Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just goes to show, more money does not mean better results. Keep approving those school budgets.
The teachers and administrators are laughing all the way to the bank.........
Just goes to show, more money does not mean better results. Keep approving those school budgets.
The teachers and administrators are laughing all the way to the bank.........
"In Jericho, Syosset and Great Neck, for example, more than 90 percent of fifth-graders passed the latest math tests. In contrast, passing rates were less than 65 percent in such districts as Brentwood and Uniondale, and less than 55 percent in others, including Longwood and Wyandanch.
"There's always room for improvement," said Rick Belyea, a Brentwood spokesman. "We're still looking at the numbers, but if you look at them right out of the box, you already start looking for places to improve."
I wonder what percentage of the down trend is from increasingly ESl dominated districts.
What the articles do not mention is that the "cut scores" (aka passing scores) were raised again this year. Last year, the cut score was raised significantly, which caused a drastic decrease in the number of children who passed. (The equivalent would have been a score of about an 83%. To say that every child, regardless of disability or language barrier, is capable of passing with an 83% is ridiculous.) This year, the cut score was raised by 2 points, for example, in 5th grade. In addition, this year's tests were longer (in some cases, an extra day, which equals an hour of testing, added on) and included harder questions interspersed early on in the test, which shattered the confidence of the students. Therefore, the slight decrease in the percentage of children passing the ELA is in large part due to the higher cut scores and length of the test, as well as the growing percentage of students for whom English is not their first language. The gains in Math scores are a positive outcome, despite the rise in cut scores.
What the articles do not mention is that the "cut scores" (aka passing scores) were raised again this year. Last year, the cut score was raised significantly, which caused a drastic decrease in the number of children who passed. (The equivalent would have been a score of about an 83%. To say that every child, regardless of disability or language barrier, is capable of passing with an 83% is ridiculous.) This year, the cut score was raised by 2 points, for example, in 5th grade. In addition, this year's tests were longer (in some cases, an extra day, which equals an hour of testing, added on) and included harder questions interspersed early on in the test, which shattered the confidence of the students. Therefore, the slight decrease in the percentage of children passing the ELA is in large part due to the higher cut scores and length of the test, as well as the growing percentage of students for whom English is not their first language. The gains in Math scores are a positive outcome, despite the rise in cut scores.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that your arguments will fall on deaf ears when it comes to the agenda driven. Just a wild hunch.
What the articles do not mention is that the "cut scores" (aka passing scores) were raised again this year. Last year, the cut score was raised significantly, which caused a drastic decrease in the number of children who passed. (The equivalent would have been a score of about an 83%. To say that every child, regardless of disability or language barrier, is capable of passing with an 83% is ridiculous.) This year, the cut score was raised by 2 points, for example, in 5th grade. In addition, this year's tests were longer (in some cases, an extra day, which equals an hour of testing, added on) and included harder questions interspersed early on in the test, which shattered the confidence of the students. Therefore, the slight decrease in the percentage of children passing the ELA is in large part due to the higher cut scores and length of the test, as well as the growing percentage of students for whom English is not their first language. The gains in Math scores are a positive outcome, despite the rise in cut scores.
As a lay person, I want to make certain I understand this correctly: students had to score 83% or better on English? If so, I wonder how many students fell just short -- earning perhaps 80-82? The flat number doesn't tell the whole story and is a disservice to everyone trying to decipher it.
As a lay person, I want to make certain I understand this correctly: students had to score 83% or better on English? If so, I wonder how many students fell just short -- earning perhaps 80-82? The flat number doesn't tell the whole story and is a disservice to everyone trying to decipher it.
Here is how the scoring works. School districts are sent a scoring guide after the tests are done. Each multiple choice question is worth one point, essay questions (or "show your work" questions in math) are worth 2-3 points, and a few more points are given for writing mechanics (e.g. grammar). As an example, the 5th grade math test this year was worth 61 points. Then the district sends these point totals to Albany, where they are converted to "scaled scores." The scale goes up to 780 points. Next, Albany determines which range of scaled scores equals a 1, 2, 3, or 4 overall score.
To pass the 5th grade math this year, a student had to have a scaled score of 676 points, which was 36 raw points. This means that to pass this year, a student had to have an 87%. On the raw points side, it looks like a student only had to get 59% correct, but this does not tell the whole story. This year, the state decided to throw in "field test" questions which would not count towards the score, but were used to determine the appropriateness of questions for future years. We have no idea which questions were the field test ones, nor do we know how many were field test questions. So out of the 70 raw points, some of those did not count.
If anyone is curious as to what the cut scores are this year for a particular grade, go to NYSED:IRS: Press Release of Data - August 8, 2011, then click on "slide presentation" and go to slide #5.
It is a convoluted process, and leaves everyone in the dark until the scores are released. Unfortuntately, many students just miss reaching the cut score, and are then required to receive academic intervention services for the following school year. In the above example, if a 5th grader got 673 points, he would get an overall score of "2" and fail the test.
I'm not sure what we waste all this money on tests for. If a child comes from an intact, attentive family that is concerned and involved in their education, that child will be successful. If a child doesn't come from such a family, chances are they won't be successful.
I'm not sure what we waste all this money on tests for. If a child comes from an intact, attentive family that is concerned and involved in their education, that child will be successful. If a child doesn't come from such a family, chances are they won't be successful.
No Child Left Behind requires all this testing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
