Thursday, March 18, 2004
Monrovia School Link ~ Number 78 ~ March 18, 2004
I caught a smidgen of the March 10 board meeting, but being a bit on the slow side, I didn't quite understand the meaning of all the API results that Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction Joel Shawn went over at the meeting, so I dropped by his office and asked him to explain it again. This issue is mostly about that, though there is a bit of other stuff, too.
~ Brad Haugaard (brad@sacklunch.net)
The good news about the API scores is that the elementary and middle schools have improved remarkably! Up, up, up! Very nice. Congratulations to all! The bad news is that the high school is not doing so hot. Well... by one measure it is doing a tad better, but by another it's doing worse.
The API information Shawn presented at the board meeting shows two measures: 1) How Monrovia schools rank compared to ALL schools statewide (I'll call this the "All Schools Ranking"), and 2) How Monrovia schools rank compared to similar schools statewide (the "Similar Schools Ranking"). (There's a whole formula to measure similarity - number of non-English speakers, ethnicity, family income, and so forth - but I'm not going to get into that). One thing the latest report does not do, however, is tell you how the schools did compared to their own scores last year. I looked for that information in vain, and that's just not what this report is about, so it's not there.
Before I tell you about my chat with Joel Shawn, let's start off with a look at the data.
On both measures, Monrovia's elementary and middle schools moved up, sometimes dramatically. Of particular note is Plymouth School. Plymouth is in the south end of town and I'd guess probably has fewer afluent families and more non-English speakers than any other school in town. In 2001 it ranked a rotten 3 in the 1-10 Similar Schools Rank. But in 2003 it had moved up to rank 8! Not only that, but in the All Schools Ranking it moved from a 4 to a 6, a two-point increase that takes it from below average to above average. This is a remarkable achievement and I think the whole Plymouth crew should be very proud! Congratulations.
Shawn credited the rise to three factors. 1) In the elementary and middle school levels, the district has aligned the curriculum to meet the state's standards, 2) The teachers are quickly adapting to the curriculum and doing a good job teaching it, and 3) the district keeps an eye out for students who are having troubles and gives them special attention, including tutoring and placing them into special classes to help them catch up.
There are a lot more good things I could say about the schools, but I think it might be simpler to show you. Look at the three-year trend on these schools, and remember, both these scales are 1-to-10:
ALL SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
Bradoaks 5 5 6
Mayflower 7 8 8
Monroe 5 6 6
Plymouth 4 5 6
Wild Rose 4 4 5
Clifton 6 6 7
Santa Fe 4 4 5
SIMILAR SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
Bradoaks 8 8 9
Mayflower 8 10 10
Monroe 4 7 8
Plymouth 3 5 8
Wild Rose 3 4 5
Clifton 7 7 10
Santa Fe 7 7 10
Now, I am, of course, known as a fault finder, so I'll give it a try, though it is mighty tough when all the numbers are going nicely in the right direction. Nevertheless, I am a bit curious about Wild Rose. Wild Rose is in a fairly nice part of town - not surrounded by $3 million homes, but still, not bad at all. Nevertheless, Plymouth School - which is probably in the poorest part of town - is surpassing it. Methinks maybe Wild Rose needs a bit of extra attention.
Okay, now on to Monrovia High School. I was very surprised at the last board meeting that nobody asked anything about Monrovia High. It is the one dark spot in an otherwise glowing picture.
Here are it's numbers:
ALL SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
MHS 5 5 4
SIMILAR SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
MHS 5 6 5
Compared to all schools in the state Monrovia High is now worse off than in 2001, and compared to similar schools it's just flat. Why?
Actaully, Shawn said, the high school is not worse off. It has been increasing its API scores. It's just that most of the rest of the high schools in the state have increased their scores *more*, which caused Monrovia High to drop relative to the other schools.
Nevertheless, Shawn agrees: "It is fair to say that our high school is below average - and that's not okay for me, for the high school staff, for Superintendent Taylor, or for the board."
Well, why is it below average?
He said the API test has changed. (I gather he means that this has introduced an element of uncertainty into the scoring.) Also, he said, the high school gets the middle school students who haven't been had the benefit of the earlier programs.
But, I said, haven't all the other schools in the state faced the same situation?
True, he said. But, he added, one big difference between elementary/middle schools and high school is that "high school is more about teachers with specific expertise. And now," he said, "we're asking them to filter that expertise through the state standards. That's a fairly big change."
While the state has a selection of approved textbooks for elementary and middle schools, he said, in high school "teachers make the determination whether the books align with the standards." Further, he said, the teachers "may or may not agree with the standards."
I take it by this that he means that the choice of textbooks may not always be as closely aligned to the state standards as they could be.
Also, he said, the lower grades have recieved the bulk of the attention thus far.
Okay, so what's happening or going to happen to make things better at the high school?
Shawn said that Monrovia High is now beginning to get a "full court press."
He said the district has been making a big effort to get parents involved. It sent out a study guide to all high school parents; there was a parents' meeting attended by about 55 percent of the high school's parents, and the district has been in personal touch with another 15 percent who did not make it to the meeting.
Shawn also said there is a big effort to make Monrovia High a "college bound" school. He noted that the number of students going on to college has jumped dramatically. I asked if this wasn't just the work of fireball counselor Oscar Ibarra. (Ibarra, if you don't know, has done some amazing work in this area.) He agreed that Ibarra has done a tremendous job, but said his work is part of a coordinated plan to raise the expectations of Monrovia High students, to let them know they can go on to Yale or Harvard or other top schools.
In addition, he said, the high school is adopting new textbooks and curriculum; it is working to make sure that English language learners get the support they need (he said there is a correlation between low English skills and poor test results), and at the higher end it is instituting honors classes, a zoology class, and an alternative independent study program for high performing students.
The changes coming to the high school remind me of an incident that occurred some time ago at one of the many jobs I've held. Someone asked me what my job description was. I replied that it was, "Be flexible." Something tells me that would be a good motto for Monrovia High instructors.
Okay, on to other topics...
SNOW ~ I got a comment about the board members' comments defending bringing in snow for the kids: "Snow schmoe," writes Rosemary Harrahill, "I, too, thought this sounded excessive! There's a damn budget crisis looming over all of us, for heaven's sake! How are we going to convince the Monrovia voter the schools need money when it's spent on snow!!!
DISTINGUISHED ~ And another letter about distinguished schools. "About the distinguished school honors... as I understand it our three schools still face a visitation by a committee that will then make a determination as to our eligability, and if we pass that we will become distinguished schools. All of the elementary schools in Monrovia were eligable to apply - very exciting! - and three are still in the running! We are especially proud of Bradoaks because our application scored a 7.9 out of a possible 8." That from Kathryn Lamb, a "slightly biased Bradoaks parent."
CHANGES ~ As I mentioned earlier, I poked my head in briefly at the last meeting to see the new board in action. A few things struck me as positive changes: First, there were quite a few people. When I left there must still have been 15 to 20 people in the audience. When I used to go to these meetings regularly, I could count the audience on one finger - me. ~~ Now, when there is a PowerPoint presentation, it is presented on the screen behind the board members instead of on the side wall, which means they have to come around and sit with the audience. Unpleasant for them, perhaps, but nice for the audience. ~~ The podium has been moved to the side, which gives the audience a better view of whomever is speaking. ~~ The board members (for the most part) are actually asking questions and trying to understand the reports. ~~ And finally, this...
JARGON ~ Some time ago I was an E4 in USAREUR. I frequently worked under the NCOIC on CQ. Sometimes he'd borrow my P38. My suspicion is that the preceeding sentences made little sense to 90 percent of you. The remaining 10 percent of you have served in the military. I bring this up because listening to the acronyms at the board meeting made me think about how incomprehensible this stuff can be to outsiders. When I went to school board meetings regularly, I became used to it and didn't notice it, but coming back for a visit I was hit by it. I really think it would be nice if staff reports layed off jargon, just for the sake of us ignoscenti. And if you're wondering, those sentences mean: "Some time ago I was a specialist 4th class (equivalent to a corporal) in the U.S. Army in Europe. I frequently worked under a sergeant watching the barracks at night. Sometimes he'd borrow my can opener."
I caught a smidgen of the March 10 board meeting, but being a bit on the slow side, I didn't quite understand the meaning of all the API results that Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction Joel Shawn went over at the meeting, so I dropped by his office and asked him to explain it again. This issue is mostly about that, though there is a bit of other stuff, too.
~ Brad Haugaard (brad@sacklunch.net)
The good news about the API scores is that the elementary and middle schools have improved remarkably! Up, up, up! Very nice. Congratulations to all! The bad news is that the high school is not doing so hot. Well... by one measure it is doing a tad better, but by another it's doing worse.
The API information Shawn presented at the board meeting shows two measures: 1) How Monrovia schools rank compared to ALL schools statewide (I'll call this the "All Schools Ranking"), and 2) How Monrovia schools rank compared to similar schools statewide (the "Similar Schools Ranking"). (There's a whole formula to measure similarity - number of non-English speakers, ethnicity, family income, and so forth - but I'm not going to get into that). One thing the latest report does not do, however, is tell you how the schools did compared to their own scores last year. I looked for that information in vain, and that's just not what this report is about, so it's not there.
Before I tell you about my chat with Joel Shawn, let's start off with a look at the data.
On both measures, Monrovia's elementary and middle schools moved up, sometimes dramatically. Of particular note is Plymouth School. Plymouth is in the south end of town and I'd guess probably has fewer afluent families and more non-English speakers than any other school in town. In 2001 it ranked a rotten 3 in the 1-10 Similar Schools Rank. But in 2003 it had moved up to rank 8! Not only that, but in the All Schools Ranking it moved from a 4 to a 6, a two-point increase that takes it from below average to above average. This is a remarkable achievement and I think the whole Plymouth crew should be very proud! Congratulations.
Shawn credited the rise to three factors. 1) In the elementary and middle school levels, the district has aligned the curriculum to meet the state's standards, 2) The teachers are quickly adapting to the curriculum and doing a good job teaching it, and 3) the district keeps an eye out for students who are having troubles and gives them special attention, including tutoring and placing them into special classes to help them catch up.
There are a lot more good things I could say about the schools, but I think it might be simpler to show you. Look at the three-year trend on these schools, and remember, both these scales are 1-to-10:
ALL SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
Bradoaks 5 5 6
Mayflower 7 8 8
Monroe 5 6 6
Plymouth 4 5 6
Wild Rose 4 4 5
Clifton 6 6 7
Santa Fe 4 4 5
SIMILAR SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
Bradoaks 8 8 9
Mayflower 8 10 10
Monroe 4 7 8
Plymouth 3 5 8
Wild Rose 3 4 5
Clifton 7 7 10
Santa Fe 7 7 10
Now, I am, of course, known as a fault finder, so I'll give it a try, though it is mighty tough when all the numbers are going nicely in the right direction. Nevertheless, I am a bit curious about Wild Rose. Wild Rose is in a fairly nice part of town - not surrounded by $3 million homes, but still, not bad at all. Nevertheless, Plymouth School - which is probably in the poorest part of town - is surpassing it. Methinks maybe Wild Rose needs a bit of extra attention.
Okay, now on to Monrovia High School. I was very surprised at the last board meeting that nobody asked anything about Monrovia High. It is the one dark spot in an otherwise glowing picture.
Here are it's numbers:
ALL SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
MHS 5 5 4
SIMILAR SCHOOLS
School 01 02 03
===================
MHS 5 6 5
Compared to all schools in the state Monrovia High is now worse off than in 2001, and compared to similar schools it's just flat. Why?
Actaully, Shawn said, the high school is not worse off. It has been increasing its API scores. It's just that most of the rest of the high schools in the state have increased their scores *more*, which caused Monrovia High to drop relative to the other schools.
Nevertheless, Shawn agrees: "It is fair to say that our high school is below average - and that's not okay for me, for the high school staff, for Superintendent Taylor, or for the board."
Well, why is it below average?
He said the API test has changed. (I gather he means that this has introduced an element of uncertainty into the scoring.) Also, he said, the high school gets the middle school students who haven't been had the benefit of the earlier programs.
But, I said, haven't all the other schools in the state faced the same situation?
True, he said. But, he added, one big difference between elementary/middle schools and high school is that "high school is more about teachers with specific expertise. And now," he said, "we're asking them to filter that expertise through the state standards. That's a fairly big change."
While the state has a selection of approved textbooks for elementary and middle schools, he said, in high school "teachers make the determination whether the books align with the standards." Further, he said, the teachers "may or may not agree with the standards."
I take it by this that he means that the choice of textbooks may not always be as closely aligned to the state standards as they could be.
Also, he said, the lower grades have recieved the bulk of the attention thus far.
Okay, so what's happening or going to happen to make things better at the high school?
Shawn said that Monrovia High is now beginning to get a "full court press."
He said the district has been making a big effort to get parents involved. It sent out a study guide to all high school parents; there was a parents' meeting attended by about 55 percent of the high school's parents, and the district has been in personal touch with another 15 percent who did not make it to the meeting.
Shawn also said there is a big effort to make Monrovia High a "college bound" school. He noted that the number of students going on to college has jumped dramatically. I asked if this wasn't just the work of fireball counselor Oscar Ibarra. (Ibarra, if you don't know, has done some amazing work in this area.) He agreed that Ibarra has done a tremendous job, but said his work is part of a coordinated plan to raise the expectations of Monrovia High students, to let them know they can go on to Yale or Harvard or other top schools.
In addition, he said, the high school is adopting new textbooks and curriculum; it is working to make sure that English language learners get the support they need (he said there is a correlation between low English skills and poor test results), and at the higher end it is instituting honors classes, a zoology class, and an alternative independent study program for high performing students.
The changes coming to the high school remind me of an incident that occurred some time ago at one of the many jobs I've held. Someone asked me what my job description was. I replied that it was, "Be flexible." Something tells me that would be a good motto for Monrovia High instructors.
Okay, on to other topics...
SNOW ~ I got a comment about the board members' comments defending bringing in snow for the kids: "Snow schmoe," writes Rosemary Harrahill, "I, too, thought this sounded excessive! There's a damn budget crisis looming over all of us, for heaven's sake! How are we going to convince the Monrovia voter the schools need money when it's spent on snow!!!
DISTINGUISHED ~ And another letter about distinguished schools. "About the distinguished school honors... as I understand it our three schools still face a visitation by a committee that will then make a determination as to our eligability, and if we pass that we will become distinguished schools. All of the elementary schools in Monrovia were eligable to apply - very exciting! - and three are still in the running! We are especially proud of Bradoaks because our application scored a 7.9 out of a possible 8." That from Kathryn Lamb, a "slightly biased Bradoaks parent."
CHANGES ~ As I mentioned earlier, I poked my head in briefly at the last meeting to see the new board in action. A few things struck me as positive changes: First, there were quite a few people. When I left there must still have been 15 to 20 people in the audience. When I used to go to these meetings regularly, I could count the audience on one finger - me. ~~ Now, when there is a PowerPoint presentation, it is presented on the screen behind the board members instead of on the side wall, which means they have to come around and sit with the audience. Unpleasant for them, perhaps, but nice for the audience. ~~ The podium has been moved to the side, which gives the audience a better view of whomever is speaking. ~~ The board members (for the most part) are actually asking questions and trying to understand the reports. ~~ And finally, this...
JARGON ~ Some time ago I was an E4 in USAREUR. I frequently worked under the NCOIC on CQ. Sometimes he'd borrow my P38. My suspicion is that the preceeding sentences made little sense to 90 percent of you. The remaining 10 percent of you have served in the military. I bring this up because listening to the acronyms at the board meeting made me think about how incomprehensible this stuff can be to outsiders. When I went to school board meetings regularly, I became used to it and didn't notice it, but coming back for a visit I was hit by it. I really think it would be nice if staff reports layed off jargon, just for the sake of us ignoscenti. And if you're wondering, those sentences mean: "Some time ago I was a specialist 4th class (equivalent to a corporal) in the U.S. Army in Europe. I frequently worked under a sergeant watching the barracks at night. Sometimes he'd borrow my can opener."
Comments:
Post a Comment
