To our readers

Hey, we heard you. You had a lot of questions about TNReady. We found answers.

The news that Tennessee’s testing company scored some high school tests incorrectly this year uncorked a flood of questions about the validity of the state’s new standardized assessment.


Here are five things to know about the latest brouhaha over TNReady


We wanted to know how the brouhaha was impacting classrooms, so we asked our readers on Facebook.

You responded in droves.

We took your top concerns directly to the state Department of Education and asked for answers. Here’s what you wanted to know — and what we have learned:

Several readers asked why they should trust TNReady results, given the series of setbacks in the test’s first two years.

  • “I do not trust the results. We have had so many problems in the last few years, that I am suspicious of any results we do get. It bothers me greatly that the state uses these numbers to hold students and teachers and districts accountable, but they seem to be unable to deliver scores they believe are accurate in a timely manner.” —Rebecca Dickenson
  • “I no longer trust the accountability of the state nor its methods. My concern is if there is a teacher who has only one year of test data, how is it the same teacher shown multi-year growth when he or she had only last year of testing? This poses a huge concern.” —Mildred Williams  

Tennessee Department of Education: “TNReady is fully aligned to Tennessee’s academic standards, and every question has been reviewed, edited, and approved by Tennessee teachers through a rigorous review process. We also have quantitative checks and processes after a test is over to ensure student responses are reliable. While more than 99.9% of TNReady tests were scored accurately this year, we want to improve on that next year, and our vendor (Questar) is taking new quality assurance steps to make sure their programming is error-free. Also, this year, as soon as the scoring error on some of the English I, II and Integrated Math II EOCs was identified, scores were updated and all TNReady tests were re-reviewed and verified for full accuracy.”

Some teachers told us that, given the delay in score deliveries this spring, many students don’t think the results will arrive in time to affect their final grades next spring. Those teachers are struggling to get their students to buy in.

  • “After two years of TNReady, it still hasn’t counted for my students. Going into year three, I will once again tell them with a hopeful, straight face that it will count as part of their report card grades and implore them to try their best. I quietly wonder what reason they have to believe me, given recent history.” —Mike Stein
  • “I struggle to get students to buy in to the importance of trying their best on state tests because the students are confident that the scores won’t come back in time to affect their grades (which has been the situation for several years now). The students see zero incentive for doing well.” —Nicole Mayfield

TDOE: “We believe that if districts and schools set the tone that performing your best on TNReady is important, then students will take the test seriously, regardless of whether TNReady factors into their grade. We should be able to expect our students will try and do their best at any academic exercise, whether or not it is graded. This is a value that is established through local communication from educators and leaders, and it will always be key to our test administration. We believe that when we share these messages and values celebrating the variety of accomplishments our students have made, taking advantage of TNReady’s scheduling flexibility to minimize disruption, focusing on strong standards-based instruction every day, sending positive messages around the importance of the variety of tests that students take, and sharing that students should always do their best then students will buy-in and TNReady will be successful.”

Other teachers asked what happens to writing scores for tests in English language arts.

  • “I can tell you that two years ago — when we first piloted the new writing test online — districts received not only every student’s scores (broken down by each of the four indicators) but also the actual student responses to each prompt. In my former district our supervisor shared them, and we analyzed them as a department. If you check with your principal, VP, or supervisors, there are some published “anchor papers” with scores available on edtools from this past year. It’s not a lot, but it’s more than we’ve had in the past. My hope is that if online continues, we’ll keep seeing the student responses in the future.” —Wj Gillespie II

TDOE: “The question appears to be referencing the process we had through the 2014-15 school year, when our writing assessment was separate. Since 2015-16, students’ writing responses on TNReady have been incorporated as part of their overall ELA score. Responses are scored based on our writing rubrics, and for educators, we have provided access to the “anchor papers” from the 2016-17 year, so they can see how students’ responses were scored based on the writing rubric, which can help them inform the feedback they give their students.”

On that same issue of writing scores, one teacher referenced the hiring of scorers off of Craigslist. We asked the state if that’s true.

  • “I continue to be curious about our ELA writing scores. Each year we are required to use state writing rubrics, attend PD related to the state’s four types of writing, etc etc…and yet our scores never come back. Students spend hours taking the writing portion of the test, scorers are hired off Craig’s list…, and yet we never actually get the scores back. It seems like every year this is swept under the rug. Where do these writing tests go?” —Elizabeth Faison Clifton

TDOE: “Questar does not use Craigslist. Several years ago, another assessment company supposedly posted advertisements on Craigslist, but Questar does not. We provide opportunities for our educators to be involved in developing our test, and we also encourage Tennessee teachers to apply to hand-score TNReady. To be eligible, each applicant must provide proof of a four-year college degree, and preference is given to classroom teachers. As part of the interview process, an applicant would have to hand-score several items for review and evaluation. Once hired, each scorer is trained based on materials that Tennessee teachers and the department approve — and which are assembled from responses given by Tennessee students on the exam — and scorers are regularly refreshed and “recalibrated” on scoring guidelines. Each writing response is scored at least twice; if those two responses differ significantly, they are sent to a third scorer. Each day, the department reads behind a sample of essays to ensure hand-scorers are adhering to the criteria set by our teachers. Any scores that do not align are thrown out, and those scorers are retrained. Any scorer who does not meet our and Questar’s standards is released from scoring TNReady.”

Finally, readers expressed a lot of concern about the complexity behind growth scores known as TVAAS, which are based on TNReady results and which go into teachers’ evaluations. We asked the state for a simple explanation.

  • “What formula is used in calculating the overall score for TVAAS when fallacies were determined as a result? My performance is weighed heavily on the state TVAAS score which is why this type of error has occurred before. This is quite disturbing. Teachers work tirelessly to ensure student achievement is a success; however, testing to measure performance seems to not be working.” —Mildred Williams  
  • “No one can give me the formula for how my students’ scores are calculated to create my score in TVAAS. How is (t)hat transparency? Yet, I’m required, constantly, to “prove” myself with documentation of education, observations, professional development and the like; all in originals, of course, to numerous overseeing bodies.” —Rachel Bernstein Kannady
  • “I find it ludicrous that data from these tests are used to evaluate MY performance when I get little to no control over most of the variables regarding the test. How could a miscalculated, misinformed, and (for all I know) incomprehensible test demonstrate what my students have learned!? And don’t even get me started on that fact that the rigor of the tests was increased ten-fold, yet not scaffolded in.” —Nicole Mayfield

TDOE: “TVAAS is statistically valid and reliable, and we follow the recommendations outlined by the American Educational Research Association (AERA) on value-added measures. Conceptually, TVAAS looks at how students have performed historically on TCAP and TNReady and compares their performance to their peers who have had similar past performance. If students tended to grow at about the same rate as their peers across the state — the expected amount of growth — they would earn a 3. If students tended to grow faster than their peers, they would earn a 4 or a 5, depending on the amount of progress they showed. If they tended to not show as much growth as their peers, they would earn a 1 or a 2. The model itself is sophisticated and complex to be as fair and nuanced as possible for each teacher’s situation, and we are working with our educator preparation providers as well as district leaders to provide more training on specifically how the model calculates scores. Tennessee educators also have access to a TVAAS user support team that can answer any specific questions about their TVAAS data, including how the data was analyzed.

Because TVAAS always looks at relative growth from year to year, not absolute test scores, it can be stable through transitions — and that is what we saw this year. Students can still grow, even if their overall proficiency level is now different. You can think about it like a running race. If you used to finish a 5K at about the same time as 10 other students, and all 10 students made the same shift to a new race at the same time with the same amount of time to prepare, you should finish the new race at about the same time. If you finished ahead of the group’s average time, you grew faster than your peers. If you lagged behind everyone, that would indicate you did not grow as much as was expected.  Because students’ performance will be compared to the performance of their peers and because their peers are making the transition at the same time, drops in statewide proficiency rates resulting from increased rigor of the new assessments had no impact on the ability of teachers, schools, and districts to earn strong TVAAS scores. Transitions to higher standards and expectations do not change the fact that we still want all students in a district to make a full year’s worth of growth, relative to their peers who are all experiencing the same transition.”

Reporter Laura Faith Kebede contributed to this report.

pink slips

One Detroit principal keeps his job as others get the ax. Next year’s challenge? Test scores.

PHOTO: Brenda Scott Academy
Students at Brenda Scott Academy will have the same principal, Eric Redwine, next year.

Educators and staff from a Detroit middle school took the microphone on Tuesday evening to save their principal’s job. Addressing the school board, they listed off Eric Redwine’s virtues, arguing that recent problems at the school can be attributed to its transition from state to district management.

And the board listened. Redwine, principal of Brenda Scott Academy, kept his job in a narrow 4-to-3 vote. He was the only one to survive among more than a dozen other administrators — and three other principals — who either lost their jobs or were reassigned to new ones.

The vote came amid a quiet year for “non-renewals,” shorthand for losing one’s job. In previous years, every administrator in the district was forced to re-apply for their job every year, a tactic designed to give state-appointed emergency managers flexibility in the face of an unstable financial situation. This year, by contrast, only 16 administrators — including four principals — were notified by the superintendent’s office that their contracts would not be renewed, as Superintendent Nikolai Vitti seeks to bring stability to a district still recovering from repeated changes in management.

The principals were singled out for their school management, Vitti has said — not because of how students performed on tests. Test scores will be a major factor in principal contract renewals next spring for the first time under Vitti, part of the superintendent’s effort to meet his promise of boosting test scores.

Seven of the 16 administrators who received “non-renewals” asked the board to reconsider the superintendent’s decision. But in a vote on Tuesday evening, only Redwine survived. He’ll remain as principal of Brenda Scott Academy, according to board member LaMar Lemmons.

The other officials were not named, but Chalkbeat confirmed independently that the district did not renew its contracts with principals Sean Fisher, of Fisher Magnet Upper Academy, and Allan Cosma, of Ludington Magnet Middle School. Vitti previously attempted to remove Cosma, then agreed to offer him a job as assistant principal at Ludington.

At an earlier meeting, Cosma’s employees gathered to vouch for his work. On Tuesday, it was Redwine who received vocal support.

Redwine himself argued publicly that the problems identified at his school by administrators — teacher vacancies and school culture — could be attributed to the school’s transition from a state-run recovery district back to the main district. The recovery district, called the Education Achievement Authority, was created in 2012 to try to turn around 15 of the most struggling schools in the district but the effort was politically unpopular and had limited success. Most of the schools were returned to the main district last summer when the recovery district was dissolved. The only exceptions were schools that had been closed or converted to charter schools.

“I’ve never been told your job is in jeopardy, never been presented a corrective action plan,” Redwine said. “I ask that you reconsider your decision.”

Of the 12 schools that returned to the district last summer, most still have the principals who were in place during the transition last summer. A few got new principals this year after their predecessors left and at least one other former recovery district principal was moved earlier in the year.

Many school leaders reported that the transition was very difficult. It occurred at a time when Vitti was new and still putting his team into place in the central office, making it challenging for principals of the schools to get information they needed about the new district.

When Marcia Horge worked for Redwine, she appreciated his openness to classroom experimentation and his schoolwide Sunday night email, which laid out a game plan for the week ahead.

Then the recovery district folded, Brenda Scott Academy rejoined the main district, and Horge found herself facing a steep pay cut. Rather than accept credit for only two of her 17 years of teaching experience, she left for the River Rouge district. But now, with the Detroit district planning to fully honor teacher experience starting this fall, Horge is contemplating a return to work for Redwine.

“He’s open to our ideas,” she said. “You can go to him. And when there’s a need, he steps in and makes sure we’re communicating.”

 

beyond high school

Report: Memphis students from poor families less likely to have access to advanced coursework

PHOTO: By Glenn Asakawa/The Denver Post via Getty Images

While most high school students in Tennessee’s largest district have access to advanced courses to prepare them for college, most of those classes are concentrated in schools with more affluent families.

Of the 14 high schools in Shelby County Schools that offer more than 40 advanced classes, all but one have a lower percentage of students from poor families than the district.

Those schools educate slightly more than half of high school students in the Memphis district. In contrast, about a quarter of high school students are in schools with 20 or fewer advanced courses, according to a new district report.

District officials say those course offerings in the 2017-18 school year are closely correlated with the size of the school: The larger the student population, the more likely the school is to offer advanced courses. The concentration of schools with more affluent students was not examined in the report.

PHOTO: Shelby County Schools

The findings are scheduled to be presented at next week’s school board meeting as part of the district’s monthly check-in on various statistics on teaching and student learning.

Taking advanced classes in high school introduces students to college-level coursework and in many cases allows them to skip some college classes — saving students thousands of dollars. And because students from low-income families, who make up about 59 percent of Shelby County Schools, lag behind their more affluent peers in college enrollment, they are encouraged to take more advanced courses.

Advanced courses include programs such as such as Advanced Placement, dual enrollment, International Baccalaureate, and honors courses.

Jessica Lotz, the district’s director of performance management who will present the report, said this year’s numbers are better than last year. Since her last report on the topic, three schools now offer advanced courses for the first time.

Staffing is the biggest barrier to offering more advanced courses, she said. So, additional teacher trainings are planned for the summer.

And district plans are underway to increase the number of students taking those courses. The district is also pursuing federal funds to help students from low-income families pay for dual enrollment courses, and also encouraging area colleges to lower the number of students needed to take a class so that smaller schools can participate.

The number of students taking advanced courses is part of the state Department of Education measure of a being ready for college, or a “ready graduate,” under its new accountability plan.

Scroll down to the bottom of this story for a full chart on the number of advanced courses by high school.

Here are the 14 schools with 40 or more advanced courses each:

  • White Station High (143 advanced courses)
  • Central High (116)
  • Middle College High (98)
  • Germantown High (95)
  • Cordova High (79)
  • Overton High (75)
  • Ridgeway High (74)
  • Bolton High (56)
  • Southwind High (55)
  • Whitehaven High (52)
  • Hollis F. Price Middle College High (46)
  • Kingsbury High (45)
  • Memphis Virtual School (43)
  • East High (42)

Note: The number of courses offered refers to unique advanced courses that are available at a given school, not the total number of times/sections the same course is offered for different groups of students.

Four high schools did not offer any advanced courses: Legacy Leadership Academy, a charter school; The Excel Center, an adult learning school; Newcomer International Center, a new high school program for immigrant students; and Northwest Prep Academy, an alternative school.

Of the advanced courses, International Baccalaureate, a high-profile certification program for high school students worldwide, was the least common. Just three more affluent high schools — Ridgeway, Germantown, and Bolton — offered those courses, according to the district’s data.

Dual enrollment, another category of advanced courses, are taught in partnership with an area college and count toward a postsecondary degree. Though the share of Shelby County Schools students taking dual enrollment courses has increased from about 5 to 9 percent since 2014, the percentage slightly decreased this year compared to last school year.

Most of the high schools, offer a total of 183 dual enrollment courses. But only four of the 16 charter schools in the report offered those classes.

About half of high schools in the district offer a total of 194 Advanced Placement courses, which culminate in a test at the end of the year that can count toward college credit if students score well enough. Most of those classes are concentrated in seven more affluent schools.

Those schools are:

  • White Station High (39 AP courses)
  • Central High (20)
  • Cordova High (15)
  • Kingsbury High (13)
  • Overton High (13)
  • Whitehaven High (11)
  • Southwind High (10)

Honors courses, which count toward an advanced high school diploma but do not count for college credit, were the most common with just over 1,000 across the district. Only seven schools, which were either charter schools or alternative schools, did not offer any honors courses.

One of Shelby County Schools’ goals is to increase the percentage of students prepared for college by 2025. Currently, about 90 percent of students who graduate from the district would be required to take remedial classes in college because of low ACT scores, according to state data. That’s usually a sign that their high school did not adequately prepare them for college classes.

A state report released last fall examining where students go after high school showed that 56 percent of Shelby County Schools’ graduating class of 2016 went on to enroll in a four-year college or university, community college, or technical college. That’s compared to 63 percent of students statewide.

One of the report’s recommendations to boost that number was to improve partnerships with universities and increase the number of advanced course offerings — a recommendation Lotz emphasized Tuesday.

Shelby County Schools partners with the following universities and colleges for dual enrollment courses: Bethel University, Christian Brothers University, LeMoyne Owen College, Southwest Tennessee Community College, Tennessee College of Applied Technology, University of Memphis, and William Moore College of Technology (Moore Tech)

Below you can find the advanced course offerings at each district-run and charter school in Shelby County Schools. Below that you can view the district’s full report.