A Sunday Los Angeles Times article is challenging some popular conceptions about which teachers are effective and where they work.
The newspaper analyzed student records in the Los Angeles Unified School System to perform a value-added analysis of teacher effectiveness. The newspaper's plan to post online a database of the results of 6,000 elementary school teachers has produced an uproar, including a mass boycott from the teacher's union.
Findings included:
* Contrary to popular belief, the best teachers were not concentrated in schools in the most affluent neighborhoods, nor were the weakest instructors bunched in poor areas. Rather, these teachers were scattered throughout the district. The quality of instruction typically varied far more within a school than between schools.
• Although many parents fixate on picking the right school for their child, it matters far more which teacher the child gets. Teachers had three times as much influence on students' academic development as the school they attend. Yet parents have no access to objective information about individual instructors, and they often have little say in which teacher their child gets.
* Many of the factors commonly assumed to be important to teachers' effectiveness were not. Although teachers are paid more for experience, education and training, none of this had much bearing on whether they improved their students' performance.
* Highly effective teachers routinely propel students from below grade level to advanced in a single year. There is a substantial gap at year's end between students whose teachers were in the top 10% in effectiveness and the bottom 10%. The fortunate students ranked 17 percentile points higher in English and 25 points higher in math.
• Some students landed in the classrooms of the poorest-performing instructors year after year — a potentially devastating setback that the district could have avoided. Over the period analyzed, more than 8,000 students got such a math or English teacher at least twice in a row.
One of the ongoing issues about the move to community schools in Wake is the contention from opponents that abandoning the diversity policy will cause good teachers to not want to work in high-poverty schools. That argument was repeated Monday by former Assistant Superintendent Chuck Dulaney at the Great Schools in Wake Coalition forum.
The LA Times used a $15,000 grant from the Heckinger Institute, an independent nonprofit education news organization, to hire the Rand Corporation to conduct the statistical analysis of the data.
Los Angeles school officials were choosing not to use the data in the analysis.
But the Charlotte Observer is reporting that value-added ratings are part of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Superintendent Peter Gorman's plan to roll out teacher performance pay in the coming years.
Wake uses its internally developed Effectiveness Index to analyze teacher effectiveness. Some critics, notably school board member John Tedesco, are opposed to the Effectiveness Index because the program expects low-income students to do poorer.
During the school board's budget work session earlier this month, Tedesco questioned Assistant Superintendent David Holdzkom about why Wake still used the Effectiveness Index when the SAS EVAAS program is available. Holdzkom said they don't have enough years of EVAAS data yet to analyze long-term trends for individual teachers.
After Holdzkom's explanation, the board agreed to let staff keep operating the Effectiveness Index.
Comments
In case you doubt
Mon, 08/30/2010 - 19:32 — danofncHere is where the Guilford County argument really got started in this thread:
"However, you refuse to acknowledge that in order to have smaller class sizes, you need to fund additional teachers OR fill other classes above their intended capacity, despite Bob Sconce's very detailed analysis."
This is where the "25" became problematic. If all the classes had 25 kids, and 25 was the intended capacity, then of course you're adding more kids than there is planned space for.
But, even using your numbers, the teacher/student ratio isn't 25:1.
The reason (at least part of it) that Wake County has such large class sizes is because they offer a lot of different classes. If two schools have 1800 kids each, and one offers 22 AP classes and the other offers 10, that's a big difference. The teachers are more spread out in the school offering 22 AP classes, because the per-student funding should be the same, right?
In 08-09, Apex was pretty well above the district average in class size for every class listed at ncreportcards.org. Where do they fall on user's list of AP offerings? Garner, which I'm pretty sure is always at the bottom of that list, is within 3 on six classes (actually it's 2, 1, 1, 3, 2, 3), and below the average on the other 4.
Blah, Blah, Blah. Nothing
Tue, 08/31/2010 - 18:50 — jeffrey1Blah, Blah, Blah. Nothing new here.
For the record, the talk about Guilford really got started in another thread where you said:
Cost isn't just dollars.
If that teacher isn't teaching an "extra" AP class, it opens up time for that teacher to teach another more basic math class.
So, you lose the AP class, but you gain a basic class, which means that the class size in the basic classes can be smaller, which makes the kids more likely to get the needed attention to help them get through the class.
You add the AP classes, the basic classes get larger, and the kids are less likely to do well.
Both Bob and I acknowledged that smaller class sizes would help, but would require additional teachers and/or larger class sizes elsewhere, you disagreed, and that was the beginning of your downfall.
For the record, here's the challenge with a class size of 16. This is to show you that there was never any reliance on a class size of 25.
High School #1
Location: Wake County
# students: 1200
# class periods per day: 4
# course offerings: 50 (40 core and 10 AP)
All courses are offered 6 times per day
# teachers: 100
High School #2
Location: Any county on a high school block schedule
# students: 1200
# class periods per day: 4
# course offerings: You Pick
# teachers: 100
You'll notice that since teachers are allocated based on enrollment (and the enrollment in both schools is the same), both schools have the same number of teachers.
The rules are that each student must take 4 classes. Each teacher teaches 3 classes per day and has 1 planning period.
OK, here is my argument for School #1: Since each teacher can teach 3 classes, there are 100 * 3 = 300 different classes taught during the day. And since each course is offered 6 times per day there are 50 * 6 = 300 different classes offered durig the day. You'll notice that the number of classes taught is equal to the number of classes offered. Since each student takes 4 classes per day, there are 1200 * 4 = 4800 "student classes." Since these 4800 student classes must be divided into the 300 classes that are taught and offered, the size of each class is 4800 / 300 = 16 students per class.
Now here is your challenge: Tell me how many courses are offered at School #2. Tell me how many are core and how many are AP. Presumably, you will want to have less AP classes since that is the context of your argument. Tell me how many times per day each course is offered (They don't all have to be offered the same amount of times per day). Finally, demonstrate to me how some or all of the core classes will have smaller class sizes, without increasing the size of other classes, or adding more teachers. Please use specific numbers in your response.
Now, given that you have just recently acknowledged that class sizes will increase:
If so, the change I said would help kids in regular classes would simply add a few to the number that sign up for a class and don't get it. That seems like common sense to me....no formulas needed.
you can skip the challenge and post more blah, blah, bah.
If you go back to the other
Wed, 09/01/2010 - 08:29 — danofncIf you go back to the other thread (I can't remember which one it was), I'm pretty sure I said that I didn't care if some elective classes had to increase in size if it meant improving the ED grad rate (or trying to).
Now, the reason the 25 (which was ALWAYS the number) was important is because you acted like that increase would mean we were choosing 29-30 kid per class in some elective in order to have a 21 or 22 student core class. Using the actual averages shows that your assumption isn't necessarily true.
"Here's the math: W class
Mon, 08/23/2010 - 17:26 — danofnc"Here's the math: W class periods per day per student, X average students per class, Y students total, Z class sessions per teacher, T = total number of teachers needed
T= WY/XZ"
Taking away AP classes in Wake would cause problems. I don't deny that for a second. But, that has no bearing at all on the impact not having a lot of AP classes has had in GCS.
WCPSS is unique. I've said that a million times. I point it out a lot when you try to provide comparisons. Well, this is another one of those times. If the ED grad rate was 75%, but there were fewer AP classes, then people would be accusing the old board of neglecting the brightest kids to babysit the "not so bright". Since the AP kids are doing great, it was ignored, and the ED grad rate was hung around the neck of the old board.
No one anywhere has "done it all", at least not that I'm aware of. Is there any district anywhere that is loaded with kids taking AP classes AND graduating a high percentage of their ED kids? Do they have a significant ED population? Are they doing it for around $9k a year?
But, if each math teacher
Mon, 08/23/2010 - 19:23 — jeffrey1The equation changes because the math teacher from the class taken away is now teaching the additional class created by reducing the class sizes of the remaining math classes. But the French teacher is already teaching a full load of courses, so you have to employ an additional French teacher to teach the French class you added.
So here's the question. What happened to the 125 students who were displaced from the AP classes that were eliminated??? They've got to take something. And here are the options, most of which are grossly unfair and don't make sense:
Like Bob explained, I suppose you could throw them all into an existing gym class, and create a massive (175-200 student) gym class. But surely you would not expect those students give up an AP class that could possibly provide them with college credit, and make them take Badminton 101. This is not a viable option.
Or perhaps you would boost the class size of each of 25 available electives by 5 students each, and somehow come up with a formula for dividing 125 students into 25 different courses, (for example, the first 5 take Spanish, the next 5 take Astrology, the next 5 take Music Theory). Again, grossly unfair to force a student to take a class that they have no interest in taking, and even if you did manage to divvy up the electives, now you've significantly increased the class sizes in those electives, which may hinder the ability for an ED student in any of those classes to pass the class. It's not a core class, like math or english, but they are not fluff classes either, and if you expect ED students to suffer from higher class sizes in math and english, the same is true in Spanish or Astrology or Music Theory. Again, not a viable option.
Or, you can allocate additional teacher MOE, which costs additional money, and offer those displaced AP math students a reasonable alternative. If you are going to cut AP classes, this is the only alternative available. You can't punish the students that were displaced, and you can't punish the rest of the student body by increasing class sizes in non-core classes.
Again, nobody is questioning your claim that ED students are helped with lower class sizes. Just realize that it's not a free lunch.
All that, and you apparently
Mon, 08/23/2010 - 19:41 — danofncAll that, and you apparently missed this:
"Taking away AP classes in Wake would cause problems. I don't deny that for a second. But, that has no bearing at all on the impact not having a lot of AP classes has had in GCS."
I'm pretty sure this started because of a conversation about the ED grad rate in Guilford County. I'm also pretty sure that I said that I would bet that GCS didn't have as much demand for AP classes, which would free up resources for core classes, which would lead to smaller classes, which would have helped them achieve that grad rate.
Now, if you want WCPSS to abolish the block schedule (Guilford doesn't use it), some of the AP classes would go away on their own because kids wouldn't have the time to take them, and kids (not just ED kids)would (in theory) perform better because things were moving more slowly.
But, anyway, your math is flawed because we are talking about Guilford County. They aren't getting rid of AP classes, there is simply not the demand for them. They haven't had the classes, so they don't have any displaced kids. That's a big difference, and one that is relevant to any comparison between the two districts. You have explained (several times) one of the problems that would come from Wake trying to emulate GCS' methods for increasing achievement, but when I do that you accuse me of being negative.
It's no different than what would happen if you said that "District H" was doing an amazing job with its ESL population, only you leave out that 75% of their kids are ESL. The differences matter. District H would be spending a lot more money on ESL than Wake could provide without taking away from other areas.
Guilford is able to do things that Wake can't without causing hardships for other groups. The question becomes a simple matter of just how much we really want to affect that ED grad rate. The available funding is either the same or less, so spending more money isn't an option. If we're going to get smaller classes, it will have to come through other methods. Something has to go.
But, anyway, your math is
Mon, 08/23/2010 - 21:29 — jeffrey1But, anyway, your math is flawed because we are talking about Guilford County. They aren't getting rid of AP classes, there is simply not the demand for them.
The math is not flawed. Whether or not there is a demand for AP classes makes no difference. In your example (using your numbers), if there is no demand for AP classes, then the math department would only have started with 7 teachers instead of 8. There would have only been say 4 AP classes instead of 10. There would have been 42 available class periods, with the same 38 devoted to core classes serving the same 950 students. Then the school decides to focus on graduating students by using smaller class sizes. they turn those 38 classes (25 students each) into 43 classes (22 students each). Except now they can't reuse teachers from discontinued AP classes because none were cut. So the school has to hire an additional teacher for the 5 additional core classes that were created by going to smaller class sizes.
In summary, 1) if you cut AP classes and resue math teachers for additional courses created by lower class sizes, you need to hire teachers for the displaced AP students, or 2) if you don't cut AP classes and lower core class sizes, you need to hire teachers for the additional core classes created by going to lower class sizes. Same result.
This all started in a previous thread where you posted (your words):
Less diversity in course offerings (fewer AP classes) means that you can offer duplicate offerings of some other classes, which means those classes are smaller.
The only reason that I ever responded in the first place was to state that it cannot be done without:
reducing the number of classes that students take, or
reducing the total number of students in the school, or
increasing class sizes in other classes, or
increasing the number of classes that existing teachers teach or
increasing the total number of teachers.
Options 1 and 2 are not not feasible options. Option 3 introduces the same problem that you are trying to eliminate into other classes. And Options 4 and 5 cost money.
I have spent several hours trying to convince you of that which is highlighted above. It is simple direct and inverse variation and I don't know how to explain it any other way, other than to say: I will pay you any sum of money you want if you can convince just 1 math teacher in Wake County otherwise.
The quote you attributed to
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 08:50 — danofncThe quote you attributed to me wasn't from a previous thread, unless I said the exact same thing twice. I may have, but I doubt it would be exactly the same wording.
Once again, you're trying to explain how to get WCPSS to GCS' level, which would require taking away something (or adding cost). GCS' class size differences don't fit your explanation, no matter how many numbered items you use (they don't even become more true when you use fancy colored letters).
Schools are funded on a per-student basis, right? So, in theory, an 1800 student school in GCS would have funding similar to an 1800 student school in WCPSS, right? I'm sure you'll tell me how Wake schools are bigger, yada yada yada, but even if you have to pro-rate the funding, there should still be a similar ratio of teacher MOE per student, right?
So, if one school is offering 26 different AP classes, and the other is offering 10, wouldn't that open up a lot of class time? GCS doesn't have as many kids demanding as many advanced classes, so they don't offer them. They don't have to take them away, because they were never there. This isn't (wasn't) a discussion of how to make Wake look like GCS. It was a discussion about why GCS has a better ED grad rate than WCPSS, and some possible (probable) reasons for that difference. So, I don't understand why you keep getting bent out of shape trying to explain what Wake needs to do to match GCS.
GCS' success with their ED grad rate could be a lot of things. It could just be random luck. It could be an indictment of Wake's block schedule. It could be a function of lower standards. It could be a function of smaller classes. It is probably a combination of all of these factors plus some more.
I've already said that it would be difficult (next to impossible) to implement this strategy in WCPSS. Mostly, that is because a lot of the "we're failing ED kids" people would show their true colors if any effort to help them actually impacted their kids and their AP classes. Plus, there are kids who are taking Algebra I in 8th grade to prepare themselves to take several AP math courses in HS, and it wouldn't be very nice to snatch those classes out from underneath them.
I just think we need to understand that Wake County made some choices to benefit the brightest kids that didn't necessarily do any favors to the kids struggling to graduate, and those choices a) have an impact on the ED grad rate and b) are pretty much irreversible.
I am not trying to explain
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 01:54 — jeffrey1I am not trying to explain how Wake can become more like Guilford!
I am making one single argument and it is in reference to your statement:
Less diversity in course offerings (fewer AP classes) means that you can offer duplicate offerings of some other classes, which means those classes are smaller.
That statement is FALSE. It's INACCURATE. It's WRONG. It's ERRONEOUS. That's the only thing that I have ever argued!
I have tried several different methods to show you that the statement is false. Bob Sconce showed you the statement is false. He gave you what was essentially a mathematical proof that the statement is false. You can't be any more convincing than that. But you don't seem to be convinced. You hem and haw and seem to want to take the discussion somewhere else.
Just admit that the statement is wrong. YOU CAN"T MAKE CLASSES SMALLER THROUGH LESS DIVERSITY IN COURSE OFFERINGS!!! It's IMPOSSIBLE!!!
If you insist on continuing to respond to this discussion, please limit yourself to your original statement (quoted above). Admit it's wrong, or try to show that it is not -- but don't try too hard, because YOU CAN'T.
Your "proofs" assume that
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 10:18 — danofncYour "proofs" assume that there are 25 kids in every single class. That is a bad assumption, and it affects everything you say based on that assumption. There simply is no reason to assume that every class has 25 kids.
According to education.com, there isn't a single Guilford County high school that has a 20 to 1 student/teacher ratio, other than the Early College at Guilford, which is a special program that is offered with help from Guilford College. A quick scan suggests that the average is about 15 or 16 students per teacher. Part of that is due to the fact that Guilford is a smaller district, so its schools don't have 2,000+ students like WCPSS.
But, when it comes time to choose classes to offer at each high school, reduced demand for some advanced courses (whether they are AP or not, actually) has to help the principal's ability to offer duplicates of other classes. The resources simply aren't spread as thinly. If you have 20 teachers trying to teach 120 different courses to 1000 kids, those teachers are spread out more than if you're trying to teach 100 courses.
The number of teachers you have is based in some form or fashion on the number of students you have in your school. The number of courses you offer is based on the demand for any particular course, and your ability to provide those choices within the budget. A less diverse set of demands (ie. more kids just wanting the basics) means that the principal can offer more of the basics.
You can use the same teachers. The people who run the AP program don't require any special teacher training for those who teach their courses.
Let me see....isn't Garner one of the WCPSS schools that is often cited by user as not having a lot of AP classes? Their grad rate for ED kids was 70.5%. That's from the link that Bob provided a week or two ago that was updated for 09-10.
Enloe and Wakefield have a ton of AP's, right? Enloe: 66.2%. Wakefield: 63.8%.
Where does Knightdale fall on the AP offerings list? 69.8% ED grad rate.
Broughton? 65%
Fuquay Varina? 72.5%. I'd just like to mention that FV was one of the test cases for PLT's.
WF-R is 82.8%. I have no idea where they stand on the AP offerings list. Leesville? 64.8%. Athens Drive is 55.8%.
Now, I'm sure that the graduation rates don't fall right in line with the AP offerings, so the numbers can't mean anything at all. But I think it's at least interesting to look at, don't you?
Your "proofs" assume that
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 13:15 — jeffrey1Your "proofs" assume that there are 25 kids in every single class.
A less diverse set of demands (ie. more kids just wanting the basics) means that the principal can offer more of the basics.
Yes he can, but that doesn't mean that class sizes are smaller. Here is your original statement (again):
High School #1
Location: Wake County
# students: 1200
# class periods per day: 4
# course offerings: 48 (36 core and 12 AP)
Each course is offered 4 times per day
# teachers: 64
High School #2
Location: Guilford County
# students: 1200
# class periods per day: 4
# course offerings: You Pick
# teachers: 64
You'll notice that since teachers are allocated based on enrollment (and the enrollment in both schools is the same), both schools have the same number of teachers.
The rules are that each student must take 4 classes. Each teacher teaches 3 classes per day and has 1 planning period.
OK, here is my argument for School #1: Since each teacher can teach 3 classes, there are 64 * 3 = 192 different classes taught during the day. And since each course is offered 4 times per day there are 48 * 4 = 192 different classes offered durig the day. You'll notice that the number of classes taught is equal to the number of classes offered. Since each student takes 4 classes per day, there are 1200 * 4 = 4800 "student classes." Since these 4800 student classes must be divided into the 192 classes that are taught and offered, the size of each class is 4800 / 192 = 25 students per class.
Now here is your challenge: Tell me how many courses are offered at School #2. Tell me how many are core and how many are AP. Presumably, you will want to have less AP classes since that is the context of your argument. Tell me how many times per day each course is offered (They don't all have to be offered the same amount of times per day). Finally, demonstrate to me how some or all of the core classes will have smaller class sizes, without increasing the size of other classes, or adding more teachers. Please use specific numbers in your response.
Thank you in advance for accepting this challenge. I look forward to your response.
I've said several times that
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 14:00 — danofncI've said several times that Guilford isn't on the block schedule. They have 6 classes per day. Does that help your math?
The lessened need for advanced classes helps make the block schedule unnecessary, too.
Try Again
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 14:41 — jeffrey1I'm trying to be nice, but I have never encountered someone as CLUELESS as you. I really mean that. Are you really that IGNORANT? Do you really think that you can reduce class sizes simply by duplicating other course offerings?
Your original argument, which I will now post for the umpteenth time:
Less diversity in course offerings (fewer AP classes) means that you can offer duplicate offerings of some other classes, which means those classes are smaller.
never mentioned anything about block vs traditional schedule. But once again, IT DOES NOT MATTER.
So I will issue the same challenge, except School #2 is no longer in Guilford County. It is in some county that is on the block schedule that has a higher graduation rate than Wake.
High School #1
Location: Wake County
# students: 1200
# class periods per day: 4
# course offerings: 48 (36 core and 12 AP)
Each course is offered 4 times per day
# teachers: 64
High School #2
Location: Any county on a high school block schedule
# students: 1200
# class periods per day: 4
# course offerings: You Pick
# teachers: 64
You'll notice that since teachers are allocated based on enrollment (and the enrollment in both schools is the same), both schools have the same number of teachers.
The rules are that each student must take 4 classes. Each teacher teaches 3 classes per day and has 1 planning period.
OK, here is my argument for School #1: Since each teacher can teach 3 classes, there are 64 * 3 = 192 different classes taught during the day. And since each course is offered 4 times per day there are 48 * 4 = 192 different classes offered durig the day. You'll notice that the number of classes taught is equal to the number of classes offered. Since each student takes 4 classes per day, there are 1200 * 4 = 4800 "student classes." Since these 4800 student classes must be divided into the 192 classes that are taught and offered, the size of each class is 4800 / 192 = 25 students per class.
Now here is your challenge: Tell me how many courses are offered at School #2. Tell me how many are core and how many are AP. Presumably, you will want to have less AP classes since that is the context of your argument. Tell me how many times per day each course is offered (They don't all have to be offered the same amount of times per day). Finally, demonstrate to me how some or all of the core classes will have smaller class sizes, without increasing the size of other classes, or adding more teachers. Please use specific numbers in your response.
Please answer, but I suspect you will make another excuse.
Flawed assumptions. See my
Thu, 08/26/2010 - 10:01 — danofncFlawed assumptions.
See my response to Bob. It should cover this one, too.
There is no school in Wake County that average 25 students per teacher.
I tell you what, you give me
Fri, 08/27/2010 - 07:06 — jeffrey1I tell you what, you give me the following information and I will design the challenge using your figures, so that you have no more excuses.
# students in school: ________________________
# class periods per day: _____________________
# Base Courses offered at School 1:____________
# AP Courses offered at Scool 1: ______________
# Base Courses offered at School 2: ____________
# AP Courses offered at School 2: ______________
Average Class Size at School 1: ________________
Look, let's just drop
Fri, 08/27/2010 - 11:43 — danofncLook, let's just drop it.
You can keep on thinking you've proved something that I'm too dumb to see, and I'll keep thinking you are too intent on being right to use common sense.
You're never going to convince me that a principal couldn't take away an AP math class, turn it into an Algebra II class, and end up with smaller Algebra II classes in his or her school.
You will not convince me of this because a kid who is wanting an AP math class has already had Algebra II. The pool of students for Algebra II doesn't increase with this change. You simply divide by a number that is increased by one, which I think will always give you a smaller result. That is a very simple math formula that tells me I am right. I don't need x=abcdfe/ghasgh*tfe-.21 to figure it out.
If kids didn't get their AP class would they be upset? Of course. Would they then sign up for another round of Algebra II out of spite? Of course not. Is every kid in every school guaranteed to get every class he signs up to take? Or are there situations where kids sign up and don't get in? If so, the change I said would help kids in regular classes would simply add a few to the number that sign up for a class and don't get it. That seems like common sense to me....no formulas needed.
I have said a million times now that any principal who attempted this would catch a lot of heat in Wake County, because a lot of kids and families have built their entire HS career around maximizing AP classes. I have also said that people who were griping about the ED grad rate during the last election would show their true colors if their principal made this move to impact the ED rate but it cost their kids an AP opportunity.
Breaking News!
Fri, 08/27/2010 - 14:46 — jeffrey1I can only assume that your eagerness to drop it is because you realize that a real life example will show that you are wrong. I've gone out of my way to placate you, yet you want to drop it. Fine. But for the record:
You're never going to convince me that a principal couldn't take away an AP math class, turn it into an Algebra II class, and end up with smaller Algebra II classes in his or her school.
You will not convince me of this because a kid who is wanting an AP math class has already had Algebra II. The pool of students for Algebra II doesn't increase with this change.
Again, ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. The pool of students for Algebra II does not change. But that has no effect on my argument. The kid that wanted an AP math now has to take something else. Just like I stated above, that means increased class sizes or additional teachers - one or the other.
If so, the change I said would help kids in regular classes would simply add a few to the number that sign up for a class and don't get it. That seems like common sense to me....no formulas needed.
AND THERE IT IS! An admission of one of the possiblities that I have suggested all along. If you don't choose to add new teachers, then you must increase the class size of existing classes.
So you really didn't need to ask me to drop it after all. You admitted that I was right. And lucky for you, we didn't need to have any complicated mathematical formulas. Glad to see you finally understand.
You can't be serious.
Sat, 08/28/2010 - 07:49 — danofncAre you seriously trying to act like all of a sudden I agreed with you? I didn't change anything about my argument, I simply put real world numbers in place that make your assumptions (which I called flawed in the first place) obviously wrong.
"However, you refuse to acknowledge that in order to have smaller class sizes, you need to fund additional teachers OR fill other classes above their intended capacity, despite Bob Sconce's very detailed analysis."
You said that. It is false. It was always false. That detailed analysis provided average class sizes of 25 through the whole school in every class, and that isn't an accurate number.
"However, to then take the leap that schools in Guilford were able to do that by eliminating AP classes and evenly distributing the demand for those AP classes into other electives is just that - a leap, for which you have offered no proof, other than just pure speculation."
You said this, too. Also false. The conversation was about why GCS vs. Wake specifically. GCS didn't have to eliminate AP classes, there has never been the demand for them that exists in Wake. It wasn't a leap or speculation on my part, simply observation.
"OK, here is my argument for School #1: Since each teacher can teach 3 classes, there are 64 * 3 = 192 different classes taught during the day. And since each course is offered 4 times per day there are 48 * 4 = 192 different classes offered durig the day. You'll notice that the number of classes taught is equal to the number of classes offered. Since each student takes 4 classes per day, there are 1200 * 4 = 4800 "student classes." Since these 4800 student classes must be divided into the 192 classes that are taught and offered, the size of each class is 4800 / 192 = 25 students per class."
Every example you have given with numbers and not letters (bob, too) has somehow ended up with 25 kids per class. At that point, you always talk about how "taking away" an AP class would cause some of the other classes to go over 25.
1. There are classes that have fewer kids than 25, and to assume otherwise is erroneous. To offer formulas that make 25 the standard class size (especially when claiming it as "per teacher") if fraudulent.
2. They wouldn't be "taking away" a class. They wouldn't have kids assigned to an AP class and then tell them "Sorry" and send them looking for another class. It would all happen in the assignment phase, and the kids would just know that there wasn't room for them in AP. That happens now, too, I beleive. I don't think every kid gets every single class the register to take.
"Furthermore, there are 24 teachers in the Special Education Department"
You failed to mention why you included TA's in that number, even though they are staff and not faculty. More fraudulent numbers to attempt to prove your point.
"Those students who were in the class that was taken away now have to take another class - some class that is offered by the school. You will either increase the size of the class they choose to take, or you will hire an additional teacher to teach a new class, again any class, that those students take."
Don't students sign up for more than 4 classes, just in case they don't get into one of their main choices? Doesn't that mean that every kid would get a schedule with a full load of classes? Doesn't that mean that no class would be "taken away"? Is it likely that all the kids who signed up for that class would choose the exact same alternate class? If a student has to have taken Algebra II in order to take an AP math class, why would you have to hire a teacher? Shouldn't the teacher be able to handle an Algebra II class?
"AND THERE IT IS! An admission of one of the possiblities that I have suggested all along. If you don't choose to add new teachers, then you must increase the class size of existing classes."
Blah, Blah, Blah, ... The
Mon, 08/30/2010 - 17:58 — jeffrey1Blah, Blah, Blah, ...
The only thing I have ever argued was that classes would get larger.
I am sorry that I picked 25 students per class, but I picked it based on the size of my son's classes in high school, which average more than 25, but what do I know? Perhaps I should listen to someone whose oldest child is in the 2nd grade - Got anyone in mind?
I could make the same examples using 22, or 20, or 18, or 25, or whatever but you're the one who said to drop it.
Oh and by the way, Apex HS counts TAs as members of the faculty, but then again, what do I know?
This whole argument was about whether or not a school could eliminate AP classes, and create smaller core classes without the need to increase some class sizes OR hire more teachers. The ONE AND ONLY POINT that I ever argued was you had to pick one or the other -- more teachers or larger class sizes, and it was you who disagreed with that every step of the way. That is, until you finally said this:
If so, the change I said would help kids in regular classes would simply add a few to the number that sign up for a class and don't get it. That seems like common sense to me....no formulas needed.
That's an admission of something that, until now, you failed to admit. You have never admitted that until now, and that's the only point that I was trying to show throughout this entire conversation.
So please don't waste your time with any more blah, blah, blah. You said what I wanted you to say. End of Story.
I have never seen anyone in
Mon, 08/30/2010 - 19:18 — danofncI have never seen anyone in my life who has to be right more than you.
The sad thing is, when I base something on what happens in my kids' school, you accuse me of using my own situation and ignoring other perspectives.
Yet, you use your son's HS classes, and act like that is the standard thing. Just like you did when you made all of your claims about buses ("Well, buses pick 10 kids per stop, so adding just 2 or 3 stops would fill them all up").
This whole argument was NOT about eliminating AP classes. The whole argument was about Guilford County and how they get better ED grad rates than WCPSS. I said that part of the reason is likely because they have fewer AP offerings, which frees up teacher availability to teach basic classes, which shrinks their class sizes, which improves performance.
I'm pretty sure the first time we talked about this I said that there would be lots of hurdles in the way of doing the same thing in WCPSS. I'm pretty sure I said that a lot of hard choices would have to be made, and I'm pretty sure I said that some of the people who are complaining so much about the ED grad rate would show their true colors if someone talked about not offering an AP class they wanted their kid to take in order to provide more support for ED kids.
The reason that using 25 instead of 21 or 22 is important is that there is a big difference between adding kids to a class of 21 or 22 and adding kids to a class of 25. You constantly argued that "taking away" a class would mean adding 25 kids to the other math classes. That is, was, and always will be false. You constantly argued that the math department would still average those 25 kids per class even if we "took away" one class. I told you that was incorrect, because those kids who didn't get into the AP class wouldn't sign up for a math class they had already taken. For the school, the class average stays the same (we never decided to kick anyone out of school)....but for the math department the class average would drop.
You were department-specific when arguing about the class sizes, and now you're pretending that you weren't. I said that the kids would be "sprinkled" throughout the school, and you told me I was wrong.
You may be right about the TA's being considered faculty. It seems odd to me, and I didn't see the need to count through the staff directory to figure it out. But, does taking them out get the number up to 25?
No...
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 14:39 — Bob_SconceThe number of distinct class sessions in a day is really irrelevant -- the important thing is how many are going on at the same time. If you have 1200 students and 64 teachers in classes, then you have, on average, 18.75 students per class. Two ways to change that number: (1) get rid of some students, (2) add some teachers. The labels you attach to the individual classes is irrelevant -- it doesn't matter if you have 63 tiny AP classes and 1 large remedial math class or 1 stinking enormous AP class and 63 tiny remedial math classes -- the average class size will be the same.
Bob, just a minor
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 14:45 — jeffrey1Bob, thanks for trying to help, but just a minor correction, which does not affect the argument. In my example, teachers have 1 planning period per day where they are not teaching, so there are 25 students per class on average.
Thanks...
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 14:49 — Bob_SconceI thought about that, but didn't want to complicate the point.
I think this is a losing cause.
The reason it is a losing
Thu, 08/26/2010 - 09:59 — danofncThe reason it is a losing cause is because you guys keep insisting on using numbers that you pull from your rear ends. Those numbers always seem to end up with average student/teacher ratios of 25 to 1, just like the "example" the jeffrey has posted here.
The simple fact is that no school in Wake County has a 25:1 student teacher ratio. That makes your math problems bogus. His 1200 student school would have more than 64 teachers. I can't argue with his calculations, because they are correct. But, like I have said several times, they are based on flawed assumptions. The assumption that WCPSS schools average 25 students per teacher is flawed, and it is flawed by a lot.
"FVHS is a comprehensive 9-12 high school that offers 15 AP classes to over 1850 students......The faculty of 135 includes more than two dozen National Board Certified Teachers,....."
1850 divided by 135 is 13.7.
Since the average class size at FVHS isn't 13.7 in any of the core subjects listed at ncreportcards, obviously there are some variables. I don't think every teacher teaches a full class load. Some are specialists.
But, regardless of all of that, it is quite obvious that there is some wiggle room with class size. That wiggle room is where an extra offering affects class size.
Kids aren't deciding between taking Algebra II and AP Calculus. They aren't choosing between Geometry and AP Stats.
If, all of a sudden, Wakefield offered 2 less AP math classes (not doing away with the class totally, but getting rid of a 2nd offering of two AP math classes), it wouldn't create a larger pool of students that needed one of the basic maths required to graduate. It would create an opportunity to offer an extra geometry class and an extra algebra II class without adding staff. According to Wakefield's website, they have 2555 students and "approximately" 170 faculty members. That is 15 students per teacher. The wiggle room is there. Getting rid of those classes doesn't mean you're going to have a class somewhere else with 50 kids in it.
Now, you would have some students and parents who are royally upset, and they'd have a right to be upset. But, if you're going to hang the school board with talk of a 54.2% ED grad rate, you have to be willing to endure the steps that are taken to affect it.
Sigh... Once again, a computational error
Fri, 08/27/2010 - 07:48 — jeffrey1"FVHS is a comprehensive 9-12 high school that offers 15 AP classes to over 1850 students......The faculty of 135 includes more than two dozen National Board Certified Teachers,....."
1850 divided by 135 is 13.7.
Sigh... Once again, a computational error.
Teachers get 1 planning period per day. On the block schedule that means that teachers teach 3 classes per day. But students still have to take 4 classes!
1850 students * 4 classes per student = 7400 required classes
135 teachers * 3 classes per teacher = 405 available teachers
7400 required classes / 405 available teachers = 18.3 students per class.
Furthermore, there are 24 teachers in the Special Education Department, and you know that special education classes are extremely small, and likely push average class size above 20. Also, some of the teachers listed on the FVHS website are listed as substitute teachers. And there are likely other reasons that a teacher cannot teach 3 full classes per day, all of which push up the average class size.
Finally, the computations I showed you do not rely on any average class size, and I have extended the opportunity for you to pick the numbers in another post.
Can we start by at least admitting that your calculation of 13.7 students per class was in error?
I think I said 13.7 students
Fri, 08/27/2010 - 11:34 — danofncI think I said 13.7 students per teacher, which wouldn't be wrong. I will admit, however, that the actual number per class is likely higher than that. But, I don't think your calculation is correct either. The actual number is probably between mine and yours....even if it's 20, it makes a huge difference in your assumptions.
First of all, I'm not convinced that Special Programs is the same thing as Special Ed. I'm sure that the Special Ed teachers are under that grouping, but I'm not convinced that it is just Special Ed. Secondly, I think 10 of the 24 people you saw in that department are TA's, and I don't think they would count as faculty. They shouldn't.
You also forget that there are situations that would pull down the average class size. Don't some kids participate in programs that are outside of campus?
Either way, you did say one thing that is inherently false.
"Finally, the computations I showed you do not rely on any average class size,"
Your computations (and Bob's, for that matter) have always said that there are 25 kids per class, and if you do away with an AP class you would have overcrowded classes somewhere else because all the other classes are full, too. Part of my response to that was to agree that simply dropping AP classes in Wake would be problematic, and another part was to point out that Guilford didn't have that concern because they didn't have more kids lined up to take AP classes than they offered.
Basically, coming up with a number significantly below 25 shows that all the other classes aren't packed. Any AP kids who couldn't get into an AP class now aren't dropping down to take a math class they have already passed, so why do you always act as though they would take a different math? They would end up in other classes, and no matter which of us is right about the calculations (or if neither one of us is 100% correct), we have both shown that the average in those other classes is NOT 25, so there is room for those kids.
They don't have to stay in the math department. They likely wouldn't. I would imagine that most of the time principals aren't dealing with full classes when deciding these things. They may have 39 kids signed up for an AP class, and 85 signed up for a regular class. Then, they have to decide if they are going to make everyone happy, which means two AP classes (that both would be small, providing an extra benefit to the kids who need it less), and huge regular classes (28, 28 and 29), putting a burden on the kids who are less likely to be able to handle it. Or, he could offer one huge AP class, but turn away some kids who qualify for it, while at the same time offering 4 regular classes that had 21 kids (and one with 22).
It would all come down to a principal's decision, but that decision would most certainly impact class size, and AP class here definitely means something elsewhere either increases in size or goes away all together.
FT BRAGG AND DODEA
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 07:57 — willynillyI had an interesting conversation with a colleague this morning who taught at Ft Bragg circa 2005. In that time frame research was completed by Vanderbilt University. In this research NO acheivement gap was found in any subgroup according to this teacher. I'll look for that data and provide a link when I can......BTW, Ft Bragg used NATIONALLY NORMED TESTS FOR THIS DATA.
I hear crickets ...
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 23:55 — nancyncOne of the largest and most oft repeated criticisms of doing away with the 'diversity' policy was that the teacher draw for low income schools (we already have plenty of those schools now) will undermine the education standards of those schools. In other words, no good teacher will be drawn to teach at those schools.
I'm curious, where are the protestors and when will they weigh in on this proof that what they claim just doesn't seem to be the case.
I suspect I'll be listening to crickets for a while ...
I think you may be right
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 06:04 — willynillyI think you may be right LOL
chirp chirp
chirp chirp
chirp chirp
Yes, you are right!
The report indicates the
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 10:48 — DrActualFactualThe report indicates the damage done when students get back to back inexperienced teachers, or unmentored teachers, teachers unfamiliar with the local NC/Wake Co. curriculum (or in the case of the report, CA curriculum) It doesn't cost the principal anything but time to ensure that if a child has a weak teacher one year, he/she gets a strong teacher to compensate the following year.
The damage done by the Effectiveness Index
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 15:17 — snordoneThe BOE approving the use of the EI is horrifying and shows how little they understand what is really going on in E&R. The EI uses less than 3 test scores to perform logistic regressions (not accurate or even possible on any statistical analysis program I have ever used) and normalizes ED children's predicited academic achievement downward multiple times for multiple factors. They then determine whether a child has met their predicted score (now artifically low), and rank a teacher higher if her kids met these now lowered expectations. EVAAS does not do this - and this is the reason why they wrote the SAS response in the first place - to expose Holdzkom for what he is doing.
This is the analogy I gave to Keung recently - what would happen if a big drug company had their scientists falsify data to show a drug was safe, and the only way the public learned it was unsafe was after people died. There would be outrage over the corruption and greed.
Our school system flaunts their manipulation of data right in our faces and no one gets it? How many children will remain in poverty because of one department's corruption? Why do you think we have such low academic achievement??
This is WHY. We don't focus on teacher effectiveness using accurate data, we'd rather pat ourselves on the back because we look good while we destroy the lives of children.
Please send this info the
Thu, 08/26/2010 - 08:50 — jenmanPlease send this info the BOE members. When I read what Holdzkom said my first thought was "did the board question him further or did they just take his word for it"?
Barbara Walters spoke at the
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 10:52 — DrActualFactualBarbara Walters spoke at the last BOE meeting and made several requests of the board in what I must say was the best use of 2 minutes yet! Many people "get" what this is and are looking for the "corrections" to be made.
I was really disappointed to
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 16:16 — loriacI was really disappointed to read that, and will send that question to the BOE. I also don't understand why this isn't front page news - and why the NAACP and CCCAAC aren't all over this.
The story's already
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 14:04 — wireless200The story's already written. How much does it take to paraphrase and attribute? It's a major story. It's front page news. And backed by concrete data. Anything less is dodging reality.
This Morning...
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 22:34 — fiveblindmice.....the story of last combat troops leaving Iraq was relegated to the bottom of page 2(!) And you want a mildly interesting statistical study about kids 3000 miles away on the front page? Talk about dodging reality! ;)
It is also about a district
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 14:11 — danofncIt is also about a district that is on the other side of the country.
Granted, on the other side
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 14:50 — willynillyGranted, on the other side of the country, but the data is extremely valid and very important. This study is pointing out things that we all have to look at or we will not imporve education. There are teachers and admin people who need to go. They allow students to go year after year unable to read and write and trying new FLUFF that does not and will not work. I like the idea of developing standards that work. Unlike the new tool for NC teachers.....which is nothing more than holding teachers to the NBPTS standards which have no validity or proof behind them.
The forced busing supporters
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 14:59 — CaryCurmudgeonThe forced busing supporters have brought up studies from all over the country to support their case. From everwhere except Wake County. Now, a study should be discounted because it comes from somewhere else?
I Don't Recall Seeing ANY Of Those Studies
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 22:37 — fiveblindmiceon the front page of the N&O (or in the paper at all), either. Do you?
I'm not discounting it at
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 15:15 — danofncI'm not discounting it at all. I'm just not going to jump up and down saying it should have been splashed across the front page of the paper yesterday, either.
Edit to add:
Is there anything in there that is really shocking? Did anyone think that there isn't a difference between teachers? Did anyone think that there weren't good teachers at poor schools? The trick is finding out how long the average teacher stays at a poor school when given other options.
In the main example given, you have a largely Latino student population being taught by either a) a young Latino man or b) an old white man. Is it really shocking that one of those guys is more able to meet the needs and grab the attention of those kids?
Isn't the value-added approach similar to the Effectiveness Index that WCPSS uses that you claim is worthless?
Interestingly
Sat, 08/21/2010 - 20:56 — TrailerParkGirl"In the main example given, you have a largely Latino student population being taught by either a) a young Latino man or b) an old white man. Is it really shocking that one of those guys is more able to meet the needs and grab the attention of those kids?"
Interestingly, National Teacher of Year winner, Rafe Esquith, teaches in the LA public school district. His students are 92% FRL, 100% from non-native english speaking families. The school is 80% Hispanic and 18% Asian and Pacific Islander. He is white and has been teaching for 28 years, so while I wouldn't call him "old," he's not "young" either. He certainly seems to meet the needs and grab the attention of many of his Latino and Asian students. You should try reading one of his books, especially as you seem to be interested in children and educational issues - interesting stuff to think about.. His lastest book, Lighting Their Fires, is more general and geared toward both parents and teachers.
I'm not discounting it at
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 01:57 — jeffrey1I'm not discounting it at all. I'm just not going to jump up and down saying it should have been splashed across the front page of the paper yesterday, either.
If the New York Times can send reporters to Wake and write several stories for its paper, we should be able to reprint a wire story.
Is there anything in there that is really shocking?
For months, you and everyone else who disagree with the current board majority have repeatedly warned that high poverty schools can't be effective because they can't attract good teachers. Along comes a study to rebuke that idea, and you want to brush it off?
Oh, and ask the LA teachers union if they think it is a shocking story.
In the main example given, you have a largely Latino student population being taught by either a) a young Latino man or b) an old white man. Is it really shocking that one of those guys is more able to meet the needs and grab the attention of those kids?
According to my take, it had a lot more to do with the attitude of the teacher than his ethnicity.
"If the New York Times can
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 07:48 — danofnc"If the New York Times can send reporters to Wake and write several stories for its paper, we should be able to reprint a wire story."
Based on the example you gave, shouldn't we send a reporter to LA and report back from there? The NYT sent people here, they didn't run a wire story.
"For months, you and everyone else who disagree with the current board majority have repeatedly warned that high poverty schools can't be effective because they can't attract good teachers. Along comes a study to rebuke that idea, and you want to brush it off?"
I can't see my original post, but didn't I mention something about retention of those teachers being important? If I didn't, then I didn't write something I intended to write. I don't believe for a second that there aren't good teachers in high poverty schools, I just think that they aren't very likely to stay there long term. If the LA district doesn't have the disparity in schools that Wake could potentially have after implementing the new plan, then it isn't really a comparison. Deciding between an 80% school and a 60% school isn't as obvious a choice as deciding between a 70% school and a 15% school.
"According to my take, it had a lot more to do with the attitude of the teacher than his ethnicity."
I would imagine it was the attitude. I'd also imagine that the age and ethnicity of the teachers contributed to that attitude. Based on my take, I'd say you have one guy trying to make a difference and another guy counting the days until retirement.
When I worked in the
Sun, 08/22/2010 - 00:39 — HJ2ss2When I worked in the schools, the teachers always joked about giving me a group of "normal" (whatever that is?) students that I could work with because they couldn't understand why I wasn't depressed working with the population that they referred to me.
I believe if you could gather staff and administrators that enjoyed a challenge, didn't take themselves too seriously, were bright, creative and supportive toward one another, you would be amazed at what could be accomplished with students in a high poverty school. Oh, yes, they would definitely need to have a sense of humor.
If the LA district doesn't
Sat, 08/21/2010 - 18:06 — jeffrey1If the LA district doesn't have the disparity in schools that Wake could potentially have after implementing the new plan, then it isn't really a comparison.
I see the same thing.....NO
Sun, 08/22/2010 - 10:46 — willynillyI see the same thing.....NO other school system is as big.....NO other school system has growth......NO other school system has this....NO other school has that.
However, as soon as the nay sayers see a story about how Char/Meck did this and did that to some detriment these same people blog....see....see.....see....see.....it doesn't work.
I find it interesting,
Sat, 08/21/2010 - 19:18 — danofncI find it interesting, though not surprising, that you act like I'm reaching for differences. If we're going to compare WCPSS to other districts, and try to implement things they are doing that are successful, doesn't it stand to reason that we should expect similar results if we are gearing those programs toward similar students?
Since you question my motives, I decided to actually visit the LAUSD school district website.
LAUSD Student Ethnic Breakdown
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.3 %
Asian 3.6 %
Black, not Hispanic 10.8 %
Filipino 2.3 %
Hispanic 74.2 %
Pacific Islander 0.3 %
White, not Hispanic 8.4 %
Another google search revealed this:
In 2001, 72% of LAUSD's 721,000 students received free lunches, and another 5% received reduced lunches.
A 2007 report from the LA Daily News said that 74% of LAUSD's 700,000 students were eligible for F&R, but only about 50% district-wide took advantage, costing the district millions of dollars (apparently they get more for the reimbursement than they actually charged).
So LAUSD is a poor district. I didn't imagine it or hope for it, I just guessed.
Hold on, I think you
Sat, 08/21/2010 - 21:31 — jeffrey1Hold on, I think you misunderstood me which may have stemmed from me misunderstanding you. I already know that the LA district is quite poor -- I would think that it is common knowledge, much like New York, or Chicago, or any other large citywide school system. I never questioned whether or not the LA district was poor.
Here's what you initially said:
If the LA district doesn't have the disparity in schools that Wake could potentially have after implementing the new plan, then it isn't really a comparison.
I took this to mean that you knew that LA was a poor district, and you were saying that the reason there are good teachers in poor schools is because they have nowhere else to go. In other words, I thought you were saying that good teachers in high poverty schools in Wake can transfer out of them into low poverty schools, whereas teachers in high poverty schools in LA have nowhere to transfer.
Is that what you were saying? If not, then I apologize. If yes, then I maintain that is just another one of your made up excuses (you do not have any proof, do you?). And that excuse is typical of the ones you make whenever someone else compares favorably to Wake (e.g. Guilford graduates more students because they offer less AP classes - again just another made up excuse - they may in fact offer less AP classes, but no one has ever shown that it lead to higher graduation rates).
Smaller classes lead to
Sun, 08/22/2010 - 12:38 — danofncSmaller classes lead to better performance. People have shown that to be a fact.
Less diversity in course offerings (fewer AP classes) means that you can offer duplicate offerings of some other classes, which means those classes are smaller. Go look at the average class sizes. I gave you those numbers, you just refuse to acknowledge them. Guilford's average class sizes are smaller, and that can be traced back to their lessened need for AP classes.
Do you know where to find the graduation rates in WCPSS broken down by school and ED? The ncreportcards page doesn't list individual schools' ED %.
I didn't really know much about the LA school district. I have no intention to ever live in LA, so it isn't high on my list of priorities (it wasn't really on the list at all). I just thought it would be important to know what kind of options the teachers have before making a big deal about them staying in their schools.
I know people who live in the county where I grew up that hate their jobs, but they won't leave it because there aren't any better ones available.
I would definitely be interested in seeing a similar study done about the mobility of WCPSS' teachers, but I'm not convinced the results would be the same. And, if the results were the same, I'd think that the old diversity policy would have been at least part of the reason why (you know, "healthy schools" and all that jazz).