed, etc. It is money better spent on actual teachers and course offerings. I have to ask Klanders, Iferreri, what is the best way to approach cuts to teachers at HS level? It seems to me that with the findings that EVAAS will identify kids to be appropriately placed but the HS will have no classes for them. Panther Creek HS will only allow 1 math class per year for rising freshmen and sophomores. Growth Mgmt. moved up a reassignment this year which added 100-200 students (if I remember correctly). With the exception of paired courses like Algebra I Plus/Hon. Geometry. The school cut 3 math teachers which results in 48 fewer sections--correct? With the revelation of the math defecit EVAAS/EI combined with the backlog of students not getting a second semester block course--won't this create a giant backlog of students hindered further at getting math classes? (There are approx. 1200 freshmen/sophomores at this school). This HS hasn't been open as long as the others and lost teachers under the General Assembly's cuts this year. I think it is an isolated incident and I'd like to see a solution implemented even though the second semester is still a month or two away. At this point it is still a FIXABLE problem. If it goes unaddressed tooooo many students will fall through a giant crack. I think other HS cut in language areas. I would think that if a specific problem area of programming had been identified that WCPSS would want to do all it can to fix the situation before it worsens. Perhaps Gurley and CC's can get special appropriations to address this situation. I appreciate their willingness to review the implications of this recent development.
They had a meeting for
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 15:33 — ApexterThey had a meeting for parents of juniors at Apex HS a couple of weeks ago. If I remember correctly, they told us that they were down 10 teachers from what they would normally have with that enrollment.
Apex HS has dropped down to 2 foreign languages. (Tough luck for you if you had only finished 1 year of your foreign language, because colleges want 2 semesters of the same foreign language.) We also lost AP Biology as well as another AP course --- I think it was anatomy.
False economy
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 22:21 — lferreriThis is awful especially for the students who have done the first year of the foreign language. Surely they could have arranged for someone to come in part time to give the second year to those kids. How much can that cost? To me, it's a false economy to hurt kids.
It is a shame that High
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 12:18 — NWRaleighMomIt is a shame that High Schools had to cut essential math and language courses meanwhile magnet schools keep hundred electives. It is obscene to offer Japanese and strings for first graders while high schoolers are not being prepared for college. New BoE should look into this immediately.
I'm not sure
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 12:40 — lferreriI don't know much about what's happening now in the high schools. (Our son has already graduated.) But I do have a couple of questions. I seem to frequently hear that more math cannot be offered because there are not enough teachers. But students are taking something! So there must be teachers to teach them. Why does it save money to have fewer math teachers? Why would Panther Creek cut math teachers then limit the number of math classes students can take? (There must be a demand for the classes or they wouldn't have had to set limits.) Has anyone explained this? I could understand if they said there was a shortage of math teachers, but that isn't the case here. Have they given you any explanation?
The school sent us a letter
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 16:45 — DrActualFactualThe school sent us a letter May 20th that outlined their course selection changes and we had to select alternate courses. They indicated this was due to budget cuts from General Assembly and that those on terminating contract status would be let go. Last year was the first year PCHS had a Senior graduating class along with the full 4 grades in the school. They must have hired the upper level math teachers for those sections. I pressed the school officials hard on why they would let math teachers go and they reminded me they are not required to provide courses beyond algebra 1. I inquired about online courses and they said there is only a 40% pass rate and that my kids would have to take those on their own time as a 5th class. In reading articles from N&O over the summer as I looked for alternatives it appears Wake Tech is crowded due to kids attending for $$ reasons and that cutbacks at NC State and other universities resulted in reduced staff/courses as well. The options that used to address math deficiencies are disappearing. I do like the suggestion of the online computer courses with a math tutor/supervisor on hand for office hours. I think that is likely the best workable solution in today's overcrowded classes--especially if EVAAS encourages more students toward achieving upward (which is a good thing) but there still has to be teacher/course/seat available. Thanks for the input.
They don't have to provide
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 20:03 — klanders65They don't have to provide courses beyond algebra?
This makes my blood boil. Someone needs to sit down and make a list of all the efforts to raise achievement in math, raise enrollment in rigorous math classes, and close achievement gaps. Then, make a list of all the policies and practices that run totally counter to these things. How much money are we spending to try to raise math/science achievement? Why don't we spend it on math teachers?
This is why they have to keep EVAAS out. Without reliable data that people understand they are able to say that we don't have kids who can do math so we don't need the courses.
Does Enloe offer any advanced math? Does Wakefield? If so, how does it compare to what is offered at say, Knightdale, or Garner High? Right now, we can say that these poor kids in Garner don't need math because poor people don't learn it very well. If someone gets their hands on EVAAS and it turns out there is evidence that they learn just fine until we don't give them access, we may have to take some of the advanced courses at Enloe, or Wakefied and move them to Garner.
Not to stir the pot any - I
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 20:44 — SouthEastWakeMomNot to stir the pot any - I do appreciate all of the information you share. But isn't the EOC for Algebra the only math EOC required for graduation by NC? If so, that would explain that the statement that only up to Algebra is required. And, I so totally don't agree with that. We need to be making sure that qualified kids have access to the appropriate courses that will let them get into college as well as making sure that our non-college bound students are getting the education they need to enter the workforce. I'm sure there are some who would disagree, but I'd cut art, music, drama, etc. before I'd touch math, history, the sciences, English.
Thanks
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 22:12 — lferreriThanks, I hadn't thought about the only required EOC being Algebra. That explains what they were saying. But I agree with you. All students should have access to the courses that they need to get into college as well as the courses that they need if they are non-college bound. These should be available at all of our high schools.
Yes, that EOC is the only
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 21:46 — DrActualFactualYes, that EOC is the only one required for graduation. And we were discussing classes in the context of budget cuts and what might be the plan for the following year. It just shocked me that they would be willing to negotiate the courses down to the bare minimum while so many of us strive to improve education. When some students complete Algebra 1 and Geometry during middle school there just won't be much left in HS if the courses get depleted to that level.
We got one of those letters
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 22:42 — klanders65We got one of those letters this summer. My daughter had what I thought was a confirmed course schedule. We got a letter saying that due to budget cuts, she would not be taking the math courses she was signed up for. She has no math this year at all. She is fine for graduation, but not fine for being educated. This is insane.
I am going to have her take an Honors math class using NC VPS so she is on track to take what she had planned her senior year. I don't know how online math will go. I can help her, though. I think it is worth the risk. I don't believe that only 40% pass or whatever someone said. I have not heard that and I looked extensively into this option.
A disgrace
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 16:59 — lferreriI can't think of a more temperate way to say this--this is a disgrace. How can they justify letting go math teachers (who are hard to find--see Klanders comment below) just because they are on terminating contract status. It would make much more sense to decide what courses can be cut and then determine who to let go. Personally, if it were my decision, I would cut basic courses like math and English last. Did they provide any evidence for their assertion that they are not required to provide courses beyond Algebra I? That doesn't seem right to me. If it's true, it needs to be changed. I'd like to see parents demand answers from the BOE for this kind of decision making. If nothing else, these kind of poor decisions need to be made public. I think a lot of us who are not directly involved would support you.
It makes no sense to cut
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 15:52 — klanders65It makes no sense to cut math teachers. I can hardly believe it. All over the country they are trying to find math teachers. They even get grants to recruit them. The state is giving out millions to beef up math teaching ability, with Math/Science Partnership grants.
People need to get mad and say so.
I know a lot of math and language courses are available with North Carolina Virtual Public School, including Honors stuff, and AP. If they don't have the teachers, they should have someone supervise the kids in a room while they use NC VPS. It is better than not taking math.
Math courses
Fri, 11/13/2009 - 16:21 — exYank_WCprinThis post is to cover several comments not just klanders65..........
Go to wcpss.net download high school planning guide because the state changes the requirements periodically.
There seems to be some confusion about Algebra and math. Yes you can graduate from hs, if Algebra is the highest level math course on your transcript, but you must have taken 2 other math courses. Please note that you will not qualify for 4 year school nor probably 2 year school.
There are 4 NC hs diplomas
1. OCS(Spec ed)
2. Career (ole' time General/Voc Curriculum..going straight into the work force)
3. Tech Prep - can go career or college. You take Voc and College Prep courses. Minimum Math Geometry (EOC) must have a total of 4 or Integrated Math+
4. College - includes Alg II(EOC) total of 4 hs math courses. Course work above AlgII. Total 3 EOC math courses.
That is minimum...if you want to go to Duke, Carolina, Harvard...you need many AP courses, including probably math courses Calculus and/or Stats.
Also............ regarding teachers, schedules, and classes offered. Please remember that student registration is complete in late April/May and the "master schedule" (teaching schedules, roooms, etc.) is created in May and June...the state "locks" the NCWISE computer progam down over July 4th. Minor modifications can be made in July, major changes require substantial time when you do not have enough staff at school. Allotments are based on budget expectations created by tax collections through April and projected enrollment. (The fact that Raleigh is now ranked 10th for places to get and keep jobs may cause the planners a bit of heartburn for 2010-11, and trying to decide if the economy is going to pick up or get worse, but then forecasting according to some of you is easy...) If the State decides in late July/August to give a school "extra" teachers, though not impossible,it is extremely dificult to undo or redo the schedule...especially if you mail out schedules and resolve "conflicts" in July. If you thought the budget was bad this year...you ain't seen nothin' yet.
I have always subscribed to the belief that simple solutions to complex problems usually don't work.
PS I believe the residual for a student is calculated 1st by computing the average increase of the test score for all those who had the same pre-test (245 in 4th grade, per example given earlier) if that average in 5th grade was 250 then a 249 would have a residual of -1 and a 255 a +5.
You are wrong about residuals
Sat, 11/14/2009 - 17:40 — klanders65You are totally wrong about residuals. If you really are a principal, you need to understand. This is not at all how the effectiveness index works. Somewhere in here on this page I explained it and I am right.
Your understanding is completely wrong. Please don't use it to make any decisions about anything.
Is it true?
Fri, 11/13/2009 - 18:33 — lferreriIs it true that "they are not required to provide courses beyond algebra" as they told the poster above? If so, these needs to change immediately.
I don't know. But as the
Sat, 11/14/2009 - 18:33 — klanders65I don't know. But as the exYank Principal points out, kids have to take a certain number of math classes in high school, and there are different paths depending on their future plans. I would think they have to offer enough math for the kids to select any of those paths but I don't know.
How about a full investigation
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 13:16 — g88ky07of EVERYONE involved? If there is nothing to hide then no one at the wcpss should object!
Eh...
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 14:20 — Bob_SconceI don't think that's particularly productive. The school board has limited time and should spend it doing useful things, not trying to figure out which adminstrator was to blame for different things. There's going to have to be a shake-up anyway -- the administration's CYA attitude is not helpful.
maybe
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:31 — SDR256Maybe they both have their usefulness.
Maybe you've been entrenched in the system so long you no longer see the woods for the trees.
Regardless of whether the tool is useful or not, how do you explain the findings of the SAS report that children who have proven capable are systematically being kept out of college bound math? Certainly from this distance is stinks to high heaven.
Being in such a knowledgable position it would be most enlightening to all of us I'm sure to hear your perspective. And I'm not just being snide. You're an insider. Give us the scoop.
How do you explain?
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 12:21 — klanders65You explain how children are systematically kept from college bound math (and other courses) with the belief system. The belief system is that these students cannot learn very well even if they somehow did learn in the past. EI has built in low expectations.
You are right that they both have their usefulness. EI is useful for making it look okay that ED kids do not have access to rigorous courses. When they do poorly the EI residuals adjusts the outcomes and reports they did "as expected." That is very useful for justifying denying them access. You can produce numeric quantitative reports that show they are just fine. This is very useful because then you can provide the quality courses to the socially elite who would come after you if you denied access to their kids.
EVAAS is useful in a different way. If we want to raise achievement and close gaps by first aligning the resources we currently have with the needs and capabilities of the kids, EVAAS would help us do that.
Can you see how these two uses are in direct conflict with each other?
Oh yes.
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 13:04 — SDR256You're preaching to the choir. My question was more rhetorical, for ExYank and then so many other posts came in that the connection was unclear. But that's ok. This exchange has been very enlightening. I'd still like to hear ExYank's explanation since he/she seemed so dismissive of criticism of EI.
I want exYank to come back
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 20:06 — klanders65I want exYank to come back and tell me I have cursory knowledge of EI and EVAAS. I think maybe he read what I wrote, and if he really is a principal (which I don't think he is, but he might be) he may have gone and looked at his data and found that what I have explained is true.
Great attitude, WCprin,
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 10:52 — woodstockGreat attitude, WCprin, your arrogance is astounding. You obviously do
not know who you are dealing with on these blogs. Most of the people who
post here have been in the battle to take back our schools for years.
They do indeed know what they are talking about and will prove it. You may want to consider getting
on board ...or else get out of the way.
As for your 9/11 referecence, that's about as tactless as you can get. What a cad.
Nice post Woodstock
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 14:13 — shank56"You obviously do not know who you are dealing with on these blogs."
Really????
My guess is the good principal has you figured out if he/she had been reading this blog for a couple of weeks.
?
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 16:41 — woodstockHis statements suggest that he thinks posters here have a only a cursory knowledge of the issues. The reality is quite the contrary.
EVAAS/EI
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 18:06 — exYank_WCprinwoodstock....
At this point my ("his"?) comments only reflect your cursory knowledge of EVAAS and EI... I'll need to revisit some older blogs to see if I think you only have a cursory knowledge of other educational issues.