## A closer look at charter and regular public school enrollments, percentages of students at risk, and percentages of students ‘proficient’

Here is another look at the brand-new data concerning four variables in the District of Columbia schools, about which I wrote a couple of days ago. The difference here is that the dots representing the schools are more-or=less proportional to the size of the student body.

1. Is this a regular public school, or a charter school (blue or red):

2. What fraction of the kids at that school are officially considered to be At Risk? (That’s the scale along the x-axis at the bottom of the page)

3. What is the average percentage of the kids at that school are ‘proficient’ in reading and math on the DC-CAS? (That’s the scale along the y-axis at the left-hand side of the page)

4. How big is the school? (That’s the size of the dot, more or less; the legend is at the bottom left-hand corner of the graph)

Time spent looking carefully at this graph will be well-spent. If you click on it, it will expand.

It will certainly show that charter schools have not revolutionized education for the better in DC: for both types of schools, there remains a very strong, negative correlation between the percentages of kids At Risk and ‘pass’ rates on the DC-CAS.

Note that most schools have between 200 and 500 students and that most of the ones that are smaller are actually charter schools. As I wrote a couple of days ago, the schools with the largest fraction of At-Risk students (say, over 2/3 of the student body) are almost all regular DC public schools.

On the second graph, which is otherwise identical to the first, I’ve labeled some of the larger schools.

Here is the one with names of some of the larger schools, so you can see how individual schools fall on this graph.

(Sorry, I there was not enough room to label every single one, and my non-existent HTML skills won’t allow me to make it so that any of the dots are clickable. If any of my readers know how to do that and would like to offer to make that happen, then please let me know in the comments.)

And here is the entire data table. So you can see where every single school lies on these three dimensions.

(PS: I added a few more names of schools and corrected four other small errors, two pointed out by an alert reader.. 2/22/2015)

Published in: on February 20, 2015 at 2:53 pm  Comments (5)
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

## Latest DC Audited Enrollment Figures for all, charters, and regular public schools

The latest audited enrollment numbers have just been released, but not in a very useful format.

They show that regular DCPS enrollment is pretty close to flat, with only a small change over last year, or even over the last seven years. However, overall enrollment in all taxpayer-funded schools in the District of Columbia continues to rise, mostly because of a steady 15-year-long rise in charter school enrollment and a large increase in the overall city population.

The strangest feature I see is that the high school enrollment (grades 9-12) is down at all types of schools, with apparently many of those students moving to ‘alternative’ schools, at least on paper.

As I said, I didn’t think the graphs put out by OSSE were very informative, so I’ve re-plotted them here. For example, they put the charter school and public school enrollments on different graphs with different scales, making them hard to compare.

My first graph is of overall enrollment figures for regular public schools and for the charter schools (which several courts have decided are NOT public entities)  since the start of the millennium:

The red line is enrollment in the charter schools, and the blue line is that of the regular public schools. You can see that the blue line has been just about level since 2007-8, when Michelle Rhee was appointed chancellor of DCP.

My next graphs explores where the students are. OSSE separates students into various “bands” which are a bit hard to decipher. PreK3, PreK4, and Kindergarten totals are counted separately, and then they lump together grades 1-3 (‘primary’), then grades 4-5 (‘upper elementary’), then grades 6-8 (‘middle’), and grades 9-12 (high school). Students in alternative schools, of unspecified ages, are counted separately, as are students enrolled in Special Education schools and those in adult learning centers.

This first one is for regular DC Public Schools. You can see that preK3 though grade 3 comprises just under half of the entire DCPS population.

The next graph shows the same thing but for ALL taxpayer-funded schools, both public and charter. Notice that the ‘adult’ sector is larger here.

And the next graph shows the same thing for just the charter schools:

We see a much larger fraction of students in the adult sector. Again, Prek3 through grade 3 makes up just under half of the total.

Now let’s look a bit closer at the changes from last year to this, by grade band. My first graph shows overall changes from last year to this year, in all taxpayer-funded schools in Washington DC. Notice the large increase in the ‘alternative’ population and the ‘adult’ population, followed by a somewhat smaller rise in grades 1-3. The high school population – both public AND charter – actually dropped, as did the number of students enrolled in a special education school like Sharpe. It appears that a large fraction of that drop is students being reclassified as “alternative” instead of being in a high school.

Now let’s look at the corresponding graph for the regular DC public schools:

Notice that once again, there was a big jump in the ‘alternative’ population, followed by an increase of about 250 at grades 1-3. As in overall DC stats, there was a drop in grades 9-12 and in special education. (the number for grade 6-8 is a typo: it should be 50)

Lastly, here are the changes since last year by grade band for the DC charter schools:

I was surprised to see small drops in all of secondary charter schools (that is, grades 6 through 12). We see robust increases at all other levels, especially at the adult and alternative levels. I’m not exactly sure what’s causing this; perhaps readers closer to the trench lines than me (retired 5 years now) can comment.

My understanding  from reading US census figures is that the number of teenagers in Washington, DC – and thus, the number of students eligible to enroll in grades 6-12 continues to fall, while the number of younger kids is increasing. Obviously, those little kids generally grow older, and soon we will see a robust increase in the high school enrollment in the public and charter schools — unless they and their families all move out of town or decide to spend huge amounts for private or parochial schools. Which I doubt will happen.

In any case, claims of huge increases in enrollment in the DC public schools under chancellors Henderson and Rhee are just wishful thinking — like most of the boasts on Michelle Rhee’s famous resume.

Comments are most definitely welcome, even if you need a magnifying glass to see the “comments” button.

Published in: on February 28, 2014 at 3:41 pm  Comments (2)
Tags: , , , , , ,

## Trends for DC & Charters & Nation in 8th grade NAEP reading scores, black students

Here we have yet another surprising graph showing how the scores for black 8th graders on the NAEP reading tests have been bouncing around for students in DC public schools, DC charter schools, DC as a whole, large US cities as a whole, and the nation’s public schools as a whole.

Tell me what you see:

What I see is that under the ‘leadership’ of Rhee and Henderson, African-american 8th graders enrolled in DC public schools (blue and purple line) are actually doing a bit worse than they did before mayoral control. However, the average scores for the their counterparts in DC’s charter schools (dotted orange line)  are rising quite rapidly and are now higher than the national averages for black 8th graders.

However, on the average, the scores for all 8th-grade black students in publicly-funded DC schools (black dashed line) on the NAEP since 2008 (when Rhee was installed – purple vertical line) seem to be following the trends that were in place before that date.

No wonder Henderson recently admitted that her administration had no real idea on how to make DCPS middle schools attractive to families. One might conclude that the DC African-American families and students who were motivated to do well in school have in many cases migrated to the charter schools, leaving the less-motivated ones behind.

As in my previous three posts, I had to do have my spreadsheet do some computation to calculate the scores for the charter schools. You can find the formula in my first two posts. I used the overall DCPS and charter school and DC total enrollments rather than the specific 8th-grade-level enrollments for each institution because the latter was too difficult to find and I suspected that it wouldn’t make a big difference. If anybody finds any errors, please let me know.

## Trends on NAEP for 8th grade math, black students in DC, DCPS, DC charters, and nation

Yet another graph, this one showing how this year’s group of African-American 8th grade students did on the NAEP math tests in the regular DC public schools, in all DC publicly-funded schools, in the DC charter schools, in large cities across the nation, and in all US public school systems, going back to the early 1990s.

As usual, I had to do a bit of algebra to calculate what the average charter school scores were in the post-Rhee era, since those are not explicitly given anywhere. I give the explanation in my previous two posts.

My previous results seem to disagree a bit with those produced by NCES (by a couple of points). Therefore I used their data instead of what I calculated; the graph above is new as of 1/6/2014.

I still make these conclusions:

(1) Since the establishment of mayoral control of the schools, as a whole, the overall average for DC students in publicly-supported schools is following just about the exact same trends that were established from 2000 through 2007.  As a result, math scores for DC’s African-American 8th graders are now equal to those in large cities across the nation, which is a positive development.

(2) The DC charter schools seemed to have siphoned off the more motivated black 8th grade students and their families; as a result, scores for students in the regular DC public schools at that level in math lag significantly behind those of their counterparts in the charter schools, whose scores now surpass those of black 8th graders n the nation’s public schools as a whole and also those in large urban school systems as well.

As usual, if anybody finds any errors in my work, please let me know by leaving a comment.

Published in: on December 27, 2013 at 9:43 am  Comments (1)
Tags: , , , , , , ,

## Enrollment in DCPS – Have Rhee & Henderson Saved It?

Michelle Rhee, her acolyte Kaya Henderson, and all their supporters keep saying that their corporate-style educational deforms in Washington DC have done wonderful things, such as increasing the enrollment in DC public schools.

As usual, they are not telling the truth.

To compare apples to apples, and not watermelons to peanuts, it pays to look at the same sort of data every year — in other words, let’s look at just K-12 enrollment for as far back as we have data.

Mary Levy has done just that, wading through mounds of official, audited data on fall enrollment in DCPS for 1990 through 2012; she shared it on the Concerned4DCPS yahoo group. (Thanks!)

I converted some of her data into graphs so you can see it more easily. I present first the total enrollment for grades K-12 during that time period. Tell me where you see a large uptick since 2007, because I for one can’t find it.

It seems to have stabilized, but that’s all; and this at a time when the entire population of the District of Columbia grew by about one-fifth (about 100,000 people) and the enrollment in our publicly-funded, but privately-run charter schools has gone through the roof. So, not exactly a stellar job; in fact, the sort of job that ought to get Henderson and company fired for sheer incompetence. In fact, this is not the only time that DCPS enrollment was roughly stable – that also happened from 1990 to 1996.

My next chart shows the actual year-to-year changes in DCPS K-12 population. A red bar pointing down means that the schools had fewer students that year than they did the year before. A blue bar pointing up shows an increase in students over the previous year.

There was a tiny increase in the fall of 2012 (the current school year), just like there was a tiny increase in the fall of 1992. The largest drop occurred in 1998, when DCPS had a net loss of about 5000 students from the year before. It is madness to pretend that things have been hunky-dory since Rhee and her inexperienced, arrogant, highly-paid management types and consultants arrived in 2007.

In point of fact, what they did is trash the few decent things in DCPS with their own corporate style of autocratic foolishness and hubris. They have fixed exactly none of the problems that parents, teachers and students were complaining about, and they hide any real data like this.

It is time to throw them out and go back to a democratically-elected school board and neighborhood schools — to begin with. Yes, lots of changes need to be made, but this crew has not a clue.

Tags: , , , , ,

## Part 3: Enrollment Trends In DC’s Public Schools and Charter Schools

I notice some interesting trends when I look at these three charts from the Washington, DC Office of the State Superintendent of Education, or DC OSSE.

Do you see what I see?

This first one is enrollment by grade grouping for all DC’s publicly-funded schools, that is, both the regular public schools and the charter schools, combined:

The next one is just for the regular DC public schools:

and the last OSSE graph is just for the charter schools, which are publicly funded but privately run:

One thing I note is that in preK-3, and in Adult Education, and in Special Education schools, there are now more students enrolled in the charter schools than in the regular public schools.

(Not so in the other grade strands.)

The Carlos Rosario adult education school is a charter school,  and apparently well-funded, may be part of the reason for the surge in Adult Ed students in the charter realm. It’s located near the home of a family member, and seems to have a lot of students. I am not sure what’s going on with the special education schools (though as I’ve noted before, it’s awfully weird that nearly every single special education student at these schools, whether charter or public, tests either “proficient” or “advanced”, when a substantial portion of them are unable to feed, dress, or bathe themselves, much less read).

I do not know why the overall enrollment for grades 4 and 5 is down for all publicly-funded schools in DC as a whole, and I am not at all sure why the number of DCPS students in those two grades is down by five percent.

I had sort of expected that the small, one-percent rise in regular DCPS population would be mostly from growth in Pre-K. That turned out not to be the case. If you just count “traditional” enrollment in grades Kindergarten through 12, enrollment went from 37,927 to 38,397, which is an increase ofr 470 students, roughly 1.2%; and that’s about the same as the corresponding change in DCPS as a whole, i.e. 1.5%.

In the charter schools, too, the enrollment growth in grades K through 12 is about 11.1%, not really different from the overall charter school growth of 11.0%.

That’s what I see.

What do you see?

Tags: , , , , , ,

## Another Look at DCPS enrollment versus the Charter Schools

This little graph I made allows you to contrast and compare what is happening in the overall enrollment in the regular DC public schools with that in the “public” charter schools. It’s a stacked bar graph, so you can see the two quantities at the same time on the same graph. Your eyes are pretty good at finding trends. What do you see?

Published in: on February 15, 2012 at 6:22 pm  Comments (4)
Tags: , ,

## So, what’s with this supposed growth in population in DC Public Schools?

Remember the myth that under Michelle Rhee and Kaya Henderson, DCPS enrollment finally started to rise again?

Yes, it is a myth, as I will show you, using OSSE’s own graphs and tables. All I did down below is cut and paste.

If you look at the press release from OSSE and DC Mayor Gray, it looks like DCPS enrollment rose by by 2%.  You actually have to look pretty hard and really understand what you are looking for, if you want to find the dirty little hidden secret that the enrollment in DC public schools is actually DOWN by 1%. It’s contained here in this sentence:

• DCPS enrollment had a slight decrease of 1%, from 45,630 to 45,191 (439 students).

“States across the country look at early childhood enrollment numbers to determine future trends and to gauge the trust parents have in their school system,” added Hosanna Mahaley, State Superintendent of Education. “Our amazing growth in the early grades and Pre-Kindergarten is a testament to the work of our school leaders, as well as the Mayor’s relentless early childhood efforts.”

So Mahaley tries to pretend that there really is big growth in DCPS, which isn’t true. However, part of the Education Deformers founding myth is that their ideas, which involve destroying public education as we knew it, will have amazing results, and that all of the results are wonderful.

The truth is otherwise: there aren’t any wonderful results. And they are destroying our public school system and turning the education of our youth over to people who at best have no idea what they are doing, even if they do have fancy spreadsheets and PPT presentations. And at worst want to move us back to a very unequal educational system that reminds me strangely of the Colored and White school systems that were still around when I was a little boy.

I think that many publications conveniently blur the differences between charters and real public schools when it suits their purposes. Here it makes the educational Deformers look good to add the numbers for public and charter schools.

Notice a couple of things: if all of the publicly-funded schools in a county or city start having enrollment increases, then there could be several reasons:

(1) Some of the students who used to be in private or parochial schools transferred to public schools, perhaps to save money, or parent(s) lost job(s), or school(s) closed down, or parents just changed their minds, etc. (Certainly possible. Problem is, I don’t have any data from private schools in DC in general, and I haven’t asked around yet; I just don’t know if they are growing or shrinking in general. As far as parochial schools are concerned, some of you readers probably remember that over the past decades, a LOT of catholic schools in DC have either closed or, more recently, converted themselves into charter schools to get the public funding.)

(2) The overall population of the region is growing for whatever reason, and that includes a number of children who were born somewhere between 2008 and 1993; and most kids do go to public schools. (DC’s population is definitely increasing, so this is quite plausible. If the population of a city is growing, and that includes kids of school age, then it stands to reason that unless their parents are home-schooling them or just not allowing them to enroll anywhere at all, then the public schools’ population will go up. It’s not rocket science, and it doesn’t really call for cheerleaders, either.)

(3) There are increased numbers of students moving across boundary lines (legally or not) in order to attend schools in the district in question. (I know that some Md and Va parents bring their kids to DC schools for various reasons, but I can’t tell you whether this trend is increasing or otherwise.)

(4) All the numbers are made up anyway, so there’s no way to know. (I hope we can trust these numbers!)

On the OSSE web page with the press release, I found some very nicely done graphs giving the long-term trends over the past decade.

First, let’s look at

## OSSE’s own graph of DCPS enrollment over the past decade:

I hope you notice several things:

(1) DCPS now has the same number of students that it did in 2008/09.

(2) The numbers of students in DCPS has been essentially flat since 2008/09. You have to look pretty hard to find any real change at all since then, and if you do, you’re probably exaggerating.

(3) This graph does not go to zero; thus all changes look much bigger than they otherwise would.

(4) DC’s population was going down at a pretty steady clip for quite some time, until 2008/09. (When I started teaching in 1978, many, many schools were overcrowded.)

Now let’s look at the same graph from the same source, but pertaining to DC charter schools.

I hope you notice several things:

(1) This graph DOES go to zero

(2) But its scale is totally different from that on the previous graph. (Given our natural human tendency to compare sizes rather than numbers, one could be forgiven for thinking that the number of charter school students now is equal to the number of DCPS kids)

(3) The # of charter students seems to be going up at a pretty steady rate, which we can estimate pretty easily. From around 2001 or 2002, there were abut 11,000 PCS students. This year, about 31,000 students, which means about 20,000 more students over about 10 years, or about 2,000 more kids per year.

(4) It’s not exponential growth.

Now, let’s look at a table that OSSE made that shows, by grade bands, what happened to the number of kids in DC public schools. As you can see, there are a few shifts of a few hundred students into and out of some grades. Big losers: grades 4-5 (down by 217 kids, or about 3%) and in grades 9-12, which is down by 311, or 3%.. There are some changes in Alternative and Special Education numbvers that I do not understand at all.

There are also some increases at grades PK4 and in grades 1-3.

Now let’s look at a similar table (again by OSSE) that gives figures for the charter schools.

Apparently the fact that the charter school numbers of  PK3 and PK4 students seem to jump around so much isn’t so important. But it does look to me that the charter schools are having a lot more growth in the earliest grades than the regular public schools are.

Another interesting trend: there are more adult students in the charter system (in particular, at Carlos Rosario) than in the regular public schools.

Another fact: the number of high school students in the charter schools went down by a larger percentage than it did in the public schools. Yes, there are roughly twice as many students in grades 9-12 in DCPS as in the charter schools, so that 3% drop in the public schools ends up being about 80 more kids than the 4% drop in the charter schools.

(Got that?)

But, in any case, both types of schools seem to be losing population in grades 9 – 12.

As usual, you can leave comments.

Published in: on February 14, 2012 at 11:47 pm  Comments (2)
Tags: , , ,

## Strange Events at Dunbar SHS

Dunbar SHS has been in the news a lot recently. Erich Martel, a history teacher punitively transferred from Wilson, has dug deeply into the record, and has written the following:

[Attachment(s) from Erich Martel included below]

## Dunbar’s Decline Began Long Before Rhee and Continued Under Her

by Erich Martel
Dunbar HS has been in the news.  Supt Janey’s and Chancellor’s Rhee’s actions regarding Dunbar do not tell a simple hero – villain story.  Mostly, they reveal how tests and data can be adjusted to give the appearance of improvement and that students continue to receive diplomas that do not represent mastery of DCPS subject standards. The data from Dunbar HS are typical of those in many of our high schools.
For several decades, students have been allowed to graduate from DCPS high schools like Dunbar without meeting mandatory requirements in core subject matter. Standardized tests occasionally reveal, if only approximately, how great the gulf between image and reality is.  This commentary grew out of an attempt to address the following questions, which Colbert King’s article on Dunbar HS brought to mind:
1) How could DCPS officials say that “70% of the class of 2007 were expected to attend college,” when two years earlier grade 10 SAT9 tests revealed that over 90% received Below Basic scores in math and over 65% received Below Basic scores in reading?
and
2) Miracle or Mirage: How was the following possible:
April 2005:  SAT9 Grade 10 Math:  no students scored advanced; 3 students scored proficient;
April 2006:  DC CAS Grade 10 Math: 5 students scored advanced; 58 students scored proficient.
Hiding or attempting to manipulate reality always has consequences:  a few benefit; most pay a price.
Erich Martel
Social Studies
Phelps ACE HS
DCPS
(In January 2008, I was the WTU representative on the Quality School Review Team that visited Dunbar HS, a step that was preliminary to the chancellor’s restructuring decision under NCLB)
Overview
1)  Posted data on the OSSE site are incomplete
2) What do truancy and graduation rate data show?
3)  Dunbar’s SAT9 and DCCAS results I:  Miracle or Mirage on NJ Ave.? (See attachment, sheet 1)
4)  Dunbar’s SAT9 and DCCAS results II:  Miracle or Mirage on NJ Ave.? (See attachment, sheet 1)
5) Graduation: How is it that “70% of [the Dunbar class of 2007] were expected to attend college”?
7)  In-house Alteration of Students’ Records
8) Enrollment Decline at Dunbar HS (attachment, sheet 2)
9) Student Records Audit at Dunbar HS, 2002-03
COMMENTARY
1)  Posted data on the OSSE site are incomplete, probably due to the failure of DCPS – and charters – to provide them.
For example:
a) Truancy data are available for only four years:  2003-04 to 2006-07 (Attachment, sheet 1, columns J & K);
b) Average daily attendance data are available for only 2009-10 (Sheet 1, column L);
c) Graduation rate data are available for only 2008-09 and 2009-10 (Sheet 1, Column M) (Columns E & I show the senior completion rates: number of June graduates divided by the number of seniors on the October OSSE enrollment count, 8 months earlier)
2) What do truancy and graduation rate data show?
a) Truancy at Dunbar went from 18.39% in 2003-04 (the year before Janey arrived) to 16.68% (his first year); the almost doubled to 29.99% in 2005-06 before climbing to 42.86% in his last year.
c) The graduation rate dropped from 81.7% in 2008-09 to 74.7% in 2009-10.
Was that Bedford’s fault? Those rates do not report that the majority of the students needed Credit Recovery and/or summer school to pass one or more courses needed for graduation.
The real test of graduation validity:  How many graduates who enrolled in colleges or professional schools:
i.  Needed to take non-credit remedial courses before moving on to credit-bearing courses?
ii. Lasted for at least one semester?    …. for two semesters?
3)  Dunbar’s SAT9 and DCCAS results I:  Miracle or Mirage? (See attachment, sheet 1)
a) Between April 1999 to April 2005 only 22 Dunbar 10th graders (out of 1,564 tested; not including the Pre-Engineering Academy) received scores of Advanced or Proficient on the SAT9 Math.
In April 2005, the last year of the SAT9, only 3 10th grade students scored Proficient (no one scored Advanced).
Yet, one year lated, April 2006, the first year of the DC CAS, 5 scored Advanced & 58 scored Proficient, a number  almost 3 times greater than the total (22) of the previous seven years.
b)  That dramatic increase occurred at the same two years that truancy jumped from 16.68% to 29.99%.
c)  The number of Adv & Prof scores then dropped during Janey’s last year (06-07), down in 07-08 (Rhee’s first year), up in 08-09, and down again in 09-10.
4)  Dunbar’s SAT9 and DCCAS results II:  Miracle or Mirage? (See attachment, sheet 1)
a)  In April 2005, 206 Dunbar 10th graders (out of 227 tested; not including the Pre-Engineering Academy) received scores of Below Basic on the SAT9 Math; one year later, April 2006, it dropped to 82, rose in 2007 to 98, fell to 72, then 61 and finally 38 in 2010 (under Bedford).
5) Graduation: How is it possible that “70% of [the Dunbar class of 2007] were expected to attend college”? (Colbert King, Washinton Post, 12/18/10).
Consider:  According to the OSSE enrollment audit, the Dunbar HS class of 2007 (seniors, including 25 Pre-Engineering seniors) numbered 223 students.
Two years earlier, in April 2005, the tenth graders of the future Class of 2007 produced the following results on the SAT9:
Math (Total:  227 students):  attachment:  sheet 1
Proficient:  3 students (or 1.32%)
Basic:   18 students (7.93%)
Below Basic:  206 students (90.75%)
Reading (Total:  234 students); attachment:  sheet 3
Proficient:  4 students (or 1.71%)
Basic:   75 students (32.05%)
Below Basic:  155 students (66.24%)
Recall what the four performance levels are supposed to mean (source:  “Stanford 9 Special Report:  Performance Standard Scores,” Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement, 1997):
Basic: “denotes partial mastery” (emphasis added)
Below Basic:  “signifies less than partial mastery”
In June 2007, Dunbar HS had 171 graduates for a senior completion rate of 76.7% (171 graduates / 223 seniors).
Assuming that these were the top students who took the SAT9 two years earlier, the class of 2007 included only 3 students who were showed “solid academic achievement” in math and only 4 in reading.  Of the 171, only 18 had shown “partial mastery” in math, while 75 had shown “partial mastery” in reading.
Of that 171, 70% (120 students) were “expected to attend college.”  Thus, leaving aside the 51 students (30%) not expected to attend college, the 120 who [were] expected to attend college showed the following performance two years earlier as tenth graders:
– 0 showed “superior academic performance”
– 4 showed “solid academic achievement”;
– 75 showed “partial mastery”;
– 41 showed “less than partial mastery”
In Math:
– 0 showed “superior academic performance”

– 3 showed “solid academic achievement”;
– 18 showed “partial mastery”;
– 99 showed “less than partial mastery”
By the end of the 3rd Advisory or marking period, when students take the SAT9 (since 2006, the DC CAS), they have completed or should have completed Algebra I and Geometry.  How likely is it that 99 out120 students who showed less than partial mastery in grade 10 math were likely to overcome that deficit and master Algebra II/ Trigonometry or mastery of the elements of four years of English and writing skills?
Undoubtedly, some students managed to improve over the remaining two years.  By the same token, however, the depressing anti-academic attitudes that hamper teaching and learning could very easily have led some students who did well in grade 10 to lose interest.  In fact, most of the students required easier summer school classes to meet graduation requirements.
7.  In-house Alteration of Students’ Records
As the review of student academic records at Dunbar in 2002-03 concluded ( http://www.dcpswatch.com/dcps/030922b.htm and below) “the opportunity for tampering was greatly enhanced and the reliability of the students’ records was questionable.” Despite recommendations of a Student Records Management Task Force (August 2003), no systemic steps were taken to ensure that student records were secure against internal tampering. That was revealed in Wilson HS’s Class of 2006, when approximately 200 of the 420 seniors listed on the June graduation day program had not completed their mandatory requirements.  It is not known whether the DC Inspector General’s report of the audit of Wilson HS graduation records led Supt. Janey to tighten procedures in other high schools (http://tinyurl.com/2nukmj ).
8.   Enrollment Decline at Dunbar HS (attachment, sheet 2)
In order to understand the decline in enrollment in Dunbar HS, one must factor out the grade 9 increases, beginning in 2006-07, when 9th grades in high schools began to increase as junior high schools were transformed into middle schools.
Dunbar’s total enrollment dropped from 1070 in 2002-03 to 913 in 2006-07 (adjusted to 887) in Supt Janey’s last year.  The October 2009 adjusted enrollment (factoring out the grade 9 increase) is 664, down by more than 200 since Chancellor Rhee took over.
9. Student Records Audit at Dunbar HS, 2002-03
Following the revelations of altered student records at Wilson HS in June 2002, DCPS contracted with Gardiner Kamya Inc. to conduct reviews of 59 students’ transcripts and supporting documentation in each DCPS high school.  The following is Dunbar HS’s report.  It is posted on the dcpswatch website, because DCPS officials did not post it.
 GARDINER KAMYA & ASSOCIATES, PC CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS / MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS

INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES REGARDING STUDENT RECORDS AT SIXTEEN HIGH SCHOOLS/SITES http://www.dcpswatch.com/dcps/030922b.htm

MARCH 30, 2003 (End of Field Work)
July 17, 2003 (DC PS Response)
September 22, 2003 (Report Submitted)

Submitted by:
Gardiner, Kamya & Associates, P.C.
1717 K Street, NW Suite 601
Washington, DC 20036

### 7. DUNBAR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

1. Internal controls (Procedure #1, Page 7)
The school did implement the grade verification process mandated by the DCPS. However, due to the state of the student records and the results of the procedures detailed below, we conclude that internal controls with respect to student grades were ineffective and there was no assurance that such grades were accurately reflected in the student records.
2. Confidentially maintained (Procedure #2, Page 9)
The procedure was completed without exception. [Comment:  This means that all alterations were done by those with legal access to student records]
3. Completeness of Cumulative and Electronic files (Procedure #3, Page 9)
1. Cumulative Files
Eighteen files in our sample of 59 were incomplete. Two files were missing. Some of the incomplete files were missing more than one item. The missing items were as follows:

1. It is the school’s policy to create a Letter of Understanding for all students in grades 9 -12. However, the school could not provide a Letter of Understanding for 14 students in our sample;
2. Two student’s file did not contain a transcript;
3. Three students’ files did not contain a 9th grade report card;
4. Six students’ files did not contain a report card;
5. One student’s file did not contain either a 9th or 11th grade report card;
6. One student did not have a 10th grade report card in his/her file.
2. Electronic Files
The school could not provide electronic data (COHI and SIS-HIST) for six students in our sample. Consequently, we could not determine the completeness of those files.
4. Consistency (Procedure #4, Page 9)
The school could not provide the teachers’ scan sheets for 31 of the 59 student files in our sample. In addition, 19 students had transferred in. Scan sheets were not available for these students. Also, the school did not provide report cards for 11 students, and two students’ file did not include a transcript. Of the records available for our review, we noted the following:

1. Two (2.0) credits were reported on the transcript of one student (for Army Jr. ROTC). The report card reported 1.0 credit.
5. Accuracy (Procedure #5, Page 10)
1. Carnegie Units and Letters of Understanding
1. The transcripts of three students were not consistent with their Letters of Understanding as follows:
1. One student’s transcript reported a credit of 1.0 for “Art 1 “. However, the Letter of Understanding reported a credit of 0.5 for the same course. Also, the transcript reported zero credits for electives. The Letter of Understanding reported 0.5 credits;
2. One student’s transcript reported a credit of 1.0 for “Adapt Health and PE”. However, the Letter of Understanding did not report this credit; and
3. One student’s transcript reported a credit of 2.0 for Army Jr. ROTC. However, the Letter of Understanding awarded a credit of 1.0.
2. We could not determine whether classes taken and credits earned by 15 students were in accordance with DCPS Carnegie Unit requirements for the following reasons:
1. Two student’s file did not contain a transcript;
2. One student’s file contained a Letter of Understanding that was not completed by a counselor. In addition, the credits had not been properly calculated;
3. The school could not provide a Letter of Understanding for 14 students;
3. The Letters of Understanding in our sample did not report hours earned for community service.
2. Mathematical accuracy of credits
The school could not provide report cards for 11 students. In addition, the transcript of one student reported 2.0 credits awarded for Army Jr. ROTC, a one-year course while the report card showed 1.0 credit for this course.
The school could not provide electronic records for 6 students. The procedure was completed with respect to the remaining students without exception.
The procedure was completed without exception.
5. Independent studies
This school does not offer independent studies.
6. Transfer credit
The procedure was completed without exception.
6. Tampering (Procedure #6, Page 11)
Of the 59 student records included in our sample:

1. Twenty files were incomplete;
2. The school could not provide scan sheets for 31 students;
3. Scan sheets were not available for an additional 19 students who had transferred in;
4. The school could not provide the electronic files for 6 students.
We also noted that all administrative staff (i.e., principal, assistant principals, registrar and counselors) used the same password to gain read/write access to students’ electronic record. Because of these factors, the opportunity for tampering was greatly enhanced and the reliability of the students’ records was questionable.

#### Conclusion:

Based on the procedures performed, we conclude that:

2. Student records were incomplete, inconsistent, inaccurate, and unreliable;
3. We could not conclude with respect to tampering because a significant number of files selected for review were not made available to us.

———————————-

# Strayer Education, Washington Post shares tumble on Apollo warning

### WASHINGTON BUSINESS JOURNAL – BY Tucker Echols

Shares of Arlington-based Strayer Education Inc. tumbled 15 percent and Washington Post Co. stock fell 8 percent Thursday after rival for-profit education firm Apollo Group Inc. warned of a drop in enrollment due to greater regulatory scrutiny. The Post’s Kaplan education division is its strongest source of revenue.

Apollo Group (NASDAQ: APOL) stock fell \$12.47, or 25 percent, to \$37 as investors reacted to the company’s statement that it was withdrawing its business outlook for fiscal year 2011. The company cited, “on-going regulatory scrutiny which has led to heightened media attention much of which has been negative.” Apollo, which operates The University of Phoenix, said that, “various external factors could result in a decline in new degree enrollments in excess of 40 percent year-over-year.”

Stock in Strayer (NASDAQ: STRA) declined as much as \$24.95 to \$132.10 in Thursday trading. Washington Post shares (NYSE: WPO) fell as much as \$33.81 to \$394.80.

The warning from Apollo indicates investors’ worst fears of the summer may be realized. Enrollment gains have been the backbone of Strayer Education’s soaring revenue and expanding Strayer University campuses. But that growth path was called into question in August when federal officials said they were considering new rules to ensure that students of post-secondary educational institutions are able to find jobs and are not overburdened with debt.

Read more: Strayer Education, Washington Post shares tumble on Apollo warning – Washington Business Journal

Published in: on October 14, 2010 at 2:38 pm  Comments (2)
Tags: , , , , , ,