The latest round of state school report cards shows improvements for Clarkston Community Schools, thanks at least in part to more ‘flexible? assessments of ‘annual yearly progress.?
State report cards for 2002-2003 (issued in January of this year) had all Clarkston school buildings with a composite grade of ‘B? except Independence Elementary School, which did not have enough comparison data to generate a grade. Three elementary schools received ‘F? grades in the category of ‘achievement change,? and Clarkston Middle School and Clarkston High School were ruled to have failed in the AYP category.
The 2003-2004 scores have all elementary schools with a composite grade of ‘A,? both middle schools with composite grades of ‘B? and all elementary and middle schools meeting the AYP standard.
The report cards offer the latest measurement of how schools are meeting criteria of the federal ‘No Child Left Behind? program and Michigan’s accreditation system to fulfill that program, ‘Education YES (Yardstick for Excellent Schools).?
The goal is for all schools to have all students proficient in reading and math by the 2013-2014 school year. The AYP is a key measurement toward that goal.
The ‘composite grades? are determined in part by student scores in the Michigan Educational Achievement Program tests, with each school assessed in categories such as ‘achievement status? and ‘achievement change? for the total test population and various economic and ethnic and disability subgroups.
District officials offered no comment on the latest report cards at the Monday, Aug. 9 school board meeting.
In January, however, they complained about how the report card system is unfair to school districts already showing high student achievement. In the case of Clarkston Middle School and Clarkston High School, officials appealed the AYP ruling.
(Since MEAP tests were administered to high schoolers later in the year, state report cards for high schools will be issued at a later date.)
Along with the report cards themselves, the Michigan Department of Education issued a 24-page report, ‘Guide to Reading 2004 Michigan School Report Cards.? In its introduction, the guide explains how this year’s grading system changed.
‘It was agreed at the time [January 2004] that refinements in the system would be needed and that local educators should be involved in recommending revisions,? the report said. For example, ‘The Achievement Grade worked against many high-performing schools with high Status grades whose achievement score declined slightly. In numerous cases, schools that had an ‘A? in Status received an ‘F? in Change because of a slight decline in their scores, even though student achievement remained at a very high level.
‘Parents and the community in these schools objected to the ‘F? grades, believing they misrepresented what they viewed as continued high performance by their schools,? the report said.
Other areas of ‘flexibility? in the new grading system included ‘participation? (averaging data over two or three years to measure the required 95 percent participation in testing) and in assessment of ‘English Language Learners.?
The format of the new report cards has been altered slightly to reflect the ‘flexible? scoring methods, now including a category for ‘adjusted? Achievement Change in each test category.
Anita Banach, director of marketing and communications for Clarkston Community Schools, said the district is taking the school report cards as only one element of measuring progress.
‘We don’t feel our hands are tied to that, because we already set high standards,? she said.
A press release from the Michigan Department of Education said NCLB is so stringent with subgroup requirements that the possibility for AYP ‘failure? exists in any of 50 possible combinations of testing area and student subgroup.
Statewide, the number of schools meeting the AYP requirement increased to 2,058 this year from 2,006 last year.
Schools failing to achieve AYP are required to engage in a series of federally-mandated corrective measures. The ultimate penalty under No Child Left Behind is loss of federal Title I funds, which only four Clarkston schools receive. Under the state Education YES system, ‘failing? schools would lose state accreditation.
With this year’s report, however, no Clarkston schools are targeted for corrective measures.
Beginning with the 2005-2006 school year, another measurement will be added to the state school report cards. In addition to ‘achievement status? and ‘achievement change? will be ‘achievement growth,? a measurement of whether students are demonstrating at least one year of academic growth for each year of instruction.
Even next year, statewide minimum performance standards will increase for schools to achieve AYP.
‘Our schools are going to have to continue working hard as the bar gets raised next year,? according to Tom Watkins, state superintendent of public instruction.
While all Clarkston schools are already above next year’s minimum test score targets, there is the matter of the gradual progression toward 100 percent.
‘The reality is, if you’re hovering in the 90s, it’s going to be an up-down fluctuation,? Banach said.
More details on individual school performance may be found at www.michigan.gov/mde.