Overall results of mayoral control of DC Public Schools, continued

Continuation from the previous post…

First, math:

percent proficient in math by subgroups, 2005-2014

Here we can see the effect of changing from one test to another quite clearly. 2005 was the last year for the SAT-9. In 2006, DCPS changed to the DC-CAS for its system-wide standardized test, and scores plummeted, as is normal for this sort of thing. We then had three years of steady growth up until 2009, when Rhee, Kamras and Henderson instituted IMPACT and incredible rates of churn among teachers. Since that time, scores in virtually every single subgroup has stayed essentially flat. But you won’t hear that fact ballyhooed in the editorial pages of the Washington Post or Education Week. The only group with any real growth is Hispanic students, and that means that they have finally matched the levels they showed under the previous test, the SAT-9, eight years ago.

The gaps between the proficiency rates of white students and the other groups have not really been reduced much at all. What exactly is there to celebrate?

Last graph will be for math, same subgroups.

percent proficient in reading by subgroups, 2005-14

Here we see that there was not nearly as much of a drop in scores from 2006 to 2007 with the change of exam. English teachers familiar with both tests can perhaps enlighten us. But since 2009, when IMPACT began and every single teacher had to follow the rigid Teaching and Learning Framework, those scores have either stayed flat or have actually decreased a bit.

Can someone please explain why Henderson and Kamras still have jobs, and why we still have IMPACT running our schools, and why we still have majoral control of the schools instead of a democratically-elected school board? Their record is pitiful!






Published in: on September 30, 2014 at 9:35 am  Comments (4)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://gfbrandenburg.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/overall-results-of-mayoral-control-of-dc-public-schools-continued/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Guy can you do this same chart with subgroups from NAEP data?


    • Done a long time ago. Do a search for NAEP on my blog and you’ll find it

      Guy Brandenburg Sent from my iPhone so possibly full of hilarious errors… ;-€}}



  2. Also I wouldn’t draw the line in where you did. Rhee was hired in 2007, but after testing had already occurred. She and Fenty took credit for the increase in test scores that year, even though all the testing was done before she started her job, and as you point out none of her policies were implemented until 2008. I’d draw the line in 2008 or 2009, or maybe note that 2008 was the first testing year when she was in the job, and 2009 was the first year of testing after firing and implementation of IMPACT.


    • Right

      Guy Brandenburg Sent from my iPhone so possibly full of hilarious errors… ;-€}}



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: