Oliver Morrison over at Chalkbeat has combed the state’s TCAP data, released yesterday, for trends and important metrics (read the source article here for more detail). I figure, why recreate the wheel, so here are the top ten things he took away when looking at the TCAP data (non bolded text added by me).
- Overall, not bad, not great. Some improvement shown, but not as much as previous years.
- Overall math scores continue to grow faster than reading scores.
- But more and more math students fall to the bottom the longer they are in school: The number of students scoring very low in math goes up every year they are in school.
- Nobody fails social studies. Zero percent of social studies and US History students scored below basic.
- The achievement gap between minorities and white students narrowed a little. Sort of.
- The achievement gap for other disadvantaged groups remains wide.
- English Language Learners didn’t do well in English. But they did even worse in math.
- What was missing from today’s data? They didn’t release district or school performance data, just overall state-wide data.
- What do the numbers actually mean? The data doesn’t include an in depth discussion of how many students fall in each category.
- More students tested in high school this year, fewer students tested in elementary and middle.
I’m going to add something on the takeaway about ESL math scores since I touched on this a couple weeks ago.
As an ESL teacher, my biggest criticism lies with the quality of the modified assessments. The math test is so dependent on word problems that for many language learners it fails to test students’ math skills and tests their language instead.
Let’s flip the script, I’m a 7th grade student who moved to Costa Rica last April. I can sort of hold a conversation, but I struggle in class because I lack the academic vocabulary. I tend to do well in math when it’s straight equations, but on the test I see this. (excuse the bad spanish, I’m not fluent and used google translate)
Para hacer una cierta concentración de un producto químico, un científico mezcla 81 mililitros de la química con 180 mililitros de agua destilada. Para hacer más de esta concentración química, exactamente cuántos mililitros de la sustancia química si la mezcla científico con 260 mililitros de agua destilada?
I’m going to have no idea what this is asking me to do. Something, something, producto quimico, something, something, cientifico, something, mililitros de agua. Okay, 81, 180, and 260. Boom, 521. No? Boom, 7,596,180. No? It’s a proportion? Why didn’t it say proporción? I know that one. 577.78. Still no? Well, caca.
That’s why we’re seeing worse results in math.
It’s also important to know that ELL is typically a temporary classification. It’s not like Michael Corleone and the mob, when you’re out you tend to stay out. There’s no real data on how these kids are doing after they fully exit ESL. The other reality is that this population is constantly changing as language is developing. Fluent kids leave, new kids come. Ultimately, the way we analyze ELL achievement data is silly, particularly value added. The group of students is constantly changing and achievement typically stays low. If they were performing as well as their peers then my job as an ESL teacher is done and they would have exited ESL.