Testing Testing

Poverty and performance are tied, officials note, but outliers abound

Towards the end of today’s conference call with reporters focusing on state test scores, State Education Commissioner John King highlighted a pair of graphs that showed a strong correlation between reading exam performance and poverty. The lower a school’s poverty level, the better its students performed on the tests.

But at each poverty level, King noted, there was a “striking” range in performance. Some schools that were packed with mostly poor students were out-performing the statewide proficiency percentages and more affluent schools.

“The question becomes, what’s happening in these schools that’s leading to those better outcomes?” King asked.

Screen shot 2014-08-14 at 3.30.14 PM

While it’s impossible to completely answer that question today, we’ve begun digging through accompanying spreadsheets (ELA and math) that the state provided to see where the outliers are in New York City. Here are two quick observations:

— Forty-nine city schools where 100 percent of students are considered to be in poverty saw their math proficiency rates jump 10 or more percentage points this year.

— Of the state’s 20 highest-poverty schools with biggest gains in math, 15 are charter schools, most of which operate in New York City.

We’ll continue to look through the data. If you find anything interesting, let us know in the comments.

exclusive

Most Memphis schools score low on student growth under new state test

PHOTO: Stephanie Snyder

More than half of Memphis schools received the lowest possible score for student growth on Tennessee’s new test last school year, according to data obtained by Chalkbeat for Shelby County Schools.

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the lowest measure, about 54 percent of the district’s 187 schools scored in the bottom rung of the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System, known as TVAAS.

That includes most schools in the Innovation Zone, a reversal after years of showing high growth in the district’s prized turnaround program.

Charter schools fared poorly as well, as did schools that were deemed among the state’s fastest-improving in 2015.

Superintendent Dorsey Hopson called the scores a “huge wakeup call.”

“It shows that we’ve got a tremendous amount of work to do,” Hopson told Chalkbeat on Monday. “It’s going to be hard and it’s going to be frustrating. … It starts with making sure we’re supporting teachers around mastering the new standards.”

District leaders across Tennessee have been trying to wrap their heads around the latest growth scores since receiving the data in late August from the State Department of Education. Only two years earlier, the Memphis district garnered the highest possible overall growth score. But since then, the state has switched to a harder test called TNReady that is aligned for the first time to more rigorous academic standards.

TVAAS results are scheduled to be released publicly this week, but Chalkbeat obtained a copy being circulated within Shelby County Schools, Tennessee’s largest district.

The data is prompting questions from some Memphis educators — and assurances from state officials — over the validity of TVAAS, the state’s system for measuring learning and judging the effectiveness of its teachers and schools.

This is the first year of issuing district-wide TVAAS scores since 2015. That’s because of the state’s cancellation of 2016 testing for grades 3-8 due mostly to failures in the switch to online testing.

Some educators wonder whether the bumpy switch to TNReady is a factor in this year’s nosedive, along with changes in how the scores are calculated.

For example, data for fourth-graders is missing since there is no prior state testing in third grade for comparison. Elementary and middle schools also don’t have growth scores for social studies, since the 2017 questions were a trial run and the results don’t count toward a school’s score.

Hopson acknowledged concerns over how the state compares results from “two very different tests which clearly are apples and oranges,” but he added that the district won’t use that as an excuse.

“Notwithstanding those questions, it’s the system upon which we’re evaluated on and judged,” he said.

State officials stand by TVAAS. They say drops in proficiency rates resulting from a harder test have no impact on the ability of teachers, schools and districts to earn strong TVAAS scores, since all students are experiencing the same change.

“Because TVAAS always looks at relative growth from year to year, not absolute test scores, it can be stable through transitions,” said Sara Gast, a spokeswoman for the State Department of Education.

Shelby County Schools is not the only district with disappointing TVAAS results. In Chattanooga, Hamilton County Schools logged low growth scores. But Gast said that more districts earned average or high growth scores of 3, 4 or 5 last school year than happened in 2015.


Want to help us understand this issue? Send your observations to [email protected]


Below is a breakdown of Shelby County’s TVAAS scores. A link to a school-by-school list of scores is at the bottom of this story.

Districtwide

School-wide scores are a combination of growth in each tested subject: literacy, math, science and social studies.

Fifty three schools saw high growth in literacy, an area where Shelby County Schools has doubled down, especially in early grades. And 51 schools saw high growth in math.

Note: A TVAAS score of 3 represents average growth for a student in one school year. A score of 1 represents significantly lower academic growth compared to peers across the state.

2017

School-wide composite Number of schools Percent of schools
1 101 54%
2 19 10%
3 20 11%
4 10 5%
5 37 20%

2015

School-wide composite Number of schools Percent of schools
1 58 28%
2 16 8%
3 38 19%
4 18 9%
5 75 37%

Innovation Zone

Out of the 23 schools in the district’s program to turn around low-performing schools, most received a growth score of 1 in 2017. That stands in stark contrast to prior years since the program opened in 2012, when most schools were on a fast growth track.

School-wide composite Number of iZone schools
1 14
2 2
3 2
4 0
5 5

Reward schools

Nearly half of 32 schools deemed 2015 Tennessee reward schools for high growth saw a major drop in TVAAS scores in 2017:

  • Central High
  • Cherokee Elementary
  • Germanshire Elementary
  • KIPP Memphis Middle Academy
  • Kirby High
  • Memphis Business Academy Elementary
  • Power Center Academy High
  • Power Center Academy Middle
  • Ross Elementary
  • Sheffield High
  • South Park Elementary
  • Southwind High
  • Treadwell Middle
  • Westside Elementary

Charter schools

Charter schools authorized by Shelby County Schools fared similarly to district-run schools in growth scores, with nearly half receiving a TVAAS of 1 compared to 26 percent of charter schools receiving the same score in 2015.

2017

School-wide composite Number of charter schools
1 18
2 6
3 7
4 2
5 7

2015

School-wide composite Number of charter schools
1 10
2 2
3 7
4 3
5 16

Optional schools

Half of the the district’s optional schools, which are special studies schools that require students to test into its programs, received a 1 on TVAAS. That’s compared to just 19 percent in 2015.

2017

School-wide composite Number of optional schools
1 23
2 6
3 5
4 2
5 10

2015

School-wide composite Number of optional schools
1 7
2 5
3 6
4 5
5 14

You can sort through a full list of TVAAS scores for Shelby County Schools here.

upcoming decision

How should Colorado respond to federal concerns about its testing opt-out policy? State board members don’t agree.

Seniors at Fairview High School in Boulder protest state tests in 2015. (Photo By Helen H. Richardson/ The Denver Post)

Divisions emerged Wednesday on the State Board of Education over how to respond to the federal government’s concerns about the state’s federally required education plan.

The most contentious issue involves how Colorado counts students who opt out of state tests. Students who opt-out aren’t considered part of the total number of test takers.

Federal officials, however, believe those students should be counted; they don’t want them excluded from calculations used to identify schools that need extra help through federal funds.

If the federal government doesn’t approve the state plan and finds Colorado out of compliance, the state could lose millions of dollars in federal funding — including Title I funds that are directed to schools with large numbers of low-income students.

Republican board member Steve Durham suggested there was no point in working to comply with the federal government’s guidance and called the idea that federal funding would be at risk a bluff.

Other board members suggested that there was no point in fighting the federal government and that it might not be a big ask to do as officials suggested.

No decision was made at Wednesday’s meeting. State officials are meeting next week to get more input from a committee that worked on the education plan, and the board will be asked to make a decision at its October meeting.

Staff from Colorado Department of Education told the board the state is allowed to keep its existing system in place for state accountability measures, while creating a separate calculation process to identify schools needing support for the federal government in a different way.

Schools identified under the federal calculation would have to write improvement plans, but state officials would still hold discretion about whether to direct funding to them or not, if they believe the calculations are providing accurate representations of the school’s performance and needs.

State officials also could choose to comply for now and ask for a waiver from the law after the plan is approved. The federal government told the state it would not consider waivers before plans are approved, state officials told the board.

The board could also choose not to change anything, as board member Durham suggested.

Other board members felt differently.

“I would be very worried about placing all of our Title I funds at risk,” said board member Rebecca McClellan, a Democrat.

Democratic board member Val Flores said she was prepared to vote Wednesday in favor of proceeding with creating a federal calculation that complies with federal guidance while keeping state systems intact, calling it “the wise thing to do.”

The board discussed other concerns — including that a full picture of student performance isn’t possible when students don’t test. Another worry is that schools identified as needing extra help under the federal calculations might cause panic for communities where schools might not otherwise be considered in need.

In Colorado, white, higher performing and more affluent students are more likely to opt out of tests. As a result, officials and board members suggested it is more likely that high performing schools that otherwise weren’t identified by the federal calculation would be, and that schools currently identified might not be excluded from the new lists. State education staff are running calculations trying to anticipate how many new schools might be identified or not identified based on opt-outs.