Charter high school would be to Christina’s detriment; Written by DESMOND KAHN DELAWARE VOICE
Two reasons stand out. First, in a blatant violation of state law that the Department of Education has shockingly failed to enforce, Newark Charter fails to offer federal free and reduced price lunches. The reason the school offers for this failure is that it lacks a cafeteria. Why doesn’t the school include a cafeteria? Could the reason be that the leadership knew that by failing to build a cafeteria, they would then avoid the federal free and reduced price lunch program, which would automatically reduce the number of low-income students?
Nothing is the law requires any charter school to accommodate Free and Reduced Lunch students! However, I tend to believe Desmond Kahn on this point.
Second, the school gives a strong preference in its admission process to those who live within a five-mile radius. This obviously excludes low-income areas in the Christina District in Wilmington and Bear. The combined effect of these two facts skews the income level of Newark Charter students away from levels representative of the Christina District, or even of the greater Newark area.
The same argument can be made in regards to Red Clay’s feeder-pattern for North Star, Linden Hill and Brandywine Springs. Also, you bet on the new Graves Road school or whatever Red Clay calls will mirror the other school in affluent selective feeder-patterns.
Gov. Markell should stand by statements he made during his campaign in opposition to the privatization of public education.
Don’t hold your breath! Markell sold his morals to the business round-table school reformist. Markell sold Delaware public and charter schools to Washington for $119 million dollars which equals on-tenth the state’s education budget.
I am still being told as recently as today that NCS request for expansion is a done deal.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Kilroy, You keep saying the approval is a done deal. I guess we will find out soon enough but you didn’t see the extension coming so I am starting to worry about your source. Are you attending in person and providing real time updates on Thursday? HA
I wouldn’t waste my time with the DOE circus! The approval is a done deal and I know that for a fact! Might be one no vote from the state board. Lowery “is” getting pressure to say no but the thing with the lunch thing has been addressed. 5 mile radius will stand because there is no violation on the law. Lowery position to push the vote to this month saved NCS, Meece really opened a can of worms with his editorial in the NJ. But it will be a yes vote! But can you image if it was a no? Dontdestroychristina will be proven right! Scary wouldn’t you say?
HAHA Kilroy- DDC right? There would be no end to that one! SHe may try to run for president! I hope your sources are right, that it is a done deal. Based on most of the info and the actual laws in place “currently” I think there would be some kind of backlash if denied. I think if they hadn’t followed the rules/laws and agreed to make the changes Lowery is suggesting it would be a different story. Personally, I would like to put this behind us, learn from it and hope that those that run CSD are listening and willing to take on the hard task of turning CSD around to be a district we can be proud of and desire to send our kids to. I guess time will tell!!
DDC might be spouting off making it sound like the charter school sky is falling but you’ll have to admit, there are some serious concerns!
Lowery was reacting to political pressure because of what appears to be racist and unjust for Free and Reduce Lunch kids. BUT nothing NCS did was / is illegal. However, there are flaws in the charter school. Who would ever of thought a public school could be built without a cafeteria? Yea yea, I know the capital funding issue. Just a bit odd! As far as CSD I think most can see the negative impact. Going be hard with the continuing brain drain. Take the top 10% achieving students out of NCS! Won’t there be an impact? But can blame charter parents for doing what is best for their child. However, government’s obligation is to all children and when the governor is bias to charter schools it sends a message they are not equal. Markell has a responsibility to save all the crabs. The vote “will:” be a yes and changes are coming in the charter school law.
I thought Kahn’s take on the strong correlation between income and test scores was interesting. He restated that this in itself could account for NCS’s high scores.
In the other article, it was interesting to note the professor’s objection to having a lottery determine state resources. Imagine if we drew lots for police protection or snow removal.
Personally, I’m tired of the whole thing. But it has made me appreciate what I have!
Beth, I have to admit I am tired of this as well. The son will come up on Friday no matter the decision.
Kilroy, This group pushing Lowery to say no… who are they? Anyone of note? Just curious…
Or sun.. ha
The real drama is whether Lowery’s conditions will stand, and how they will be implemented.
DDNCS, I can’t speak for all opponents of the NCS modification proposal, but the ones I am familiar with (maybe 30-40 people?) are a diffuse group of area residents, some of whom knew each other before this issue arose (neighbors, parents of children in the same district schools) and others of whom “found” each other via internet in trying to organize a response to this issue. Whether there is a more organized group also involved I couldn’t say. But the response I’ve seen has been pretty classic grassroots political activism (21st c. style)–emails, rapidly assembled websites, neighborhood meetings, etc.
Interestingly, although apparently a number of CSD teachers have told individuals that they appreciate this effort (because of the attention it has drawn to the tensions between charter & district public schools, at least as those have been managed in N. DE), most of those teachers have been wary of speaking out themselves. They (and their administrators) feel that there own vested interests are so clear that this would diminish the power & persuasiveness of opponents who are speaking on behalf of their children, communities, etc. Again, I’m sure some teachers are involved in some ways, but the people I’ve become aware of over the past weeks are not CSD employees or union reps. They are parents of children in district schools; older residents who feel local school admin. has been going off-track and charters are due for more oversight; parents who have chosen private schools but would like to see better options for the majority of children in the district; politicial activists skeptical of the charter agenda for various reasons, etc. Watching that process unfold has been heartening, actually. A lot of people do care about the quality of public education for all district kids (and I know that this group includes many NCS parents). Many of us are late to this party, but we’re in now!
To Proud NCS Mom of Two:
“Personally, I would like to put this behind us, learn from it and hope that those that run CSD are listening and willing to take on the hard task of turning CSD around to be a district we can be proud of and desire to send our kids to. I guess time will tell!!”
There are many in Christina who have been working diligently to address achievement issues in our district. However, it’s much harder to remediate the results of poverty, racism, bigotry, absentee parents, the slew of social injustice that exists, etc. than CSD detractors assume. Not one NCS supporter has had a kind word to say about Christina and our schools. I think that is very telling.
Take NCS’s request to expand their elementary school – they need more seats if they are to flow students into a high school that can be financially solvent – even though there is no capacity need for more elementary seats in the district and the majority of CSD’s elementary schools are high performing schools, especially those in the five mile radius. Very disengenius and NCS supporters continue to gloss over this very important fact.
For me, personally, I can understand why NCS parents would want a high school for their kids – it’s to continue a tradition. However, NCS has taken the avenue of demonizing CSD’s elementaries to further their cause. That’s immoral and unethical. It’s lying, plain and simple. But, whoever wrote the application seemed to believe they needed to lie to get their high school. The ends don’t justify the means and for that reason, I cannot defend the earnest desires of some NCS parents.
I’m proud of the hardwork occuring in my district. I’m proud of my staff, my teachers, and my students. And I’d take the absentee parent and their struggling child anyday over those who would lie about Christina to further their own personal and political agenda.
“Not one NCS supporter has had a kind word to say about Christina and our schools. I think that is very telling. ”
With all due respect, Elizabeth, that is not true. I have said on more than one occasion on here, on other blogs and in general that we were very happy with Downes Elementary school and that was not the reason we left for NCS. I have praised the parent involvement there, the academics and the active PTA. The reason we left was the comparision between NCS middle school and the CSD middle schools.
I have actually had a hard time finding a positive remark either from a parent or rep of the CSD outside of the Cambridge program. I have become concerned from the lack of positive statements from CSD people, especially since my child will be going back to CSD next year. I would be happy to hear positive stories about CSD, I KNOW they are there, rather than seeing the largest district in the state continue playing victim.
Elizabeth, I don’t recall anyone saying the CSD elementary schools are failing at all. This is all about the High Schools, not elementary schools. “However, NCS has taken the avenue of demonizing CSD’s elementaries to further their cause.” Also, I will stop saying CSD and failing in the same sentence. I believe the CSD HSs are challenged w/the rules they must follow, RTTT, funding, politics, etc.. and therefore families in the area are looking for other HS options.
I guess you haven’t read much lately on this blog. I just wrote the other day that I think all kids should be proud of their school, whether its CSW, Pencader, Newark, Glasgow, or whatever school they go to. I also said I know some amazing kids at Glasgow who are doing wonderfully. I also said I liked McVey when my kids were there and the principal was the best principal ever. I also said that everyone should work together to help all schools.
I have said some negative things and will say them to anyone who will listen. It is about my nephew. It is frustrating beyond belief to me that a child can get passed through to 10th grade reading at a 4th grade level. Kilroy just wrote on here yesterday or the day before about passing kids through, I think he called it social passing, or something like that. I guess that is what happened to my nephew. I don’t know how that happened (don’t ask about the parents, I wrote about that on here and don’t want to again) Anyway, since he either got overlooked or there wasn’t enough money for reading specialists or whatever happened, he felt so horrible going to school every day because he didn’t understand anything, he dropped out in tenth grade. It’s funny, I guess there wasn’t enough money to educate him, but the state has found enough money to jail him twice already!
Every time I have talked about issues with schools, I have never once said that I thought it was the fault of the teachers, principal,board, and certainly have never ever said anything negative about the kids themselves. (although I have been called a racist on here and told that I must not want my kid with ‘those’ kids, in those exact words) I don’t know who is to blame, the state, lack of money? Principals hands tied when it comes to discipline? I don’t know the answer. It is great that many are working to make changes. It is unfortunate, more unfortunate than you will ever know, that it is too little, too late, for many kids like my nephew. If I sound bitter on here, it’s mostly because I know how many members of own family have been affected.. and the many other families out there in the same boat.
Agreed Newarkmom… I would like to see/hear more about what CSD is doing to improve (where needed) and positive CSD stories. Most of the oppostion and CSD supporters have been on here beating down NCS… not building up CSD.
Thanks newarkmom and ddncs. For the most part I have not put down CSD. There is alot of work that needs to be done. I think that is a known fact. My only negative experience with CSD is when my kids were transferring to NCS and they assured me they would not do well and be forced to come back to West Park. The OT at Brader told us that they wouldn’t be able to help my son and that NCS had no one on staff to help him. She wanted him labeled as developmentally disabled and tried to push us into that diagnosis. I left that meeting in tears and feeling helpless. We still sent him to NCS where SHE was hired as his OT. After we spoke with our physician about her concerns and what she wanted done we had her removed from his case. He is now reading at a 4th grade level (in 1st grade) and helps his sister (in 5th grade) with her math homework. The experience with them and the last IEP mtg in CSD caused me alot of undue stress and heartache. I’ve put that behind me and have praised the Lord that I have two healthy intelligent children who had rough beginnings. The recent events of the NCS expansion and all of the negative things that have been said have caused me to dredge up the past and remember why we are where we are and that to me NCS has had such an incredible affect on our children. I know I am not alone on this. I have to say that the teachers, specialist and administration at NCS has been so wonderful and accomodating to my kids. My only wish is that every child and parent could feel this way.
The tone has not been the most civil at times on the blogs and in public forums, and maybe “CSD” has been used too generically but no one has been critical of the elementary schools in CSD specifically that I can recall. Conversely, NCS and it’s administrators have been repeatedly attacked and images of the students posted on certain blogs. NCS get’s no credit for the success of their model, even though the low-income and minority students there still out-perform their counterparts in traditional public schools, but traditional public schools in CSD can point to low income and minority students as the primary reason they can’t make similar improvements while conveniently leaving a school like Kuumba Academy out of the conversation. NCS has consistently been called a racist school, but opposition is convinced that minority and low-income kids will bring the school down. By any reasonable observer there is a double standard at work regarding NCS and it’s supporters, so yes occassionally you’ll hear/read some of us blow off some steam. We would all do well to heed Dr. Lowery’s call for a more civil, fact based debate.
especially NCS supporters as she astutely noted.
@Newarkmom?Not one word from a secondary parent? Were you at the Dover meeting in March? And I am a parent of a NHS senior and I am very satisfied.
If you review the transcript from the March meeting, at least half of the NCS parents clearly stated they wanted a high school so their kids wouldn’t have to go to district schools.
@Beth, I was at the meeting and the next day I commented that I was impressed with the statements made by the CSD teachers. No, I can’t recall many (any?) positive statements made on here by a CSD parent about their school, outside of the Cambridge program…I have been looking since I do have a vested interest. And I am happy to hear that you are a NHS parent that is satified with your school, I’m sorry if I hadn’t noticed you say that before, perhaps I missed it.
Yes, I also remember at the Dover meeting our NCS kids being referred to as “units” . The loss of them was not about losing those kids, it was about money or what these kids represented as test grades. They are wanted for programs, yet despised for being products of NCS. Less than 50 kids a year somehow became responsible for the entire infrastructure of NHS. They were and are fought over like community property. You can interpret the transcripts any way you wish. To me, the transcripts show that the parents are so happy with the school and the schools environment, that they want it to continue and were asking for that chance.
You don’t recall a mom reading from her daughter’s graduation speech?
Furthermore, imagine if this was the year 1977. The year after the deseg ruling. What would the public think if a school like NCS was offered by geographic lottery?
@Newarkmom, What Beth fails to understand is that these 50ish kids from NCS who attend a CSD HS today will drop w/or w/out the NCS expansion. W/the expansion I am sure a large % (but not all) will stay at NCS. The NCS HS won’t keep 100% of the 8th graders due to things like sports (no football/wrestling) and normal attrition (moving, testing into CSW, etc…). W/out the expansion those 50ish kids/families are going to look elsewhere, even harder now, for HS education due to the negative opposition battle and free flowing information about CSD that parents might not have looked for before. These 50ish NCS 8th graders, that will be the downfall for the entire CSD district, will drop no matter the decision tomorrow.
Sorry, I meant to say… I don’t see how these 50ish kids can be the downfall for the entire district. But that is how DDC and Beth are selling it.
You know, I’m not trying to sell anything. I’m making comments, asking questions, wondering out loud…good blog stuff.
The thing about kids and schools and society…it’s all a big classroom out there and your kids will make you happy or break your heart or graduate and get jobs or go to Harvard or move to Costa Rico or accidently get pregnant or hit the big time or run into big time trouble…
no matter where they go to school.
But some things just don’t seem fair, big picture fair. For me, this is one of them. I understand that many people don’t agree with me and that’s fine.
without having a NCS high school, the high school kids in my neighborhood attend the following schools, Pencader, Conrad, Hodgson, DMA, CSW, Caravel Academy, St. Georges, a catholic school I forget which one, and Glasgow. Possibly more that I don’t know about. There are only a couple in my neighborhood who go to Glasgow, the rest are spread out all over. One of the kids in my neighborhood who does go to Glasgow used to go to Pencader. He didn’t like the rules or uniform so switched to Glasgow. NCS high school is not going to take any kids from Glasgow or Newark from my neighborhood, almost none are going to those schools anyway.
lol on your paragraph Beth. True! And sometimes they make you happy and break your heart all in the same day.
Again, how many CSD parents on HERE have promoted their school?
Imagine whatever the outcome of tomorrow’s decision, you had to send your child to a school next year overwhelmed by community hostility towards the school he came from?
You are kidding, right newarkmom? Do you think adults at district schools confuse students with the bigger issue? Staff at these schools LOVE having all sorts of students including the excellent ones from NCS! Do you REALLY think there would be retribution and prejudice because a student’s parents choose NCS? I challenge you to give me a shred of evidence. Seriously, I am surprised, shocked, and bewildered.
Beth- the letter that was read at the meeting- wasn’t that from like 2003? I remember that it was not a recent grad. Times have changed and if you look back at 1977- alot of people would have welcomed NCS with open arms. That was when there was a mass exodus from NCC to other places like Cecil County. Who had overflowing classes because of it. Our family moved to Cecil County in 1977 and I had numerous kids in my class that were in the same school in Delaware! It has been proven (numerous times) that the number of 8th graders that move onto CSD high schools is a small number compared to the number of kids attending NCS 8th grade. I’m sure that is not going to change.
No, not kidding, be called a few names by the public and be yelled at a community event and maybe you would feel the same. It’s a little different when you’re the big bad charter school. :-0
I have NEVER thought that a teacher or a staff member at the school would be prejudiced to my child. Quite the opposite, they have been very helpful through registration. Do I think that the hostilities of some of the parents may make things uncomfortable….it’s certainly possible. NHS’ PTA sponsered a evening “movie” to bash charter schools recently. Is that welcoming to charter families? There will be a small group of kids from NCS going to NHS in comparison to the district schools, time will tell what happens. In the mean time we have remained very positive and excited for our son and his step to high school next year.
Again, I recognize why NCS parents want a high school – they want to continue the education their children have attained at NCS. CSD’s high schools are struggling, but each high school has programs that are high performing – at NHS, it’s their Cambridge program. At Christiana, it’s their Agricultural pathway. For Glasgow – the jury is still out as the school was completely re-visioned and re-structured and the data is not yet in as to where which programs excel there.
However, the NHS Expansion Application is quite clear as to the feelings of NHS leadership towards the caliber of our elementary schools:
“Over a nine-year phase-in period, the school wishes to expand to a total enrollment of 2,470 students. This will include balancing all grades (K-12) at 190 students per grade (see attached “Current and Projected Enrollment” in Appendix) and the addition of grades 9-12.” (p. 3)
Q.”4. Describe the reasons for the request(s)…
“3) It will level enrollment in each grade at 190 students, thereby eliminating enrollment gaps, and the academic problems associated with them, when students progress from grade to grade…
“Expansion will enable our students to continue their academic achievement in a way that is currently not adequately being addressed by othe schools in this area.” (p. 5)
“Our teachers have encountered serious disparities between students who have been in our program and progress to the next year and students who have not. For example, most of the 52
newly-admitted first graders in 2009 were not on the same reading Level as students who came from Newark Charter School’s Kindergarten. Of the 30 new fourth grade students, 29 fell into
the bottom 20% of our fourth grade class. We tried to remediate these students’ gaps in knowledge prior to their entering Newark Charter School, but the summer programs the school offered were not enough to fully address the students’ needs.” (p. 8)
“The number 190 is based on the optimal high school enrollment size. Research shows that the ideal size for a high school is about 800 students – large enough to provide an array of curricular and extracurricular options, but small enough to build a strong school culture. Expanding the number of students in each grade level (K-8) to 190 students will eventually result in a high school enrollment of 760 students, very close to the optimal size.” (p. 8)”
This is all in the expansion application. I think it’s pretty succinct, especially the last portion I have pasted above. In order for the high school to be viable, NCS needs to expand its elementary and intermediate grades. And while the percentages of 1st and 4th graders cited above reflect an academic disparity, the application never states where these children came from – private school, private daycare/kindergarten, public school? In 2009, CSD only provided half-day kindergarten. In 2010, we offered full-day K by choice. In 2011, there was evidence of an academic disparity between half day K students and full-day K (which is now universal, 1/2 day K is choice) within the district itself. This was absolutely expected as part of phasing in a new program and resources were deployed to help those students affected.
The justification for the NCS high school has been to insinuate that CSD is failing. In fact, much in CSD is succeeding and many of us are working hard on those pieces that are not. This has truly been lost in all of the dialogue that has occurred and is completely neglected in the application itself.
To: DontdestroyNCS -
“50ish NCS 8th graders, that will be the downfall for the entire CSD district, will drop no matter the decision tomorrow.”
But, it won’t be 50 8th graders. With the elementary and middle school expansion, it will be many more. Actually, the K-8 school will grow by 424 seats in the expansion. From which schools will those 424 children come? How many non-public elementary schools exist in the five-mile radius?
Elizabeth- Based on most of the DCAS scores most CSD elem. schools are failing and it looks like all of the high schools are failing. So based on DCAS scores no one is insinuating it is failing, the statistics reported by the state ( http://dstp.doe.k12.de.us/DCASOR/default.aspx ) prove that it is failing. I am not comparing numbers (b/c we know that people like DDC will say it is b/c we skimmed the cream from the top). I am strictly basing it on the current numbers reported by the state.
So why would I want to send my kids to their feeder HS (Glasgow) when they have no great programs and it is almost impossible to choice into another school?
Elizabeth, No one on this blog has said there aren’t great things going on at CSD. No one = CSD and NCS supporters. It isn’t all bad at CSD… it can’t be and everyone knows that. The majority of this blog recently has been about NCS and the opposition/support of it. I agree that the positive news about CSD has been lost in the shuffle and that includes those who support CSD. It seems the CSD supporters would rather stretch truths and create conspiracy theories about NCS vs speak about the positive activities at CSD. I have been saying this from day 1… why fight against the quality education at NCS that is obviously in high demand (2K+ on waiting list) and rather turn this energy into fixing the issues at CSD (perception or reality)? If CSD was a success overall… I don’t believe NCS would be required at all. Either in perception or reality, CSD is failing (at the HS level).
I really hope in 5/10 years we can look back and say wow… the NCS HS and CSD HSs are some of the best in the state.
bull, once your kids are done, you are too. mark it,.
Elizabeth – the Cambridge program and the agriculture program, any kid in the district can get into those programs?
DDC – how does the district feel about students after they have either dropped out or graduated?
To Proud NCS Mom of Two:
You state: “Elizabeth- Based on most of the DCAS scores most CSD elem. schools are failing and it looks like all of the high schools are failing. So based on DCAS scores no one is insinuating it is failing, the statistics reported by the state (http://dstp.doe.k12.de.us/DCASOR/default.aspx ) prove that it is failing.”
Now, the DOE’s interpretation (I, too, prefer to deal in facts and in this case I will use DOE’s own translation of the data you cited above) : From the DOE Website: http://profiles.doek12.de.us/SchoolProfiles/District/Default.aspx?DistrictCode=33&checkSchool=0
There are 13 Suburban Elementary (those most likely to fall within the 5 mile radius of NCS) Schools. Here is there AYP rating according to the state:
Wilson – Superior
Leasure – Superior
Maclary – Superior
Marshall – Superior
McVey – Superior
Smith – Commendable
West Park – Superior
Brader – Superior
Downes – Superior
Gallaher – Superior
Jones – Superior
Keene – Superior
Oberle – Academic Watch
There are 4 Urban Elementary Schools that are definitely outside the 5 mile radius. They are rated as:
Bancroft – Academic Watch, PZ School, Year 1 Restructuring
Palmer – Superior
Pulaski – Superior
Stubbs – Academic Watch, PZ School, Year 2 Restructuring
11 CSD Elementaries whose feeders fall within the NCS radius are rated the SAME as NCS. Would you consider NCS’s SUPERIOR rating “failing” ?
2 of CSD’s 3 “failing” elementaries (2 urban, 1 suburban) are engaged in what DOE feels are aggressive turnaround plans.
I have never asserted that CSD’s high schools are high achieving. I did highlight some high achieving programs in each as requested by a previous poster. My issue is not with your high school. For me, it’s adding elementary seats when there is no clear need for them. NCS wants to enlarge it’s elementary to make its high school financially viable, but there isn’t actually a physical need for more elementary desks in its five mile radius. The argument for the high schools is disengenuous b/c it predicated on the insinuation that CSD’s elementaries are failing and therefore there is a need for NCS to level up in order to provide a great education to more students. In fact, that same level of education currently exists in elementaries in the NCS radius.
DDNCS:
Those numbers are not a good measure of the value added by schools and are not appropriate to gauge how well as school is doing.
Steve Newtwon can probably give more information on more appropriate measurements but with a quick search on the web I found a reference from 1990: http://hanushek.stanford.edu/publications/alternative-assessments-performance-schools-measurement-state-variations-achievement
and a review of performance of California Charter Schools using a measure of achievement that tries to capture the value added by schools:
http://www.calcharters.org/advocacy/accountability/portraitofthemovement/
Following up on my comment, besides a change to the charter law we also need to start collecting more data on schools, students and all types of relevant variables so that scientific methods can be used to determine as accurately as possible what works and does not work in the education process.
I think one of today’s letters to the editor in the NJ frames very well the implications of Lowery’s recommendation:
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20120418/OPINION10/204180312/Lowery-s-observation-right-her-call-wrong?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Opinion|s&nclick_check=1
Elizabeth- I guess your opinion can be considered very bias seeing as you are a member of the CSD School Board. Of course, you don’t want to see negative information or hear it. The truth is NCS was started for a reason, it has flourished and is in high demand. Not only is it in high demand it is extremely successful and I am sure it will continue to be successful even when the poverty rate is higher.
Your post states that much of CSD is succeeding. I considered the DCAS scores to be a very good indicator of passing or failing. I know you go by ratings. But I prefer numbers and if you look at DCAS scores there are very few schools in CSD that are considered passing. Unless of course you consider 65% a passing grade. If you as a school board member don’t use those scores as a basis why are they taken? Why are the results made such a big deal in the NJ?
I can understand you want to defend your eployer/position. But what I don’t understand is why it can’t be admitted that NCS is a school that works and we should learn from it. Why do you want to tear something down that is successful? Because it’s admitting that CSD does not work as well as it should? No one from NCS is trying to tear down CSD we just want the best education for our children. And based on my current options that would be NCS.
Hello. Test scores are correlated with income. Period. Not school structure. Not curriculum. If your school is segregated by INCOME it will have high test scores. Not a model you can brag about.
Elizabeth – I was just looking at the info that you are citing. The actual link you posted didn’t work. I did find the info. I find it interesting that the only district in the state that rates “BELOW TARGET” is Christina. Does that mean anything? And on another form within the site I found information that states Christina District is on “Academic Watch”. So it sounds like the federal gov’t doesn’t considered that a success either.
Enough with the income- the DCAS scores at NCS with the students who are low income are still well above the state averages for children that are considered to have low socioeconomic standard in the remainder of the district. And her is the link to the DCAS scores for NCS of the kids that are in that classification. http://dstp.doe.k12.de.us/DCASOR/SchDisaggSum.aspx?s=588
The state was kind enough to break down all of that info. So you can easily see that those children at NCS also did very well on the test.
This proves that even kids in the low income bracket can perform well on the DCAS. Let me guess- NCS will now be accused of skimming only the really smart kids from the low poverty pool?
Anyone relying on federal or state designations of school success will be repeatedly and persistently misinformed.
Proud NCS Mom, I said this earlier… NCS low income #s will go up by default next year w/the lunch program and rise even more w/the outreach program in the future (if they still have to do it seeing that other schools do not). DDC and her cronies will find a way to spin it saying that NCS has come up with a way to skim the smart low income kids and it has nothing to do with NCS.
John, What should be looked at to determine a school or districts success and where can I find that information?
“the DCAS scores at NCS with the students who are low income are still well above the state averages”
The predictive factor is not simply the income status of the individual, it’s the rate of low income students at the school.
In a school with 21% poverty those 21% will probably find success. But in a school with 60% poverty – not so much.
If you really want to make an honest comparison – compare student performance at schools with similar poverty levels. Stop trying to compare NCS with 21% poverty against CSD schools with 60% poverty.
Somebody just needs to find or construct a spreadsheet that ranks all the schools by % of low income students, and also by performance (however you want to measure performance).
I think you’ll find NCS loses most or all of its performance advantage once you control for poverty rate.
On the positive side for charters, I also think:
1. There may be a performance advantage to the K-8 model, whether charter or not.
2. The success of Kuumba with a low-income population bears looking into. I don’t know enough about it to comment.
Mike O.
Like I said a few posts above, we need more and better data to be able to evaluate the impact of schools and other variables.
Charter associations are trying to build measures that control for variables other than school input to be able to distinguish high-achieving schools from low-achieving ones.
See for instance: http://www.calcharters.org/advocacy/accountability/portraitofthemovement/
Also, the only benefit of a well run lottery is the possibility of running control experiments (see Hoxby’s work on NY charters). In a well set up lottery where all students apply, the students that get in have the same characteristics than the ones that don’t. This makes it easy to evaluate the impact of schools by comparing the performance of students that are in with the performance of students that are out.
Also here Delaware missed an opportunity. Unfortunately it seems that DDOE and many other institutions in the first state are lagging years behind.
The argument several are making is that the children of poverty don’t do well on tests and the reason why NCS has better DCAS scores overall is that the poverty level is so low. The state actually breaks down the numbers to show how the children of poverty at NCS did on the test. Is that not a true measure? When you look at the scores of low income kids at NCS vs. the scores other CSD children of poverty NCS does score much higher. That’s not an opinion or observation that is a fact. So now that we are comparing poverty children to poverty children you still won’t accept the numbers? This just goes to show that regardless of the facts there are individuals that will not be happy either way. I guess we’ll just have to wait until the poverty level is up at NCS and prove to everyone that it will still outperform other schools. But I’m sure by then there will be a new area of concern!
Mr. Young, you too are a school board member, right? Elizabeth gave her link for the info that should be used to rate the district. She is also on the board. Why is she saying to use that info and your saying that we cant use info from either the feds or state? Then what info do we use? How do you measure the districts success against both the district and state schools? This really makes no sense now. There has to be some type of measurement for success. What is it?
@Mike O – I’m glad you pointed out Kuumba. That school’s numbers are the proverbial fly in the ointment in the low income theory. Combine that with the performance of low income students at NCS and one can make the case that the very similar academic approach being used by both schools is the primary reasons for their success. You don’t need years of research to establish that correlation.
It is like talking to a wall…
Yes, throw away all the research done by people that have spent years learning highly advanced statistical methodologies, collecting extensive amounts of data, analysing it and subjecting their findings to a highly demanding peer review process. Patriot is here…
Newark- ??- Are you just being sarcastic? I really would like to know the answers here. Two diff. board members are saying use the data/don’t use the data. The state has shoved the importance of DCAS down our throats and when we try to comapre apples to apples we’re told no you can’t do that. So what’s the deal? What do we use? The numbers that the state has obviously spent alot of time, energy and money putting together or opinions of district members? How are we measuring success of our district?
Proud NCS Mom -
Yes. I am a Christina School Board Member. And that is why I choose to post to Kilroy with my name, I own my beliefs publicly. CSD is not my employer. School Board members are not paid. The constituents who elected me are my sponsor. No, I am not attempting to tear down NCS. I am seeking to direct the conversation to a part of the application that is inaccurate, the statements regarding local elementary schools. I have already conceded that I will not argue the desire for a NCS high school.
Perhaps I have a more balanced view of the situation than many others. I have one foot planted firmly in each world – traditional public education and charter public education. My daughter is a charter school student. She needed a different model of curriculum delivery than the statewide program established for children with her disability could provide. We opted to enroll her in a charter this year to determine if the model this school employs would help mitigate the effects of her disability. It has.
My son is a CSD elementary school student. He attends what I believe is an excellent public elementary school within the five mile radius of NCS. I am proud that he is a CSD student. And I am proud of the work I do on the CSD board to spur student achievement and mitigate the effects on education caused by social problems.
Furthermore, I have already stated my position on successful charter programs that work on my own blog, Children and Educators First,
http://www.elizabethscheinberg.blogspot.com/2012/03/next-generation-of-charter-legislation.html My position is actually supportive of successful charter schools expanding their model into collaborative agreements with failing traditional public schools.
Mr. Young is also a CSD board member. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don’t. The method I have chosen to utilize in comparing school models is different from his. (Although I agree that data from standardized testing is manipulated and frequently deceptive.) However, what that data means must be viewed through the eyes of those who manipulate it. It is my opinion that the best way to compare different schools is by the state’s AYP ranking. AYP, a secret DOE formula, utilizes DCAS data to basically grade a school. Once the mathematically formula has been applied to all the data at a given school, it calculates out to a rating – AYP. It’s what the state and federal goverment tell us to use to determine a schools overall success.
Within AYP, you can access data to specific cells, minorities, special education, poverty, etc. A, entire school can miss AYP b/c just one cell is failing. Therefore, a district can receive a low rating according to DOE b/c only a certain subset of schools is failing. Christina’s secondary schools have been struggling. That school data reflects on the whole district thus the district’s very low ranking. These are facts. I won’t dispute them. But, that doesn’t mean school and district officials are not working daily to improve their academic programs and provide interventions to those failing cells. It also does not mean that all of CSD is failing. We are however frequently restricted in how to spur change at schools because traditional public school funding from the state is very restricted. For a board member and parent, it is extremely frustrating. But, I am committed to finding a way to help my students, all of them!
@ Newark – just because you don’t like the answer doesn’t make it less true. You and others like you would love to attribute NCS’s results soley to income levels and attribute CSD’s poor results to income levels but ignore schools like Kuumba that don’t fit into your nice little theory. Also, the low income numbers at NCS are articially low due to the way these numbers are reported (i.e. based upon enrollment in F/RL program, and NCS doesn’t have this program). I can’t wait to hear the excuses when the low income numbers at NCS go up but the scores don’t come down. BTW, it’s not me you have to convince that NCS is not doing something better than traditional public schools. It’s the 2K on the waiting list.
Elizabeth, thank you for your (volunteer) service on behalf of all families in the district, in regularly improving our Delaware public schools, and special thank you for your wonderful public outreach, via your blog and your postings here.
Proud NCS Mom of Two:
Yes, I am being sarcastic. I posted twice with information on this issue for you.
I even found a link to an evaluation report from the California charter schools association so that there would be no presumption of a bias against charter schools.
As I said before, the state of Delaware has dropped the ball in this issue. At this point, to my knowledge, nobody has compiled reliable measures of school (not student) achievement for our schools. More problematic is that the state might not even have collected the data to compute these measures and to evaluate the impact of different variables in the education system.
There are a lot of statements being made that are made without any strong evidence to support them.
We are using what Prof. Hoxby referred to as a cardiac test: “we just know in our heart that this is right.”
Elizabeth- please correct me if I am wrong but based on your previous post the portion that you are saying is inaccurate in the application is the part that staes “that they have experienced serious disparities in the children currently enrolled in the program and the new children coming into the program”. They are basing there information on direct experience and what they are dealing with. Unless you are personally part of that process you can’t really say that it is inaccurate.
You also state in the above post that data from from stanardized testing is “maniplated”. That means it has been altered or edited. Really- at what level is that happening? State?
You also state that you feel the AYP is the best way to rate a school. I’m sorry but your post states that part of the AYP is “a secret DOE formula”. Secret? Really? That to someone on the outside sounds extremely deceptive and possibly maipulated. Either way it staes that CSD is below standard.
I stand behind my previous statement that I hope the district can take on the hard task of turning it into a district we can all be proud of and want to send our kids to. That is my personal opinion and hopes for the district.
Beleive it or not- I do appreciate the efforts that the board members are putting into the district and our children. I recognize that it is a non-paying position and I am sure has little reward- especially when things aren’t great. I just hope that the members take the concerns of the parents and realize we just want is best for our kids.
Patriot:
You systematically lie or knowingly and intentionally misinterpret statements to other contributors in this blog.
Regarding your persistence in analyzing two “facts” and referring to your interpretation as the truth.
This is one of the best quotes that I have ever heard from a politician and it fits appropriately:
“ [T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know.
We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don’t know. ”
—United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
and an article that you might want to read:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/the-anosognosics-dilemma-1/
Newark- I have read the information that you have posted. The one article basically glorifies charter schools and how great some are working. (based on the key findings portion of the article).
I am looking at the info that the state is supplying on it’s schools and districts. You are right- there is alot of work that needs to be done as far as charters go. I am not only basing my info on test scores but also on my personal experience (or as you call it the cardiac test). I have 2 children with special needs that were told NCS could not handle and to keep them at their CSD schools. I didn’t and now they are both performing above average. Would that have happened if they stayed at their previous schools? I will never know. But based on what I was told – get your documentation together, apply for social security benefits for them because they will always be considered developmentally disabled and that I needed to come to terms with it and accept it. Seeing where they were then and now I can tell you it makes me physically sick to remember what we went through and to think that someone else may experience that.
And yes- there are alot of statements being made without any evidence to support them. Alot of them against NCS. I have tried to stick with data supplied by the state and that is what most people use. It’s there for a reason. I have also used my own personal experience.
@Newark – I’ll respectfully decline to place any stock in a Donald Rumsfeld quote. I guess he was talking about KNOWING there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That aside, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. You can’t unequivocally attribute NCS success to high income students any more than you can attribute CSD’s performance (primarily middle and high school) to low income students. Also, any discussion of % of high income students that doesn’t involve ALL schools with this same dynamic rings hollow and comes across as exactly what it is: a weak attempt to discredit NCS and derail the NCS expansion. What about the low-income/minorities choicing into predominately minority charter schools like Moyer? Doesn’t that “help” CSD’s percentage of low-income/minority? I know, I know. Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory. Go sell crazy somewhere else.
Proud NCS Mom of Two
The linked I sent was to a report from the California Charter Schools association so it is expected that they glorify charter schools.
The reason I mentioned the link was to point out the measures of achievement that they use. There might be better measures, and the goal should always be on improving the accuracy of the measures that are used, but for years analysts have been using these types of measures.
The fact that the DDOE or the CSD uses this measures does not give any credibility to the measures, it just underlines how out of date the institutions that used them are.
Your personal experience is also not relevant for policy making unless we can be sure that it is replicable. A lot of variables affected your kids performance and it is difficult to disentangle them and see which ones had a positive effect and which ones had a negative effect or no effect at all. Then which ones can be implemented by the public school system and which ones are out of its control. So while what is important for you is that your kid is doing well, for the DDOE it is important to figure out what they should be doing to allow each one of all children do better.
One of the positive things that came out of these discussions is the need to revise the Charter School laws, but I personally think we need to extend that revision to include a revision of the methods of the institutions that supervise our educational institutions (charters as well as traditional schools).
I think NCS is a good school but it is not as good as it is perceived by many, while many CDS schools are better than they have been depicted. An accurate assessment of their achievements is essential for a policy debate and to help parents make school choices.
I have probably sided with public school teacher’s unions in the current debate but when I read yesterday in the NJ that seniority has priority in teacher placement I cringed. There are many things that need to be changed and although I think the efforts of individuals is great we need the people that are minding the store to do a better job, to be clear about what and why they do and to be held accountable for it.
Newark- I’m sure there could be better measures for rating schools. I don’t agree that there is no credibility to the measures that CSD or the state use.
I am not using my persional experience for the district to use as any type of measure or variable, It is exactly what I called it- my personal experience. It is what has made me a NCS beleiver and happy with their school- IMO they turned 2 kids that CSD said were developmentally disbabled and turned them into high acheiving students. That to me is my fact. I personally think it is important that the districts know from the top down what kind of things happen and in cases like this learn from it.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion- you may feel that NCS is not as good as many think. I know based on my experience, how many of the kids are doing there, the waiting list, and so on that it is a great school and that is my opinion.
I respect everyone’s opinion whether it is for or against NCS or CSD. I will not call names, be rude or condescending because of it. I can agree to disagree. I will ask questions about info people post because I want to understand. I would hope that conversations can be productive and not meant to be nasty. Again- I think we all have the same goal in mind- a great education for all our kids regardless of the school they attend.
Moving on to important things… Bloggers will be meeting up on Tuesday, April 24th, 7pm at Timothy’s on the Riverfront. I will make up a sign so people can find us! All are welcome.
Proud NCS Mom – The formula that calculates AYP is secret. DOE will not give that formula out to anyone. We know it plugs in DCAS scores, beyond that it’s a mystery. And b/c DOE won’t share the formula, I think it’s very safe to worry that the data is manipulated.
Aside from my personal concern about how data is used to achieve AYP rankings, I am charged with making decisions for my schools based upon those rankings. And b/c it is presumed that the same formula is used for every school, the results should reflect each schools DCAS scores. What I pasted above is DOE’s interpretation of that data. And their interpretation ranks most suburban traditional public schools in CSD the same as NCS. Superior. Different cells may score higher or lower than NCS’s cells, but the overall rankings for most of these schools are the same.
As far as the cited sections I posted above – it is stated 1st that “Expansion will enable our students to continue their academic achievement in a way that is currently not adequately being addressed by othe schools in this area.” (p. 5)
And then the justification of the expansion of the elementary school is described this way:
“Our teachers have encountered serious disparities between students who have been in our program and progress to the next year and students who have not. For example, most of the 52
newly-admitted first graders in 2009 were not on the same reading Level as students who came from Newark Charter School’s Kindergarten. Of the 30 new fourth grade students, 29 fell into
the bottom 20% of our fourth grade class. We tried to remediate these students’ gaps in knowledge prior to their entering Newark Charter School, but the summer programs the school offered were not enough to fully address the students’ needs.” (p. 8)
This is deceptive and perhaps I mistated that sentiment. The application does not identify from which schools those children came. It was written to lead readers to assume these children came to NCS from CSD schools. However, they may be kindergartners who never went preschool, didn’t go a challenging preschool, could have been in daycare instead of school, were homeschoolled or simply home-kept. The fourth graders may have been homeschoolled, they could have come from private schools in either Delaware, Maryland or Pennsylvania, as living in the state a private school is located in is not a prerequisite for attendance. They may have newly moved to the area and could have come out of public schools anywhere.
This very important information was left off the application, because there was a clear intention to lead readers to believe that all of CSD is failing. The application’s writers were counting on readers to be uninformed in order to expand the early grades that would ensure the high school was financially solvent.
That makes me really sad.
PBaumbach – thank you for your kind words. They are deeply appreciated.