Missouri
Education News
September
2009
IN
THIS ISSUE:
Charter
Schools in Missouri Perform Significantly Better Than Their Traditional Public
School Peers
Hazelwood, Missouri School District
Implements Algebra Readiness Intervention
High School Achievement Continues to Lag
Missouri Education Report Back
Issues (http://www.queuenews.com/MOnews.html)
Education Research Report Back
Issues (http://queueeducation.blogspot.com)
Queue, Inc. is offering public schools free previews of QueueÕs best-selling test prep and curriculum-based workbooks. Queue publishes test prep workbooks in reading comprehension and math for grades 2-8 based on the MAP standards as well as a a wide variety of workbooks in language arts, reading comprehension, math and science ideal for test prep.
Go to http://www.qworkbooks.com/MO/MO.html descriptions.
Receive 10% off your entire purchase if you order by December 31, 2009. Use order code NLD1231 on your purchase order to qualify.
Order
previews online, or call Queue at 800.232.2224.
End-of-course Tests Debut; Fewer Schools
Meet AYP Targets.
State education officials say they are pleased with new Òend-of-course testsÓ in English, biology and algebra that will be used to measure the academic progress of Missouri high school students.
Results from the new end-of-course (EOC)
exams were released today by the Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education along with its annual report of Missouri Assessment Program (MAP)
test results for all public schools in Missouri.
In grades 3-8, students posted small to
moderate gains in math and English at every level except one (grade 6 math),
continuing the trend of slow but steady improvement in the academic performance
of elementary-grade students.
That growth, however, is not sufficient to help
schools meet the rising standards of Òadequate yearly progressÓ (AYP) as
required by federal law. As a result, the number of schools in the state
that did not meet AYP targets this year increased again
About 63,000 students took each of the new
EOC exams during 2008-09. The statewide results are:
á
English
II Ð 72.6% of student scored proficient or
advanced
á
Algebra
I Ð 52.7% of students scored proficient or
advanced
á
Biology
Ð 55.1% of students scored
proficient or advanced
With EOC exams, students take the test over
the specific course content at the end of the class. In the past, all
students took a math test in tenth grade and a communication arts test in
eleventh grade.
The EOC exams also are intended to increase
studentsÕ motivation to perform well on the tests. A portion of each
studentÕs final course grade is now based on the results of the EOC exam.
In the past, there were no consequences for students if they scored poorly on a
MAP test.
About two-thirds of all school buildings in
Missouri did not meet federal AYP targets this year, compared to about 58% in
2008.
Here is a breakdown of districts and
schools meeting AYP in 2009:
Title I
Schools in ÒSchool ImprovementÓ
|
Total
Number of Public Schools |
2,210 |
|
Total
Number of Title I Schools |
1,165 |
|
Title
I Schools in School Improvement: |
350 |
|
School Improvement Level 1 |
198 |
|
School Improvement Level 1, Delayed |
39 |
|
School Improvement Level 2 |
100 |
|
School Improvement Level 2, Delayed |
13 |
|
Title
I Schools in Corrective Action: |
70 |
|
School Improvement Level 3, Corrective Action Year 1 |
69 |
|
School Improvement Level 3, Corrective Action, Delayed |
1 |
|
Title
I Schools in Restructuring: |
75 |
|
School Improvement Level 4, Restructuring, Planning |
19 |
|
School Improvement Level 5, Restructuring, Implementation |
42 |
|
School Improvement Level 5, Restructuring, Continuing |
14 |
|
Title I Schools
Receiving Sanctions: |
495 |
|
|
|
http://dese.mo.gov/news/2009/mapsummary.htm
http://dese.mo.gov/schooldata/school_data.html
Preliminary List
of Title I Schools Receiving Sanctions
http://dese.mo.gov/schooldata/Schools_ReceivingSanctions.xls
A new report issued by the Center for Research on Education
Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found that there is a wide variance in
the quality of the nationÕs several thousand charter schools with, in the
aggregate, students in charter schools not faring as well as students in
traditional public schools.
The analysis looks at student achievement growth on state
achievement tests in both reading and math with controls for student
demographics and eligibility for program support such as free or reduced-price
lunch and special education. The analysis includes the most current student
achievement data from 15 states and the District of Columbia and gauges whether
students who attend charter schools fare better than if they would have
attended a traditional public school.
Missouri
A supplemental report, with an in-depth examination of the results
for charter schools in Missouri found that reading and math gains were
significantly higher in charter school students compared to their traditional
public school peers. African-American and Hispanic students had a larger and
more positive learning effect in charter schools compared to their counterparts
in traditional public schools, while charter school students in poverty
performed significantly below their traditional public school peers. English
Language Learner students attending charter schools performed significantly
lower in math compared to their counterparts in traditional public schools.
There was no significant difference for English Language Learners in reading.
Overall State Results
The report found that achievement results varied by states that
reported individual data. States with reading and math gains that were
significantly higher for charter school students than would have occurred in
traditional schools included: Arkansas, Colorado (Denver), Illinois (Chicago),
Louisiana and Missouri. States with reading and math gains that were
either mixed or were not different than their peers in the traditional public
school system included: California, the District of Columbia, Georgia and North
Carolina. States with reading and math gains that were significantly below
their peers in the traditional public school system included: Arizona, Florida,
Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio and Texas.
To download a copy of
the full report and executive summary, visit: http://credo.stanford.edu
To download a copy of the Missouri report visit: http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MO_CHARTER%20SCHOOL%20REPORT_CREDO_2009.pdf
Although MissouriÕs average ACT score is remarkably
stable and remains above the national average, state education officials are
concerned that many high school graduates are not as college-ready as they
might think.
MissouriÕs composite ACT score for 2009 is
unchanged Ð 21.6 Ð for the fifth year in a row. The national average Ð
21.1 Ð also is unchanged from 2008. The ACT is scored on a scale of 1 to
36, with 36 being the highest possible score.
Last
year, 46,923 Missouri high school graduates took the ACT exam. This was
about 300 fewer than the previous year and represented 67 percent of the Class
of 2009. By comparison, about five percent of Missouri graduates take the
SAT exam prior to entering college.
The
percentage of U.S. high school graduates meeting all four of ACTÕs College
Readiness Benchmarks increased slightly in 2009 as the pool of students taking
the ACT¨ continued to expand, according to the not-for-profit ACTÕs annual grad
class report on college readiness.
Nevertheless, the findings suggest continued effort to improve college
readiness is needed on the part of states and school districts.
Missouri ACT Report:
http://www.act.org/news/data/09/pdf/states/Missouri.pdf
More
than 1.5 million students (1,530,128) in the class of 2009 took the SAT, the
most widely used and researched standardized college admission test.
Missouri SAT Report:
http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/MO_09_03_03_01.pdf
$505 million is now available for Missouri under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. This funding will lay the
foundation for a generation of education reform and help save hundreds of
thousands of teaching jobs at risk of state and local budget cuts. Missouri
will be eligible to apply for another $249 million this fall. TodayÕs funding
is being made available per MissouriÕs successful completion of Part 1 of the
State Stabilization Application, which was made available on April 1.
To date, Missouri has received $370 million in education
stimulus fundsÑrepresenting a combination of funding for Title I, IDEA,
Vocational Rehabilitation Grants, Independent Living Grants, Impact Aid and
Government Services funds. On April 1, Missouri received nearly $74 million in
Title I funding and nearly $121 million in IDEA funding. This represents 50
percent of the Title I and IDEA funding Missouri is eligible for in total. On
April 1, Missouri also received $6 million in Vocational Rehab funds and
$969,000 in Independent Living funds. On April 10, Missouri received $1.2
million in Impact Aid funding.
In order to receive todayÕs funds, Missouri provided assurances
that it will collect, publish, analyze and act on basic information regarding
the quality of classroom teachers, annual student improvements, college
readiness, the effectiveness of state standards and assessments, progress on
removing charter caps and interventions in turning around underperforming
schools.
Missouri is also required by the Department of Education to
report the number of jobs saved through Recovery Act funding, the amount of
state and local tax increases averted and how funds are used.
See Missouri and other state applications for initial funding
under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program at http://www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization/resources.html.
Many States Show Gains Since 2002 at
All Achievement Levels
Missouri
report
Student
performance on state reading and math tests has generally risen at three
achievement levels, according to a 50-state study by the Center on Education
Policy (CEP). The study found more states with gains than declines in the
percentages of students reaching or exceeding the basic, proficient, and
advanced levels of achievement, and relatively few instances of sizeable
declines in the percentage scoring below the basic level.
Achievement
also improved in most states at the elementary, middle, and high school levels.
The
CEP study analyzed test score trends, where available, from 2002, the year the
federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) took effect, through 2008. (Some states
did not have trends going back to 2002 because they had adopted new tests or
made other major changes in their testing systems.) The study expands on CEPÕs
previous two reports on achievement by examining, for the first time, test
results at the ÒadvancedÓ level and at the ÒbasicÓ level-and-aboveÑas well as
at the ÒproficientÓ level and above, which is the benchmark that matters most
for federal accountability under NCLB.
ASSESSING PERFORMANCE AT LEVELS ABOVE AND BELOW PROFICIENT
CEP
found that, even though NCLB creates incentives for schools to focus on
ensuring students reach the proficient level, states posted gains at the
advanced and basic-and-above levels as well. At the basic-and-above level, 73
percent of the trend lines analyzed across various subjects and grades showed
gains. At the advanced level, 71 percent of the trend lines analyzed showed
improvement.
ÒIf
accountability policies were indeed shortchanging high- and low-achieving
students, we would expect to see stagnation or decline at the basic and
advanced levels,Ó said Jack Jennings, CEPÕs president and CEO. ÒInstead, the percentages
of students scoring at the basic-and-above and advanced levels have increased
much more often than they have decreased, especially in the lower grades.Ó
Ninth
Graders Prepare for Success in High School Math
Hazelwood School District, near St. Louis, Missouri, has
purchased Carnegie Learning¨ Bridge to Algebra textbooks and software for 900
ninth grade students in the DistrictÕs three high schools. Hazelwood School District
purchased the curricula for use through 2014.
ÒOur goal is to graduate each of our students prepared to
compete professionally or in continuing education,Ó said Cathy French, Math
Coordinator for Hazelwood School District. ÒWe evaluated several math programs
and found that Carnegie Learning provided the engaging, real-world application
of concepts that we believe will motivate our students to get excited about
math and be successful in higher-level math courses required for graduation.Ó
Gains were somewhat more prevalent at the
proficient-and-above level than at the other two achievement levels. Of the
trend lines analyzed at the proficient-and-above level, 83 percent displayed
gains, while 15 percent showed declines. The size of the gains was also larger,
on average, at the proficient-and-above level. However, this may be partly due
to a test-related statistical issue: When average test scores go up, the
percentage of students at the proficient level tends to grow faster than at the
basic and advanced levels because more studentsÕ scores tend to be clustered
near the proficient level.
At
the advanced level, the size of the gains in elementary and middle school math
were close or equal to those at the proficient level and there were more upward
trends than downward. These findings generally point to a significant movement
of students from proficient to advanced. At the basic level, too, there were
more gains than declines. Although some states posted declines at the basic
level, most were slight.
ÒThere
are several possible explanations for the upward trends. The most hopeful
explanation is that students are learning more and consequently are performing
better on state tests,Ó Jennings said. ÒThere is probably also a cumulative
effect of test-focused instruction at work.Ó
More
gains have been made in math than in reading, according to the report. The size
of the percentage gains across all states was greater in math than in reading,
data which is confirmed by the results from the National Assessment of
Educational Progress.
The
report notes that achievement at the high school level has improved but still
lags behind elementary and middle school achievement. The average annual
percentage point gains for high school students tended to be lower than at the
elementary or middle school levels. There may be several reasons for the
divergence in performance between students at the lower and higher grades,
among them that it is more difficult to engage and motive high school students
or that high schools receive fewer federal resources.
Although
CEP collected test data from all 50 states, achievement trends were included in
the report only for states with at least three years of comparable test data
for a particular subject, grade, and achievement level. A change in test
results was considered to be a ÒtrendÓ only if it was based on at least three
years of data in order to account for yearly fluctuations in test scores that
are unrelated to studentsÕ learning.
The
report, titled State Test Score Trends Through 2007-08, Part I: Is the
Emphasis on ÒProficiencyÓ Shortchanging Higher- and Lower-Achieving Students?, is available at
http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document_ext.showDocumentByID&nodeID=1&DocumentID=280
Individual
state profiles are available at:
http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=572