Percentages
of student passing each standardized test in three Tacoma middle
schools--Giaudrone, Jason Lee, and Stewart. The test years covered by the SIG
were 2011, 2012 and 2013. 2009 and 2010 are included for comparison between SIG
and pre-SIG performance. There are, then, at least two broad evaluations to
make. First, pre-SIG and SIG scores. Second, growth during the SIG period. The
score in parentheses is the percentage of 7th grade students passing the
writing test. Only 8th graders take the science exam. All data available on the OSPI report card web site.
Giaudrone
Reading
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
6th Grade
|
50.3
|
49.2
|
56.4
|
67.3
|
7th Grade
|
39.7
(54.9-Write)
|
46.6
(50.8)
|
38.0
(55.5)
|
56.7
(54.1)
|
8th Grade
|
55.4
|
58.3
|
64.1
|
58.8
|
6th
grade scores show what seems to be a healthy improvement. 7th grade reading
scores show improvement in the second year of the SIG, though writing scores
remained essentially the same. 8th grade
scores showed an initial bump, but returned to essentially where they had been
before the SIG.
Following a student cohort (by moving
one cell to the right and one cell down) reveals another mixed pattern. 2009 6th graders drop in reading at 7th
grade, while they pass writing at the same rate as they passed reading in 6th
grade. As 8th graders, they show significant improvement in reading. 2010 6th
graders improve some in writing but drop significantly in reading at 7th grade.
As 8th graders they show healthy reading improvement over their 6th grade
scores. 2011 6th graders remain essentially the same in both reading and
writing in 7th grade.
Giaudrone
Math
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
6th Grade
|
27.1
|
27.6
|
38.3
|
55.1
|
7th Grade
|
35.0
|
24.1
|
41.0
|
49.3
|
8th Grade
|
26.2
|
36.2
|
39.4
|
45.7
|
All
3 grades improved substantially over the 4 years. Follow the student cohort,
and similar patterns of gain remain. Math, in other words, showed much more
consistent improvement than did reading.
Giaudrone
Science
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
8th Grade
|
31.2
|
37.4
|
38.8
|
51.8
|
Jason Lee
Reading
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
6th Grade
|
51.5
|
37.1
|
40.5
|
63.4
|
7th Grade
|
38.8
(41.0)
|
36.9
(56.3)
|
35.8
(54.5)
|
51.9
(61.0)
|
8th Grade
|
60.5
|
44.4
|
49.0
|
50.7
|
6th
and 7th grade showed improvement across the years, but 8th grade dropped.
Following student cohorts shows little change for the 2009 6th graders. (It
seems likely that their 7th grade year was more devoted to writing than
reading.) 2010 6th graders showed writing improvement in 7th grade and reading
improvement in 8th. 2011 6th graders showed substantial improvement in both
reading and writing as 7th graders.
Jason Lee
Math
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
6th Grade
|
33.3
|
37.1
|
24.4
|
61.5
|
7th Grade
|
28.1
|
30.1
|
43.1
|
36.4
|
8th Grade
|
27.4
|
13.3
|
37.7
|
35.3
|
6th
grade showed a sizable gain in the second year of the SIG. 7th and 8th showed
modest gains, perhaps barely more than statistical wobbles. Student cohorts
also showed fairly insignificant gains, except 2011 6th graders as 7th graders.
By contrast with the Giaudrone, this school likely focused more on reading than
math.
Jason Lee
Science
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
8th Grade
|
21.7
|
28.1
|
48.3
|
38.8
|
Stewart
Reading
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
6th Grade
|
57.0
|
37.3
|
49.0
|
48.3
|
7th Grade
|
39.9
(56.1)
|
33.9
(54.2)
|
36.7
(37.3)
|
53.8
(32.4)
|
8th Grade
|
54.7
|
52.9
|
47.1
|
40.0
|
The
only worthwhile gains in reading were in 7th grade in the second year of the
SIG. Cohort changes were insignificant, or negative.
Stewart
Math
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
6th Grade
|
33.0
|
19.6
|
30.6
|
34.2
|
7th Grade
|
33.7
|
24.3
|
25.9
|
18.7
|
8th Grade
|
29.8
|
27.6
|
25.2
|
11.7
|
By
grade level and student cohort, there are no real gains here.
Stewart
Science
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
8th Grade
|
23.2
|
25.3
|
35.0
|
39.1
|
1 comment:
I enjoyed your bog post very much! As I pointed out for years to my students, and to the public... always look at cohorts, since looking only at grade level changes year to year can often be explained by demographic shifts, while the "diagonals" (moving from one grade to the next each year in a chart) can give us much more valuable and realistic insights. One other thing that would be useful, if you don't mind a suggestion, would be to com are gains over time (as you do) with the average gains over time for the state as a whole, for example. I remember sharing with my University students some "marketing" data that suggested that certain commercial products" were extremely successful in creating student improvement... when they compared the data provided with state-level growth my students discovered that the schools using the products (regardless of how much credit or blame you give to them" actually showed fewer and less substantial gains that schools that had NOT used the products. Thanks for sharing. i am gong to retweet this! :)
Post a Comment