Oakland Unified is declared to be “the most-improved urban school district over the last five years!” This is speaking about test scores, of course. The problem is that some important gaps don’t show signs of closing. ¿Por qué?*
How long do you think it’s going to take for people to decide it's time to go back to the drawing board?
CALIFORNIA’S MEASURE: THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDEX
THE SCORES: OUSD API Growth | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
African American | 539 | 559 | 562 | 587 | 604 | 602 | 609 | 630 |
Asian | 684 | 708 | 718 | 749 | 768 | 778 | 802 | 807 |
Latino | 494 | 542 | 559 | 592 | 609 | 616 | 642 | 660 |
White | 806 | 829 | 847 | 859 | 884 | 882 | 891 | 902 |
THE GAPS: Difference between the subgroups’ API scores | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
White/African American | 267 | 270 | 285 | 272 | 280 | 280 | 282 | 272 |
Asian/African American | 145 | 149 | 156 | 162 | 164 | 176 | 193 | 177 |
Latino/African American | -45 | -17 | -3 | 5 | 5 | 14 | 33 | 30 |
White/Latino | 312 | 287 | 288 | 267 | 275 | 266 | 249 | 242 |
Asian/Latino | 190 | 166 | 159 | 157 | 159 | 162 | 160 | 147 |
THE FEDERAL MEASURE: ANNUAL MEASUREABLE OBJECTIVES (% PROFICIENCY)
THE SCORES: English Language Arts AMOs | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
African American | 12.9 | 16.7 | 17.8 | 22.8 | 26.3 | 26.4 | 28.9 | 32.5 |
Asian | 29.4 | 37.6 | 39.0 | 47.9 | 53.8 | 56.0 | 58.2 | 62.4 |
Latino | 7.8 | 11.3 | 12.1 | 17.1 | 21.9 | 21.5 | 26.1 | 31.2 |
White | 64.7 | 68.4 | 70.5 | 76.3 | 80.3 | 80.6 | 81.2 | 83.5 |
THE GAPS: Difference between the subgroups’ ELA AMOs | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
White/African American | 51.8 | 51.7 | 52.7 | 53.5 | 54.0 | 54.2 | 52.3 | 51.0 |
Asian/African American | 16.5 | 20.9 | 21.2 | 25.1 | 27.5 | 29.6 | 29.3 | 29.9 |
Latino/African American | -5.1 | -5.4 | -5.7 | -5.7 | -4.4 | -4.9 | -2.8 | -1.3 |
White/Latino | 56.9 | 57.1 | 58.4 | 59.2 | 58.4 | 59.1 | 55.1 | 52.3 |
Asian/Latino | 16.5 | 26.3 | 26.9 | 30.8 | 31.9 | 34.5 | 32.1 | 31.2 |
THE SCORES: Math AMO’s | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
African American | 10.9 | 14.8 | 16.7 | 21.9 | 25.6 | 25.3 | 29.0 | 33.7 |
Asian | 41.1 | 51.5 | 53.0 | 61.7 | 66.2 | 66.5 | 69.4 | 74.9 |
Latino | 10.3 | 17.3 | 19.4 | 26.1 | 29.6 | 29.8 | 35.0 | 40.2 |
White | 59.5 | 65.4 | 69.3 | 74.1 | 77.6 | 78.5 | 79.7 | 82.5 |
THE GAPS: Difference between the subgroups’ Math AMOs | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
White/African American | 48.6 | 50.6 | 52.6 | 52.2 | 52.0 | 53.2 | 50.7 | 48.8 |
Asian/African American | 30.2 | 36.7 | 36.3 | 39.8 | 40.6 | 41.2 | 40.4 | 41.2 |
Latino/African American | -0.6 | 2.5 | 2.7 | 4.2 | 4.0 | 4.5 | 6.0 | 6.5 |
White/Latino | 49.2 | 48.1 | 49.9 | 48.0 | 48.0 | 48.7 | 44.7 | 42.3 |
Asian/Latino | 30.8 | 34.2 | 33.6 | 35.6 | 36.6 | 36.7 | 34.4 | 34.7 |
My 2008 report on the gaps is here.
*Richard Rothstein can tell you the answer. And here's a clue: it's not the fault of the teachers, nor the school.
3 comments:
This is valuable information. Once again, how come the people who are paid to do this research don't do it? Or maybe they do and just "forget" to mention the results publicly. (Though this info is available to the press -- I know they're desperately worrying about keeping their jobs, but they could still DO them...)
I just found out something interesting. Maybe you know it already. Jack O'Connell's charts for API growth are what sparked my interest.
I am able to pull up subgroup API scores for our district and its schools back to 2002. However, the State of California was not tracking its own subgroup API progress before 2006.
As you know, I've been interested in the progress of the "gap" much more than just the generalized "most improved" scores.
http://perimeterprimate.blogspot.com/2010/02/hows-that-gap-fixing-project-coming.html
I just find it disconcerting that with all the talk about the "gap," the State for some time wasn't bothering to track its own subgroup API gap progress. See the exchange below.
Sharon
--- On Wed, 3/24/10, AAU wrote:
From: AAU
Subject: RE: RE: Seeking older API Growth Reports
Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 10:44 AM
Because the state law and the State Board of Education did not require CDE to report statewide API at that time.
Academic Accountability Unit
Academic Accountability & Awards Division
California Department of Education
Tel.: 916-319-0863
Fax: 916-319-0152
\\\\
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 10:36 AM
To: AAU
Subject: Fw: RE: Seeking older API Growth Reports
Hello,
I am seeking the answer to a question.
I am interested in seeing the statewide API progress of various subgroups from earlier than 2006, but understand this information is not available.
I can do it for the subgroups in my own district, Oakland Unified, back to 2002, and was hoping to compare our trajectories to those of the state.
Do you happen to know why State of California APIs weren't calculated earlier than 2006, but district and school level APIs were?
Thank you,
\\\\
--- On Mon, 3/15/10, Donna Rothenbaum wrote:
From: Donna Rothenbaum
Subject: RE: Seeking older API Growth Reports
Date: Monday, March 15, 2010, 11:24 AM
Hi Sharon,
Yes you are correct and no, I don’t know why they weren’t calculated prior to 2006. I don’t work directly with that program, I’m more in the technical end of things. If you want to email the accountability office with your question, their email is aau@cde.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
Donna Rothenbaum
DataQuest Management Team
California Department of Education
916-327-0193
\\\\
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 9:46 AM
To: Donna Rothenbaum
Subject: RE: Seeking older API Growth Reports
Thank you for responding, Donna.
Your answer was surprising to hear. It seems to mean there is no way to look at the statewide API progress of various subgroups from earlier than 2006. Am I correct?
My interest is in tracking the width of the statewide achievement gaps over time.
I can do it for the subgroups in my own district, Oakland Unified, back to 2002, and was hoping to compare our trajectories to those of the state.
Do you happen to know why statewide APIs weren't calculated earlier than 2006?
Thank you so very much for your time.
Sharon
\\\\\
--- On Mon, 3/15/10, Donna Rothenbaum wrote:
From: Donna Rothenbaum
Subject: RE: Seeking older API Growth Reports
Date: Monday, March 15, 2010, 9:03 AM
Hi Sharon,
State level API scores were not created prior to 2006.
Sincerely,
Donna Rothenbaum
DataQuest Management Team
California Department of Education
916-327-0193
\\\\
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 4:34 PM
To: Donna Rothenbaum
Subject: Seeking older API Growth Reports
Hello,
I am seeking the State level API Growth Reports prior to 2006. On this page, the state level reports only go back to 2006. School reports go back to those for 1999-00.
Could you please direct me to the information I seek.
Thank you,
Sharon Higgins
"The Black-White Achievement Gap - When Progress Stopped." Educational Testing Service report, 2010
http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICBWGAP.pdf
Audio interview w/Sam Dillon of The New York Times
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/podcasts/2009/04/28/28backstory-dillon.mp3
Post a Comment