Last spring I calculated the gap for the first time. Initially, I compared the percentage of students who attained proficiency in 2002 to the same group in 2007. Using this measure, I learned that the achievement gap in OUSD (between Asian and White vs. African American and Latino subgroups) had widened over the years in all but one comparison.¹ The exception was the Math achievement between White and Latino students where the gap was slightly narrowed by 0.5 percentage points.
I calculated the gap a second time using different data.² It was suggested that I use the API scores because they portray a more accurate picture of student achievement. This is because the API is derived from the test scores of ALL students and can show more nuance.
This time my calculations revealed that the achievement gap narrowed between Asian and Latino students and between White and Latino students. However, the gap grew wider between Asian and African American students and between White and African American students.
The recently released 2008 figures reveal the same trend.
API scores from 2002 to 2008
- African American students: 539, 559, 562, 587, 604, 602, 609
- Asian students: 684, 708, 718, 749, 768, 778, 801
- Latino students: 494, 542, 559, 592, 609, 616, 642
- White students: 806, 829, 847, 859, 884, 882, 890
- Between White and African American students: 267, 270, 285, 272, 280, 280 and 281. This gap increased by 14 points.
- Between Asian and African American students: 145, 149, 156, 162, 164, 176 and 192. This gap increased by 47 points.
- Between White and Latino students: 312, 287, 288, 267, 275, 266 and 248. This gap decreased by 64 points.
- Between Asian and Latino students: 190, 166, 159, 157, 159, 162 and 159. This gap decreased by 31 points.
- Between Latino and African American students (a comparison not typically made): -45, -17, -3, 5, 5, 14 and 33. This gap increased by 78 points.
When will the gaps be closed?
The goal of NCLB is for 100% of students to test proficient in English/language arts (ELA) and mathematics by 2013-14. Despite district efforts to produce accelerated achievement, it doesn't seem likely that the students will meet that goal. But based on the average annual rates of increase of our ELA and Math proficiency scores, and as long as we don't encounter any stumbling blocks, we can project when every OUSD student will reach proficiency.
In 2002, 12.9% of African American students achieved proficiency in ELA, and 10.9% achieved proficiency in Math. In 2008 the figures were 28.9% and 29.0% respectively. The average annual rate of increase for ELA was 2.7 percentage points and for Math it was 3.0. If the current rate of improvement is maintained, African American students will achieve 100% ELA proficiency in 26.3 years (the 2034-35 school year). They will achieve 100% Math proficiency in 23.7 years (the 2031-32 school year).
In 2002, 29.4% of Asian students achieved proficiency in ELA, and 41.1% achieved proficiency in Math. In 2008 the figures were 58.1% and 69.2% respectively. The average annual rate of increase for ELA was 4.8 percentage points and for Math it was 4.7. If the current rate of improvement is maintained, Asian students will achieve 100% ELA proficiency in 8.7 years (the 2016-17 school year). They will achieve 100% Math proficiency in 6.6 years (the 2014-15 school year).
In 2002, 7.8% of Latino students achieved proficiency in ELA, and 10.3% achieved proficiency in Math. In 2008 the figures were 26.2% and 34.9% respectively. The average annual rate of increase for ELA was 3.1 percentage points and for Math it was 4.1. If the current rate of improvement is maintained, Latino students will achieve 100% ELA proficiency in 23.8 years (the 2031-32 school year). They will achieve 100% Math proficiency in 15.9 years (the 2023-24 school year).
In 2002, 64.7% of White students achieved proficiency in ELA, and 59.5% achieved proficiency in Math. In 2008 the figures were 81.1% and 79.5% respectively. The average annual rate of increase for ELA was 2.7 percentage points and for Math it was 3.3. If the current rate of improvement is maintained, White students will achieve 100% ELA proficiency in 7.0 years (the 2014-15 school year). They will achieve 100% Math proficiency in 6.2 years (the 2014-15 school year).
I invite comments and corrections. If you would like me to send you a table of this data, just write to perimeterprimate@yahoo.com.
¹See Perimeter Primate entry called “Who would have guessed?” (5/11/08).
²See Perimeter Primate entry called “What else contributes?” (5/27/08).
3 comments:
I sent this piece out to the Oakland Public School Parents Yahoo group and received a response from a reader who invited me to look at Joaquin Miller Elementary and to blog about the accomplishments towards closing the gap at that site.
Unfortunately, I am unable to obtain AYP or API data for any group other than White students at that school. The other subgroups are not numerically significant according to the CDE.
This school's 2007-08 demographics were: 21% African American, 13% Asian, 8% Latino, 1% Pacific Islander, and 56% White. It had 9% Free or Reduced-Price students, an Average Parent Education Level of 3.66. It enrolled ~216 students that year.
The school's 2008 API was 892. The API of the White subgroup was 959.
Another response to this posting from a member of the previously mentioned Yahoo group (Jody London, an OUSD Board Member-elect for District 1):
"There was a presentation on these results at the School Board meeting last week. They reach the same conclusions as you, Sharon.
The presentation also points out that many of the biggest schoolwide gains were at Program Improvement schools. There also was a presentation from Allendale School on the strategies employed there to increase test scores. You can see the staff presentation at: http://boe-webexten der.ousd. k12.ca.us/ attachments/ 11100.pdf
Additionally, the Board members are going to be participating in
meetings in their Districts over the next couple of months at most
middle schools, most high schools, and some elementary schools on what the data show for that specific school, as well as plans from the school staff and OUSD to increase achievement at each school."
The reader who suggested that I look at the progress of Joaquin Miller also asked me to look at the progress that Montera Middle School has made towards closing "The Gap."
She said, "I invite you to look deeply at Joaquin Miller. We are a "hills school" and we have a GAP - we continue to have a GAP, however, last year, with a great deal on one-on-one tutoring, concerted effort by our parents, teachers, extended family members, librarians, computer lab teachers, etc. we narrowed our GAP.
We have a long way to go. And we are not perfect; we are still struggling with serving the needs of the advanced students as well as the students of color who are behind, as well as the white / Asian students who are behind.
But one thing at our school was clear - unless everyone at our school took and continues to take part in closing the GAP, it will continue to grow. I also believe our next door neighbor, Montera Middle School took a bite out of the GAP.
Please give our scores, and those of Montera a look - then I'd love to have you blog about what things our schools, and other schools who ARE narrowing the GAP are doing that is right.
Montera's API scores from 2002 to 2008:
African American students - 650, 654, 657, 652, 671, 643, 686,
Asian students: 835, 843, 689, 886, 897, 905, 923
Latino students: Not numerically significant
White students: 875, 871, 884, 895, 905, 904, 919
In 2002, the Asian/African American achievement gap was 185 points. In 2008 it was 237 points. The gap widened by 52 points.
In 2002, the White/African American achievement gap was 225 points. In 2008 it was 223 points. The gap narrowed by 2 points.
In this age of test scores and accountability, it doesn't appear that Montera is being particularly successful with closing the achievement gap.
Post a Comment