Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

State rating of D

22 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Well the new state rating for school districts is out, and our Winton Woods district scored an impressive D.  Can't wait to start spending money for the new buildings, how can kids learn in old buildings.  Thats why Cambridge and Oxford have such poor performance and low graduation rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Ahh, did you look at all of the schools in Hamilton County?   The State needs to look at themselves in the mirror and ask if these tests actually tell the public anything......other than:

1) Wealthy and/or primarily white demographics determine outcome of these tests. Without extremely few exceptions, State-wide.

2) Testing and the amount of it is out of control. The results are difficult to understand for the laymen.

3) Generally speaking, motivated students are getting a good education when you look at those students who are deemed "gifted"  (Proficient, Accel., Advanced)

District NamePerformance Index Score 2016-17Performance Index Score 2015-16Performance Index Score 2014-15Performance Index Percent 2016-17Letter Grade of Performance IndexPercent of Students Not TestedPercent of Students BelowPercent of Students BasicPercent of Students ProficientPercent of Students AcceleratedPercent of Students AdvancedPercent of Students Advanced PlusGifted Performance Index Score 2016-17Gifted Performance Index 2016-17Percent of Gifted Students Not TestedPercent of Gifted Students BelowPercent of Gifted Students BasicPercent of Gifted Students ProficientPercent of Gifted Students AcceleratedPercent of Gifted Students AdvancedPercent of Gifted Students Advanced Plus
Winton Woods City66.30664.85576.39355.3D0.535.825.422.911.14.30109.10390.90.61.33.816.733.344.20
Wyoming City107.158104.525107.9689.3 B0.22.4618.831.740.90.2115.896.50.100.26.826.565.90.5

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Hi  - I posted this on the Concerned Residents for Greenhills page today:

Dr. Martha Herbert, Harvard Pediatric Neurologist, is one of many doctors who encourages replacing wireless internet (WiFi) in schools with wired internet and removing cell towers/antennas from school properties: "EMF/RFR from wifi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function. This will make it harder for some children to learn, particularly those who are already having problems in the first place.": http://www.parentsforsafetechnology.org/doctor-s-letters.html?fref=gc&dti=197803160353547

This has been discussed for many years overseas and many have already taken action: http://whyfry.org/over-1-million-members-of-teachers-unions-in-germany-uk-usa-and-canada-who-have-done-their-research-do-not-support-wifi-in-schools/?fref=gc&dti=197803160353547

I posted these links yesterday in regard to the school rating:

Do Laptops Help Learning? A Look At The Only Statewide School Laptop Program

Yet, after a decade and a half, and at a cost of about $12 million annually (around one percent of the state's education budget), Maine has yet to see any measurable increases on statewide standardized test scores. That's part of why Maine's current governor, Paul LePage, has called the program a "massive failure."

April 4, 2017:  Using laptops in class harms academic performance, study warns.   Researchers say students who use computers score half a grade lower than those who write notes. 

Some I didn't yet post to Facebook that are related to this topic:

Scientific American:  "Students are better off without a laptop in the Classroom" (study)

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/students-are-better-off-without-a-laptop-in-the-classroom/?wt.mc=SA_Twitter-Share

 

2014:  New York Times:  “Steve Jobs Was a Low-Tech Parent”:  https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/11/fashion/steve-jobs-apple-was-a-low-tech-parent.html

2011:  New York Times: A Silicon Valley School That Doesn’t Compute”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Sorry my tin foil hat slipped off, could you repeat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

WWWarrier

 

AH, yea I did look at other schools.  Let me try to lay out my thoughts even though I am just a slobbering idiot "layman".

If we can dispense with the white privilege bull crap for a minute, I will say this: one must first ask, what is school success?  I believe it is: first of all not who has the best new buildings, it is not who does the best on state tests (I agree they are a poor metric, but one nonetheless), I would say not even who graduates students with the highest grades.  It is, in my never humble opinion, the schools that graduate young men and women who have learned critical thinking skills, are decent respectful citizens, and looking to better their lives (be it college, trade, or simply learning in life).

If this is what school success should be, then why are some schools successful and some not.  There are, of course many reasons, but I believe two make up 90% of the difference. Until school administrators admit that 1. Parent Involvement, and 2. School discipline are the critical factors, no progress will be made.  Winton Woods will continue to score D's and F's and you will continue to scream racism, white privilege, and we need more money and newer buildings.

When students can look at school employees and threaten them, and tell them to F off, and the employee is chastised for sending the student to the principal, then all the bricks and mortar in the world are not going to help.  Discipline is obvious, how do you ramp up parental involvement?  I haven't a clue, but I know its not bricks and mortar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

WWWarrior, you said this: " Generally speaking, motivated students are getting a good education when you look at those students who are deemed "gifted"  (Proficient, Accel., Advanced)"

Could you please provide clarification on that?  (My view of the posted numbers was cut off, so maybe I couldn't see the point you were making.)

Also, I am confused - are you equating "motivated" with "gifted"?  It sounds like you are in your statement, and that's just not the case.  There are plenty of motivated students who are not gifted, just as there are plenty of gifted students who are not motivated.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

ligoriolivin,   It seems that many on this list are concerned about their children. These are not my personal opinions.  I'm simply providing links with statements by experts for those on this thread who are trying to determine all the reasons why children are having a difficult time learning.  It wasn't that long ago when people made fun of those who were concerned that tobacco use and asbestos were harmful as well.     

WHO: Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk” http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/05/31/who.cell.phones/

Dr. Keith Black, chairman of neurology at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angelos:  What microwave radiation does in most simplistic terms is similar to what happens to food in microwaves, essentially cooking the brain.  So in addition to leading to a development of cancer and tumors, there could be a whole host of other effects like cognitive memory function, since the memory temporal lobes are where we hold our cell phones." 

In regard to children, Dr. Black states, "Children's skulls and scalps are thinner. So the radiation can penetrate deeper into the brain of children and young adults. Their cells are at a dividing faster rate, so the impact of radiation can be much larger."

American Academy of Pediatrics Issues New Recommendations to "Reduce Exposure to Cell Phones"Nation's largest group of children’s doctors responds to new government study linking cell phone radiation to cancer  http://www.releasewire.com/press-releases/american-academy-of-pediatrics-issues-new-recommendations-to-reduce-exposure-to-cell-phones-726805.htm

For those who aren't certain that radiation itself is harmful - there is plenty of research showing that increased "screen time" in children is affecting their ability to learn.   Even tech inventors seem to be concerned about the impacts on their own families:

CoDesign:  Nest Founder: “I Wake Up In Cold Sweats Thinking, What Did We Bring To The World?”Tony Fadell, one of the minds behind the iPod and the iPhone, mulls design’s unintended consequences. (7/07/2017) https://www.fastcodesign.com/90132364/nest-founder-i-wake-up-in-cold-sweats-thinking-what-did-we-bring-to-the-world  “And I know when I take [technology] away from my kids what happens,” Fadell says. “They literally feel like you’re tearing a piece of their person away from them—they get emotional about it, very emotional. They go through withdrawal for two to three days.”

From the Mayo Clinic in 2016:  Sending Text Messages On Your Smartphone Changes The Rhythm Of Your Brain Waves  http://www.medicaldaily.com/text-messages-brain-waves-human-brain-smartphone-390677

“Smartphones destroying generation?”  http://video.foxnews.com/v/5575506985001/?#sp=show-clips

Sep. 13, 2017 - 5:03 - One professor argues that while post-millennials are physically safer than adolescents, they are more comfortable online than with real people - and are the verge of a mental breakdown

NPR – “All Things Considered” – How Smart Phones Are Making Kids Unhappyhttp://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/08/07/542016165/how-smartphones-are-making-kids-unhappy    

 

 May 29, 2017 Teenagers' sleep quality and mental health at risk over late-night mobile phone use:  https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/may/30/teenagers-sleep-quality-and-mental-health-at-risk-over-late-night-mobile-phone-use

May 17, 2017:  ABC 20-20:  “Digital Addiction” 

April 9, 2017:  CBS 60 Minutes:  Brain Hacking:  Why can't we stop looking at our smartphones? And are the designers of the apps and content on them using brain science to keep us hooked? Anderson Cooper reports.  http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/brain-hacking/

March 4, 2017:   Surge in children being admitted to hospital for sleeping disorders with many kept awake by technology  /http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/04/surge-children-admitted-hospital-sleeping-disorders-many-kept/

CNN:  Half of teens think they're addicted to their smartphones

www.cnn.com/2016/05/03/health/teens-cell-phone-addiction-parents/  

The New York TimesAre Teenagers Replacing Drugs With Smartphones? 

  

 

Edited by Monique
links keep disappearing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Let me take that in reverse order.

No, I wasn't equating Gifted = Motivated.  As it has for decades, some students are only capable of "C" work, enjoy school and are motivated.  Some "A" students are not challenged enough and are unmotivated. The only reason I used those terms is because that's how the State spreadsheet showed it.  It was just interesting that again, "GENERALLY SPEAKING", when as an example comparing results of that subsection of students Winton Woods versus a recognized high performing district Wyoming the top students are at reasonably similar levels.  A good education can and is available in the Winton Woods School District.

Now, ligoriolivin, I hope you are kidding.  I don't know you well enough to comment on your slobbering......;):D (I'm joking of course).  To your points at issue in our particular school, we are very much in agreement.  I'm disturbed that uniforms enforcement has apparently gone by the wayside. I'm disappointed and always have been of the lack of support of parents claiming discrimination when their kids act up (acting up many times as a result of something wrong going on at home).  Finally, teachers not being supported by administration.  It was true in the 1950's and true today, there are 10% of students who take up 95% the discipline activity. Many times you just didn't know what the deal was until they hit the front door on a particular day. They are known actors and it really needs to be a team effort to address it.  I can't explain that or their parents.

However, the methodology of the State testing, the "bar raising", the "Value Added" calculations and this and that of the numbers.  And let's not forget the suggestion of palm greasing in the selection of testing company.  The statewide reports speak for themselves, it's not privileged, it's unfortunately obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

WWWarrior, so that I can see it more clearly, could you please re-post just the portion to which you are referring - the portion that shows that subsection of WW students that are at similar levels to Wyoming students?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Once again the debate on quality of schools begins, and what impacts student learning.   The truth of the matter is we are comparing apples to oranges.  While all students take the same test; the demographics, curriculum, number of students in a school, parent involvement is all different.   Then there are other factors which a student doesn't have control over, such as a disability, number of schools a student attends, and how many days absent.  Let's also add home life, that can affect student learning, such as homelessness, and/or do they live in a hotel or in a house with extended family with way to many people.  These tests don't just show a schools ability to teach students,  but a schools ability and resources they have to help get students to overcome these challenges.  Schools are now providing school based therapy, community liaisons - to help families access resources, school based health centers, snack pack (food sent home over the weekend so they have enough to eat), and much more.  None of these items are measured in a school report card.  The fact of the matter is schools in higher income areas than WW, have less non-school challenges to overcome than those districts with a high percentage of low income students.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

 

Gifted Performance Index Score 2016-17Gifted Performance Index 2016-17Percent of Gifted Students Not TestedPercent of Gifted Students BelowPercent of Gifted Students
109.10390.90.61.33.816.733.344.20
Basic
Percent of Gifted Students ProficientPercent of Gifted Students AcceleratedPercent of Gifted Students Advanced

Percent of Gifted Students Advanced Plus

 

 

WWWarrior, so that I can see it more clearly, could you please re-post just the portion to which you are referring - the portion that shows that subsection of WW students that are at similar levels to Wyoming students?

 

District NamePerformance Index Score 2016-17Performance Index Score 2015-16Performance Index Score 2014-15Performance Index Percent 2016-17Letter Grade of Performance IndexPercent of Students Not TestedPercent of Students BelowPercent of Students BasicPercent of Students ProficientPercent of Students AcceleratedPercent of Students AdvancedPercent of Students Advanced PlusGifted Performance Index Score 2016-17Gifted Performance Index 2016-17Percent of Gifted Students Not TestedPercent of Gifted Students BelowPercent of Gifted Students BasicPercent of Gifted Students ProficientPercent of Gifted Students AcceleratedPercent of Gifted Students AdvancedPercent of Gifted Students Advanced Plus
Winton Woods City66.30664.85576.39355.3D0.535.825.422.911.14.30109.10390.90.61.33.816.733.344.20
Wyoming City107.158104.525107.9689.3 B0.22.4618.831.740.90.2115.896.50.100.26.826.565.9

0.5

 

Edited by WWWarrior
Copy edit errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Sorry could get the thing to copy correctly, here is just the Gifted Section

District NameGifted Performance Index Score 2016-17Gifted Performance Index 2016-17Percent of Gifted Students Not TestedPercent of Gifted Students BelowPercent of Gifted Students BasicPercent of Gifted Students ProficientPercent of Gifted Students AcceleratedPercent of Gifted Students AdvancedPercent of Gifted Students Advanced Plus
Winton Woods City109.10390.90.61.33.816.733.344.20
Wyoming City     115.896.50.100.26.826.565.90.5

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

WWWarrior,  

Those don't look similar to me.  For example, 92.9% of Wyoming's gifted students scored above Proficient, while only 77.5% of Winton Woods' gifted students scored above Proficient.  If you were to put those percentages in the form of letter grades, Wyoming would get an A and Winton Woods would get a C in terms of percentage of gifted students scoring higher than Proficient.  That's concerning to me, because those kids are all gifted, so they are all coming into it with cognitive gifts at a high level, so why are so many more Wyoming gifted kids scoring higher than Winton Woods gifted kids?  The ball is being dropped somewhere along the way - those gifted Winton Woods kids have the innate ability to score higher than they are.  

I'm not saying this to be argumentative - I actually thought you had some figures that showed more of a similarity between Wyoming and Winton Woods gifted students, but instead I'm seeing greater differences.  The important question to answer is this:  What is the cause of those differences in two groups that have similar innate abilities?  Are the Wyoming gifted students getting a better education at school than the Winton Woods gifted students?  Are the Wyoming gifted students faced with less distractions that hinder their learning than Winton Woods gifted students?  Are the parents of Wyoming gifted students more involved in their children's education than the parents of Winton Woods gifted students?  Do the Wyoming gifted students have greater access to gifted enrichment outside of class than Winton Woods gifted students?  I could think of a dozen more questions along this line, but it comes down to this: Until we know what is causing the difference, we can't effectively address it.  So what can we do to get to the bottom of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I'm sorry, but the Excel column didn't copy over correctly and were misaligned.  Allow me to hand type it.

GIFTED STUDENTS- % Proficient or Better

                    Proficient              Accelerated     Advanced     Advanced Plus                               Performance Index                Adjusted Performance Index

WW            16.7             +         33.3            +     44.2      +        0              =   94.2                             109.103                                         90.9

Wyoming    6.8               +        26.5             +     65.9      +       0.5            =   99.25                           115.8                                             96.5

 

It's also worthy of note how many WW parents opt out of testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

I had already caught that it was misaligned - my figures are still correct:  77.5% of Winton Woods' gifted students scored above Proficient (Accelerated and above) while 92.9% of Wyoming's gifted students scored above Proficient.  You are including the gifted students who are at Proficient, but not above it, and let's be real: Gifted students have the capability to score above Proficient, which is the bare minimum to denote mastery, and if they are not, then that's a red flag that they are not rising to their full potential.  

Since you mention opting out of testing, could you please provide those figures for Winton Woods as well as Wyoming (how many students opt out), and also how many gifted students opt out in both school districts?  That could be a relevant point if more gifted students are opting out of testing in Winton Woods than Wyoming, but the figures are necessary to draw any possible conclusions.

Edited by GambierGal
added paragraph about opting out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

GG.

Good Lord !!!?????

 "GENERALLY SPEAKING", when as an example comparing results of that subsection of students Winton Woods versus a recognized high performing district Wyoming the top students are at reasonably similar levels.  A good education can and is available in the Winton Woods School District

GIFTED STUDENTS- % Proficient or Better

                    Proficient              Accelerated     Advanced     Advanced Plus                               Performance Index                Adjusted Performance Index

I guess we can't be gifted and proficient at the same time?  Welcome Lake WhoaBeGone where all of the children are above average.

Whatever.  If you want that much data, then go to the State DOE website or call the District and ask yourself.  You're wearing me out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Are you kidding me???    You are fine with gifted kids scoring proficient??   These are kids who scored in the 95th percentile in aptitude, yet you are fine with them scoring average in achievement??  The district's tagline is "Ensuring all students achieve their highest potential", not "If students score average, we're good with that."  These are gifted kids we're talking about ...to be satisfied with a significant percentage (almost 22%) of Winton Woods gifted students scoring at or below proficient is just plain sad.    

You can't solve a problem if you brush it under a rug.  I'm glad that Superintendent Smith, unlike you, says he is not satisfied with gifted students underachieving and that his goal is for ALL students to achieve at their highest possible level, rather than just focusing on getting all students to proficient and then stopping there.  He's explained his viewpoint on this not only privately, but also in his public addresses.   

And my second "Are you kidding me?" is directed at you spouting what I thought must be facts (I trusted you had data to back it up) when you said that it is worthy to note how many WW parents opt out of testing, yet when I ask for that data, you tell me to go find it myself.  Well, I tried, and I was told that data isn't available, so where did you get it from?  If you have some source that I'm not privy to, please share that data. 

It is meaningless to say "it is worthy to note" when you provide no further info.  We don't even know if you're saying that more WW parents opt out of testing than Wyoming parents (I think that's what you're saying, but it's not clear) or that fewer WW parents opt out of testing than Wyoming parents.  And even if you have data that more WW parents opt out, that data is meaningless without knowing which students are opting out.  This particular conversation is about gifted students, so unless the data on opting out is broken down in such a way that we can see how many GIFTED students are opting out, it is pointless to even mention opting out.  And unless we have data on how those students are likely to score (such as data on how they've scored in the past), we wouldn't even know if the gifted students opting out are the gifted students likely to score proficient or the gifted students likely to score advanced.  So many flaws in arguing that opt-out numbers have any effect on state results, unless there is more data to back it up.  

Come one, we both want this district to improve, so let's get to work and do what we can do to work toward that goal.  Trying to paint a pretty picture while ignoring the very real issues is an injustice to our students, who deserve our fullest efforts to help them succeed.  To be satisfied with students underperforming, when they have the potential to do so much more, is taking the easy way out, and is rather insulting to them.  My children are Winton Woods students, and their friends are Winton Woods students, and I know that they are capable of so much more than "proficient."  Show some faith in the students' abilities, and give them what they need to rise up to success.  Don't bring them down with your low expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Soon we will have the distraction of construction and old building disposition, and grand re-openings.  All the fuss and clamor truly will be like the Wizard of Oz:  pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (holding the terrible test results) just watch all the lovely steam and smoke rising from the ashes of what was once a good school district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The buildings are being replaced because they are old, outdated, and have served their purpose.The communities got their money's worth and now it is time to replace them with buildings for the next 50 years. That is a separate issue from the state report card.

State report cards only show the obvious: Higher socio-economic communities score higher than lower socio-economic communities with tests and results designed by and for higher socio-economic communities. Winton Woods is doing a good job with the students it is mandated to educate. It is innovative in many ways and many students are receiving excellent educations and going on to do better things.

State report cards are used by many to bash school districts for perceived poor results.That is unfair to the teachers, administrators, and the communities themselves. The fact is, the goals keeps changing and supposedly "good" districts get low marks in some areas because the state continually messes with the formula. To me, the "state report cards" merely reflect the challenges each district faces and it is unfair to use them as you do, as a way to shame and blame your local district.

You could use the state report card to ask why Wyoming isn't perfect in every category, couldn't you? Report card data is good for some things but not for many others. It doesn't really reflect what actually goes on in schools and communities. 

There was no report card in the good old days so there is no way to compare then and now and to do so is unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

"Good districts" get low marks in some areas because no-one is perfect.  Across the board horrible results like WW are due to systemic failures that new buildings will not solve.  How in the hell are you going to get 50 years service out of the new buildings when your lousy maintenance didnt get 30 years out of these buildings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Your math is wrong. The newest building is from 1972. The high school is 50 years old and every other building is closer to 60. Not lousy maintenance by a long shot. These buildings have served their purpose and are worn out. Whether the district was "high performing" or not, the buildings would still need to be replaced. Please get back to the issue of the report card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

My husband and I don't have children but I thought I'd post another expert opinion article about education that was published last week by Business Insider.com.  It references other articles that I've posted already.   

“An MIT psychologist explains why so many tech moguls send their kids to anti-tech schools”   http://www.businessinsider.com/sherry-turkle-why-tech-moguls-send-their-kids-to-anti-tech-schools-2017-11

Also a friend of mine sent me this 5 minute interview on Fox News in September.  “Smartphones destroying generation?” 

One professor argues that while post-millennials are physically safer than adolescents, they are more comfortable online than with real people - and are the verge of a mental breakdown.  http://video.foxnews.com/v/5575506985001/?#sp=show-clips

Good luck, y’all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Monique
links disappear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0