Trying to Make Sense of PSSA, Keystone Scores, and SPP

	2016 PSSA Mathematics Results
	Total  number	% Below Basic	%Basic	% Proficient	% Advanced	% Advanced/Proficient
3rd grade	124642	24.6	21	28.1	26.3	54.4
4th grade	123651	27.6	25.9	26.7	19.9	46.6
5th grade	122776	28	27.6	25.9	18.5	44.4
6th grade	125088	30.1	28.8	24.2	16.9	41.1
7th grade	124781	34.9	28.1	23.7	13.3	37.0
8th grade	123003	40.2	28.6	20.8	10.5	31.2
	2016 PSSA English Language Arts Results
	Total number	% Below Basic	%Basic	% Proficient	% Advanced	% Advanced/Proficient
3rd grade	124507	13.6	25.5	45.7	15.2	60.9
4th grade	123308	12.2	29.1	34.0	24.7	58.7
5th grade	122662	14.1	24.4	45.3	16.2	61.5
6th grade	125047	8.6	29.8	38.9	22.7	61.7
7th grade	124784	5.0	33.5	43.3	18.2	61.5
8th grade	123100	11.3	30.4	40.9	17.5	58.4
	2016 PSSA Science Results
	Total number	% Below Basic	%Basic	% Proficient	% Advanced	% Advanced/Proficient
3rd grade	NA					NA
4th grade	123527	11.6	12.1	36.7	39.5	76.2
5th grade	NA					NA
6th grade	NA					NA
7th grade	NA					NA
8th grade	122782	25.5	16.8	30.4	27.3	57.7
	2016 Keystone Results
	Total  number	% Below Basic	%Basic	% Proficient	% Advanced	% Advanced/Proficient
Algebra I	123525	8.4	23.3	47.6	20.6	68.2
Literature	123292	6.2	17.0	66.8	10.0	76.8
Biology	122834	14.6	19.7	38.6	27.1	65.7

                The state recently “scored” all public schools in Pennsylvania. The school report card is the School Performance Profile. Schools are given a score from 0-100. Schools that score between 90-100 are at the apex. Schools that score between 80-89 are exceeding state expectations. Scores between 70-79 are at state expectations. Schools between 60-69 are below state expectations in a “warning” or “cautionary” status. Schools below 60 are considered failing. You can see how any PUBLIC school scored at http://www.paschoolperformance.org/.

                Approximately 40% of a school’s score is based on standardized test results. The chart above explains how the state faired on the tests. You can you this chart to compare your school against the state average. As you review the state scores and local scores a few observations come to mind.

As the grade level increases, proficiency in math across the state decreases. Approximately 2/3 of 7^th and 8^th grade students are failing the state math test. Several plausible reasons exist. As the students grow older the test becomes more rigorous. Another explanation could be that the test rigor increases beyond the acceleration of the students. Detractors of public education may point to ineffective instruction.

The state has created and endorsed a series of math tests that averages a 42.45% Advanced/Proficient. Therefore, close to 58% of all tested students are below state expectations in math. Either the students and teachers of Pennsylvania are incapable, or the state expects all students to reach an unattainable standard.

Although ELA proficiency averages are higher than math, more than 1/3 of all PA students were basic or below basic across all grade levels. So again the reflection goes to the students, the teachers, the curriculum, or the state expectations and testing mechanism as defined by Pennsylvania Core Standards as assessed on the PSSA.

Science proficiency falls by a 1/3 from 4^th to 8^th grade, from 76.2% who passed to 57.7%. The reflective process parallels math. What is the cause? Why did almost 20% of our public school students performance worse than they did 4 years ago? If the assumption is made that some things are relative (the students are older and more capable, the teachers in 8^th grade are as effective as the teachers in 4^th), then the problem is the rigor of the state curriculum and standards. Again, detractors will point to ineffective instruction. Without definitive research, the conclusion will be based upon perspective.

High school students must pass Keystone Exams in literature, biology, and algebra in order to graduate. Between ¼ and 1/3 of all high school students fail any of the 3 keystone exams. On average Keystone Exam proficiency is higher than PSSA proficiency. Of those students who fail any Keystone, approximately 50% will never pass any retest regardless of intervention, remediation, tutoring, etc.

The trend lines are clear. The interpretation of the trend line is up to the reviewer. If you are confident in your school and the teachers, then recognize the hurdle that the current system of standardized tests creates. If you are a critic of public education, then you have evidence that we are less than successful.

To be clear, the intent is not to avoid accountability. The intent is to educate as to the task. If proficiency in gym class were dunking the basketball, how would you do? We could give you extended time, would you pass? Mr. Michael Jordan and Mr. Lebron James could be your teachers, could you then dunk? With a strong curriculum and strong instruction, all students can learn and make progress. We should push our students to achieve all that they can. The finish line should be attainable.

Election 2016 - It makes me sick

I had problems sleeping last night. I am sick to my stomach this morning. Why? I must vote. It sickens me that either Donald J. Trump or Hillary R. Clinton will be a successor to Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt.

I have voted proudly for President since the general election of 1988. I can make no such proud vote today. I participate, but I am not optimistic. We are a country of polarization. Gone are the days when Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan could argue during the day and then share dinner together. The 24 hour news cycle has turned us into a country of arguments not ideas.


The Constitution itself is "The Great Compromise." The Virginia Plan, and the New Jersey Plan gave way to the Connecticut Compromise. A bicameral legislature with an independent executive. The give and take of compromise created the strongest country of the last 225+ years.

Polls and pundits matter more than people. We are statistics. To them I am a white, male, college educated, Democratic between 35-54 years old. I prefer to be known as father, husband, or PUBLIC school administrator. I am polled and predictions made based upon my "demographic."

The national Republican Party does NOT represent me. The national Democratic Party does NOT represent me. In the past I have voted for people, not parties. So today my priority will not be who is the best person, but rather who will do the least damage. My priority is as follows: I want judicial review as established by Marbury v. Madison not judicial activism. I am pro-life not just for the unborn child but for the criminally condemned. Protection from the infringement of government upon my individual liberties. Freedom of religion, NOT freedom from religion.

So today in addition to voting, I will pray for this one nation under God. I pray this country "has a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

One Postsecondary Option Does Not Fit All

I am not a fan of college for all. Students today have a variety of post-secondary options. The average entry level tradesman makes around $40k per year and has limited to no debt. The average college graduate enters the work force at the same level, $40K, but is loaded with about $35,000.00 in debt on average. Many students owe a considerable amount more.

Post-secondary options must  be a cost-benefit analysis. If we make the investment, what will be the return? Will the career choice allow for debt repayment and a reasonable standard of living.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholaswyman/2015/09/01/why-we-desperately-need-to-bring-back-vocational-training-in-schools/2/#6f67b2e865e5

Throughout most of U.S. history, American high school students were routinely taught vocational and job-ready skills along with the three Rs: reading, writing and arithmetic. Indeed readers of a certain age are likely to have fond memories of huddling over wooden workbenches learning a craft such as woodwork or maybe metal work, or any one of the hands-on projects that characterized the once-ubiquitous shop class.

 But in the 1950s, a different philosophy emerged: the theory that students should follow separate educational tracks according to ability. The idea was that the college-bound would take traditional academic courses (Latin, creative writing, science, math) and received no vocational training. Those students not headed for college would take basic academic courses, along with vocational training, or “shop.”

Ability tracking did not sit well with educators or parents, who believed students were assigned to tracks not by aptitude, but by socio-economic status and race. The result being that by the end of the 1950s, what was once a perfectly respectable, even mainstream educational path came to be viewed as a remedial track that restricted minority and working-class students.

The backlash against tracking, however, did not bring vocational education back to the academic core. Instead, the focus shifted to preparing all students for college, and college prep is still the center of the U.S. high school curriculum.

So what’s the harm in prepping kids for college? Won’t all students benefit from a high-level, four-year academic degree program? As it turns out, not really. For one thing, people have a huge and diverse range of different skills and learning styles. Not everyone is good at math, biology, history and other traditional subjects that characterize college-level work. Not everyone is fascinated by Greek mythology, or enamored with Victorian literature, or enraptured by classical music. Some students are mechanical; others are artistic. Some focus best in a lecture hall or classroom; still others learn best by doing, and would thrive in the studio, workshop or shop floor.

And not everyone goes to college. The latest figures from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that about 68% of high school students attend college. That means over 30% graduate with neither academic nor job skills.

But even the 68% aren’t doing so well. Almost 40% of students who begin four-year college programs don’t complete them, which translates into a whole lot of wasted time, wasted money, and burdensome student loan debt. Of those who do finish college, one-third or more will end up in jobs they could have had without a four-year degree. The BLS found that 37% of currently employed college grads are doing work for which only a high school degree is required.

It is true that earnings studies show college graduates earn more over a lifetime than high school graduates. However, these studies have some weaknesses. For example, over 53% of recent college graduates are unemployed or under-employed. And income for college graduates varies widely by major – philosophy graduates don’t nearly earn what business studies graduates do. Finally, earnings studies compare college graduates to all high school graduates. But the subset of high school students who graduate with vocational training – those who go into well-paying, skilled jobs – the picture for non-college graduates looks much rosier.

Yet despite the growing evidence that four-year college programs serve fewer and fewer of our students, states continue to cut vocational programs. In 2013, for example, the Los Angeles Unified School District, with more than 600,000 students, made plans to cut almost all of its CTE programs by the end of the year. The justification, of course, is budgetary; these programs (which include auto body technology, aviation maintenance, audio production, real estate and photography) are expensive to operate. But in a situation where 70% of high school students do not go to college, nearly half of those who do go fail to graduate, and over half of the graduates are unemployed or underemployed, is vocational education really expendable? Or is it the smartest investment we could make in our children, our businesses, and our country’s economic future?

The U.S. economy has changed. The manufacturing sector is growing and modernizing, creating a wealth of challenging, well-paying, highly skilled jobs for those with the skills to do them. The demise of vocational education at the high school level has bred a skills shortage in manufacturing today, and with it a wealth of career opportunities for both under-employed college grads and high school students looking for direct pathways to interesting, lucrative careers. Many of the jobs in manufacturing are attainable through apprenticeships, on-the-job training, and vocational programs offered at community colleges. They don’t require expensive, four-year degrees for which many students are not suited.

Lawrence County Economic Profile for September 2016

The following are some conclusions based upon recent information released from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I always find it interesting to see how the Lawrence County population compares to the rest of the state.

A few observations:

•       Lawrence County is 51.6% (45,466) female and 48.4% (42,616) male.
• ·         Lawrence County has a total population of 88,062 people.
• ·         Lawrence County is 93.3% white. The state is 82.6% white.
• ·         Lawrence County is 4.1% black. The state is 11.7% black.
• ·         36.1% of Lawrence County residents are 55 or older. 31% of the state is 55 or older.
• ·         The median age in Lawrence County is 44. The median age in the state is 40.
• ·         Per capita income in Lawrence County ($38,322) is 80% of the state per capita income ($47,679).
• ·         Lawrence County median family income ($56,065) is 83% of the state median family income ($67,521).
• ·         Lawrence County unemployment rate of 6.9% is 1.2% higher than the state average of 5.7%.
• ·         Lawrence County has a labor force of @ 42,400 people.
• ·         Lawrence County average wages are $38,816 which are 74% of average wages in the state ($52,160).
• ·         Lawrence County average entry level wages are $20,780 which are 44% of average entry level wages in the state ($46,550).

Conclusion:

• ·         Lawrence County is an aging community with a diminishing population.
• ·         Lawrence County unemployment is higher than state unemployment.
• ·         Lawrence County wage earners make less than the state average.

     This presents some unique challenges for public education. We have a significant portion of the population that does not have anyone in school and therefore has an idea about education that does not exist.

      As wages decrease and population decreases, so do tax revenues. As a function of government, public education relies primarily on real estate tax revenue. A mill of tax will continue to generate less dollars requiring an increase in millage to produce the same revenue.

      Quite a perplexing dichotomy!

Graduation Requirements Executive Summary

I had the opportunity to attend the Superintendent’s Advisory Council this week at MIU 4. The following is a summary of findings from a study by the governor’s office. Common sense may rule the day. Unfortunately it has come after the state has spent tens of millions of dollars. Feeling frustrated yet!!! Some highlights follow.

Graduation Requirements Executive Summary

FINDINGS

1.       Among high school graduates from the class of 2015, barely 50% scored proficient on all three Keystone exams.

2.       Passing high school exit exams is not the sole valid measure of mastery of a standards-based core subject matter.

3.       Passing high school exit exams does not indicate postsecondary readiness.

4.       The Project Based Assessment, PBA, has been proven to be ineffective and inefficient strategy to demonstrate mastery.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.       Adopt/Implement 4 options to demonstrate proficiency:

Option 1 = pass the three tests (algebra, biology, literature)

Option 2 = pass an alternate assessment approved by PDE for algebra, biology, or literature

Option 3 = demonstrate competency in standards-based subject matter content through course grades or assessments plus, for students who are identified as career and technical education (CTE) concentrators, demonstrate evidence of readiness for postsecondary success through NOCTI or NIMS assessments, competency certificates

Option 4 = demonstrate competency in standards-based subject matter content through course grades or assessments plus evidence related to postsecondary plans that demonstrate readiness to meaningfully engage those plans (graduation portfolio).

2.       Discontinue PBA (project based assessment)

3.       Allow LEA to determine whether or not to include Keystone exams scores on student transcripts 

Performance Audit Laurel School District August 2016

                The Laurel S.D. was recently audited by PA Department of the Auditor General for the period of July 1, 2012-June 30, 2015. The areas reviewed were: financial stability, hiring practices, bus driver requirements, and school safety.

Financial Information

                The Laurel S.D. had a $7.5 million fund balance as of June 30, 2012. The district has seen that fund balance shrink to $6.8 million as of June 30, 2015. The school district has also paid approximately $2.5 million in debt service over the same period of time. As of June 30, 2015 the district debt shrank from $17.0 million to $14.7 million.

                Traditionally, the Laurel S.D. has had revenues that have exceeded expenditures. However, FY 2012-2013 saw expenditures of $16.9 million exceed revenues of $16.8 million. FY 2013-2014, revenues of $17.1 million exceeded expenditures of $16.7 million. Those savings were lost in FY 2014-2015. Expenditures of $18.2 million exceeded revenues of $17.5 million.

                Charter tuition payments peeked at over $362, 000 in FY 2011-2012. As of FY 2014-2015, charter school tuition payments were $197,500.

                Laurel has seen revenues grow from $16.3 million in FY 2011-2012 TO $17.5 million in FY 2014-2015. About 1/3 of all revenue, $5.8 million are local effort. Over 61.7% of revenue, or $11.2 million, comes from the state. Approximately, $500,000, or 2.8% of the district revenues come from the federal government. The remaining, less than 1% of all revenue, comes from miscellaneous grants.

Academic Information

                For 2012-2013, the school district had an SPP of 75.2 with a corresponding SPP Grade of C which was lower than the statewide benchmark of 77.6. For 2013-2014, the school district improved to 80.1 with a corresponding SPP Grade of B which was higher than the state benchmark of 77.2. PSSA performance was competitive with statewide benchmarks.

                Laurel Elementary School had an SPP of 85.3 in 2012-2013 and an SPP of 83.3 in 2013-2014. Both scores exceeded the statewide benchmarks of 77.6 and 77.2 respectively. The elementary averaged over 81% advanced/proficient in math and over 75% in reading. Again, these scores were higher than statewide benchmark averages of 74% in math and 73% in reading.

                Laurel Junior-Senior High School had an SPP of 65.0 in 2012-2013 and an SPP of 76.8 in 2013-2014. Both scores were below the statewide benchmarks of 77.6 and 77.2 respectively. The junior-senior high school averaged over 64% proficient in math and over 72% in reading. Math was significantly below the math benchmark of 74%, but reading was competitive with the statewide benchmark of 73%. The junior-senior high school also had a higher 4 year cohort graduation rate of 99.1 when compared to the statewide average of 89.7%.

Findings

                For the audited period, the District resulted in no findings.

                The prior audit of the District resulted in no findings or observations.

                The district is in compliance with relevant requirements. The district has internal controls

Objectives/Methodology

                Based on an assessment of fiscal benchmarks, the district did comply with all statutes prohibiting deficit fund balances

Let us ask ourselves some guiding questions and reflect on our instruction

As you are teaching your classes, ask yourself the following:

·         Are the big ideas, essential questions, and assessment visible to the teacher and student?

• ·         Does the teacher incorporate the big idea and essential questions into the lesson?
• ·         Is there a clear formative or summative assessment that will provide feedback to the student and teacher? Did they get it?
• ·         Does the classroom environment support cooperative engagement?

Let us continue to work and “discover” v. “cover.” This may very well be a clumsy process at first. It is important to understand that over the course of time layered curricular initiatives are intended to change what we do, not add to what we do. Collectively, we need to build a language. Some language will merge. For example: how does the RACES format fit into the WATC (writing across the curriculum) initiative?

Our journey begins with building a k-12 language for literacy. Literacy is the basis for all learning in all content areas. The delivery of literacy instruction and the development of literacy skills does not end with the completion of 6^th grade. All scores, in all grade levels, and in all subject areas benefit when students can read and understand the content.

We begin to prepare for curriculum writing. We will train ourselves this year to look at things differently. Our lessons will on Big Ideas and Essential Questions. The information we receive from the students through pre-assessment, formative assessment, and summative assessment will drive future instruction. The goal (which will take 3-5 years) will be to have a dynamic k-12 curriculum that we revisit annually. We will have instruction centered around student readiness, interest, and ways of learning. We will have a culture that demands a cycle of continuous improvement.

Welcome Back Teachers to the 2016-2017 School Year

The following was the message sent to the Laurel School District Faculty.

August 10, 2016

To Spartan Educators:

It is a great time to be an educator. It is a stressful time to be an educator. As public school educators we are under enormous pressure to perform and to do so with less. The Laurel School District is not immune from this unique dynamic.

The good news is that as a unit we can enjoy the great times and handle the stress. We need to be there for one another. We need to support one another. We need to grow together. We will look to follow the fearless attitude of our mascot, the Spartan. By coming back with our shield or on it, we will advance the district rather than regress.

We will begin to scaffold our professional development. We will look to embed literacy and content literacy into our instruction. We will launch a k-12 writing across the curriculum (WATC) initiative. We will differentiate our instruction. We will have lessons centered on Big Ideas and Essential Questions that generate understanding.

We will continue to scaffold our professional development. We will be on a year-long journey that will focus on:

·         Integrating Big Ideas and Essential Questions, and Quadrant D Assessments into instruction.

·         Evaluation v. Differentiated Supervision

·         Exploring Moodle technologies

We will remain a school that has an inclusive differentiated educational process. We will continue to provide authentic connections to what we do.

Our first two in-service days are August 22^nd and August 23^rd. The agendas are available on district server under superintendent 2016-2017. We will start with breakfast in the HS cafeteria at 8:00. A specific schedule governing the in-service days and first 3 days of school will be distributed during the morning meeting.

Please contact us with any questions or concerns. Go GREEN!

Yours in education,

Leonard A. Rich

Superintendent

Findings and Recommendations Pursuant to Act 1 of 2016

After reading the PDE report: Findings and Recommendations Pursuant to Act 1 of 2016, I am encouraged and infuriated. I am encouraged by the changes that are on the horizon. I am infuriated at the cost of this lesson. Common sense said the original plan would fail. Hundreds of millions of tax dollars spent on a futile plan that has ultimately failed.

Please review the report on Act 1. Some highlights include:

FINDINGS

·         Among high school graduates for 2015, barely half scored proficient on all three Keystone exams.

·         Passing high school exit exams is NOT the sole valid measure of mastery

·         Project Based Assessments (PBA) have proved to be an ineffective an inefficient strategy to demonstrate mastery of the required content.

RECOMMENDATIONS

·         Adopt and implement 4 options to demonstrate postsecondary readiness

·         Discontinue the use of PBA

·         Allow local education agencies (LEA) to determine whether or not to include Keystone exam scores on student transcripts

INTRODUCTION

·         The state level graduation requirements currently set forth in Chapter 4 of the PA Code fail to provide PA students with a sufficient number of measures to demonstrate mastery of standards-based subject matter content and readiness for postsecondary success.

·         In practice, the considerable number of students who became eligible for PBAs signaled a larger instructional challenge.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE KEYSTONES

·         Annual pass rates are below 60% across all 3 Keystone exams for more than half of all districts and charters statewide, with lower pass rates on average for students of color and economically disadvantaged students.

·         By the winter of 2015-2016, there were approximately 740,000 Keystone exam modules requiring supplemental instruction and a corresponding PBA.

·         Schools began to limit extracurricular activities and CTE program to insert remediation.

·         PDE has recognized that postsecondary success looks different for different students.

OVERARCHING RECOMMENDATIONS

·         Postsecondary success looks different for different students

·         Discontinue the use of PBAs

·         Allow LEAs to determine whether or not to include Keystone exam scores on student transcripts.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED OPTIONS FOR GRADUATION

·         Option 1 = Pass the Keystone exams

·         Option 2 = Use an approved alternative assessment (SAT/ACT/AP/PSAT, IB), for those content areas where the student was not proficient

·         Option 3 = Student passed Keystone trigger course but failed Keystone exam. Student can attain Industry Based Competency Certificate (NOCTI/NIMS) or demonstrate likelihood of success on assessments by meaningful engagement in Program of Study

·         Option 4 = Student passed Keystone trigger course but failed Keystone exam. Student provides at least 3 pieces of evidence that reflect readiness for meaningful engagement consistent with a student’s career goals as represented in Career Portfolio.