Inadequate Yearly Progress
Arbitrary, unfair, not representative of the true quality of the schools...whatever you say about federal and state educational accountability standards and the exams used to measure them, they are not shining the most flattering light on Teaneck's schools. Yesterday's release of the annual school improvement statistics by New Jersey's Department of Education revealed that Teaneck High School once again failed to make significant enough strides in language arts or math proficiency, and that the school will now enter Year 4 status. This could compel the school to :- Extend the length of the school day or year
- Adopt a new research-based curriculum
- Replace or train staff
- Reorganize administration
- Submit to outside review
While the flaws in the system are widely recognized, perception is often reality, and the reputation of Teaneck's schools is harmed through these negative designations. Given the extraordinary amount of money poured into the Teaneck school system and the provenance of those funds, voter support for public school funding, already on the wane, will only decline further if things do not change. The already elevated spending on Teaneck's public schools puts the Board of Education into a difficult position. It is now almost impossible to persuade the public that an even larger financial investment is all that is needed to make the problems, whether real or invented by an imperfect system, go away. Better results, however, must come soon. The only option is to do more with less. A tall order, indeed.
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 9:58 AM
7 Comments:
whatever you say about ...
Perhaps you should give your opinions instead of others.
Since one of the stated intentions of the federal law is to pressure districts to close the achievement gap, results are reported by race, gender, economic status and whether test takers are English language learners or receive special education services. Many schools fail to meet the federal standards because one subgroup of students fell short of the passing rate.
This is often the explanation given by our BOE.
An explanation, I might add, that appears to be true based on the statistical breakdowns. However, this still leaves us with a very expensive school system relative to neighboring areas with a reputation that is middling at best. As I have argued elsewhere, this is a combination that bodes very poorly for future support for the public schools in town and puts us in danger of experiencing a downward spiral of support for funding public education and/or a drop in demand for homes in Teaneck among young families.
From the Record article:
"Many schools fail to meet the federal standards because one subgroup of students fell short of the passing rate."
According to the DOE Preliminary Adequate Yearly Progress Status Under No Child Left Behind Accountability, in Teaneck the only group that does not meet the federal standards is "Students with Disabilities".
Unfortunately, the Teaneck Schools are once again at the mercy of a statistical chart that gives less than half the information needed to draw conclusions. Without getting int specifics, however, I would just like to point out that a school cannot be taken OFF the list until it has met the standards two years in a row -- and the US Government raises those standards each year to make it harder for schools than in the previous years. It's like trying to move forward with your leg tied to a heavy log... The other thing to remember is that, as the US Government defines each sub-group, a specific school must have 20 or more students in each group for that group's performance to be considered. Therefore, smaller towns with smaller schools will NEVER come under the microscope that Teaneck's schools have to -- towns like Bogota, Emerson, Park Ridge, Midland Park -- in addition to schools in upper income towns that would not have certain categories that Teaneck does, like "economically disadvantaged" or certainl racial categories. So, before rushing to blame, let's consider all the information and be fair.
anonymous said...
"a specific school must have 20 or more students in each group for that group's performance to be considered."
That applies to all subgroups except "Students with Disabilities" which must contain at least 35 students to be considered.
While in my previous post I only considered Teaneck, I took a further look at the 328 schools in the DOE report for Bergen county. Of the 33 schools that did not make the AYP, all but three failed in the subgroup "Students with Disabilities". One passed in that subgroup and two did not have enough students to report the subgroup.
More $$ is not going to fix the Teaneck Schools ...what Teaneck should do is get back to teaching the BASICS...what a concept :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home