Login | Create New Account | Facebook | Twitter
Homes | Jobs | Wheels | Worship | IShopTheTri | Move To Kingsport | Kingsport Chamber of Commerce
Print
'Report Card' grades Tennessee schools
KINGSPORT — Kingsport City Schools received an “A” in academic achievement in math, science and social studies and a “B” in reading on the 2009 Tennessee Department of Education Report Card.
However, in value-added Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) scores — which measure how much progress students have made in one year — the system got a B in math, C’s in reading and social studies, and a D in science. Individual schools got anywhere from A’s to F’s in value-added scores.
“As a system we are showing some good scores. But we have areas to grow,” Damon Cathey, KCS assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction, said Tuesday afternoon. His comments followed the morning public release of the State Report Card data.
Statewide, schools scored an average of straight B’s in achievement and straight C’s in value-added.
In Kingsport, one bright spot at the elementary level was Lincoln Elementary.
It got straight B’s in achievement, which is the state average, and on value-added got an A in math, B’s in reading and science, and a C in social studies compared to the state average of straight C’s.
And Jefferson Elementary got straight A’s in achievement but in value-added got an A in math, C in reading, and B’s in social studies and science.
On the down side, Roosevelt Elementary in achievement got a B in math and C’s in the other three subjects and on value-added got D’s in math and reading and F’s in social studies and science.
This year’s scores use a new baseline, meaning they were re-indexed to 2009 levels instead of the old 1998 level. Next year, the scoring of the results will be tougher to reflect curriculum changes and more academic rigor.
“Because we have been on an aggressive path of improvement with the Tennessee Diploma Project, it was necessary to utilize this transition year to change our calculation methods and more accurately demonstrate student progress in an effort to pursue higher standards,” Tennessee Education Commissioner Timothy Webb said in a written statement Tuesday.
He said two major changes have been implemented for calculation of scores on the State Report Card.
First, the baseline year for comparing student achievement has been reset using 2009 test scores. Second, the grade scale used to determine all grades A through F has been dramatically revised, meaning scores considered to be an A “proficient” in years past may now be a B or C, Webb said.
“Plans are being developed,” Cathey said of work at every school to improve both achievement and value-added scores.
At the high school level, Dobyns-Bennett High School exceeded the state goal of a 90 percent graduation rate, and ACT test results also exceeded the state average, especially in math, Cathey said.
The system three-year composite ACT average score was 22.2 compared to a statewide average of 20.7, and the one-year composite was 22.3 compared to the state’s 20.6.
“We’re really happy with our graduation rate. That continues to be a point of pride with our schools,” KCS spokeswoman Amy Greear said.
She and Cathey said graduation efforts include math coaches and other academic coaches at the middle and high school levels.
Last week Cathey, KCS Director of Accountability Dory Creech and literacy coaches went to every school to go over the State Report Card data and look at ways to improve it for next year.
However, while this year’s scores generally went down because of re-indexing, next year’s scores may be down, too, because they will be scored on a tougher, yet-to-be-determined scale.
In general, with the new index, having lower value-added scores is not necessarily a bad thing as long as achievement scores are OK.
“We’d be more concerned if we had a C in achievement,” Greear said.
For instance, at Jackson Elementary, value-added was C in math, D in reading and F’s in social studies and science. However, achievement came out straight B’s.
And at Johnson Elementary, achievement was straight A’s while valued-added was C’s in math and reading and B’s in social studies and science.
Likewise, Robinson Middle School had straight A’s in achievement but a C in reading and D’s in the other three categories in value-added.
Sevier Middle in achievement got A’s in math and science and B’s in reading and social studies, while value-added was a B in math, D’s in reading and science, and a C in social studies.
Washington Elementary had all B’s in achievement but in value-added had B’s in math and science, an A in social studies and a C in reading.
And at Kennedy Elementary, achievement scores were B’s in math, social studies and science and a C in reading, but in valueadded Kennedy got a C in math and F’s in the other three subjects.
“With our continued focus in key academic areas and the tireless work of our teachers and administrators to address and implement improvements, we are poised to face the challenges ahead as we tackle a more rigorous curriculum,” Superintendent Richard Kitzmiller said in an afternoon news release. “Our goal is for every student to be ready for college and the work force upon graduation, no exception.”
The full State Report Card for the state, individual systems and individual schools is available online by CLICKING HERE.
To comment, you must register.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the registered user participating in online discussions. You agree not to post comments off topic, abusive, obscene, defamatory, vulgar, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned.
Most Popular News
Today | Week | Month | Year
- Oprah says prayer, thought influenced decision to end TV show
- Gang killed people for their fat; it's worth $60,000 a gallon on black market
- Black Friday 'doorbusters' dirty little secrets - what bargain-hungry consumers need to know
- Machete bandit robs same Kingsport Sunoco station for second time
- Man accused of stealing large amount of metals from Bristol business
- Proposed Aug. 2 start of Kingsport schools might move Fun Fest events
- Judge strikes down Tennessee guns-in-bars law
- Movie Review: Apocalyptic ‘2012’ sacrifices story for special effects
- Gallup says Obama's daily approval rating drips below 50% for first time
- Kingsport police going paperless with PDAs
Most Popular News
Today | Week | Month | Year
Featured Blogger
Sexting: Grandma, grandpa say it isn't so!
By Don Fenley - 11-14-2009
Sending naughty photos and text messages isn't just for the younger set anymore. Shortly after the first of the year I happened onto a trend ...
Most Discussed
Today | Week | Month | Year
- Judge strikes down Tennessee guns-in-bars law
- With Mom's OK, officer uses Taser to subdue 10-year-old girl who didn't want to go to bed
- America is heading down the road to socialism
- Photo of Obama not saluting at ceremony is not what outrage e-mails claim
- Blountville man charged with rape of a child
- Black Friday 'doorbusters' dirty little secrets - what bargain-hungry consumers need to know
- Oprah says prayer, thought influenced decision to end TV show
- Two arrested in Kingsport prostitution sting
- Kingsport nurse accused of stealing credit cards from elderly patient's daughter
- Proposed Aug. 2 start of Kingsport schools might move Fun Fest events
Most Discussed
Today | Week | Month | Year
topjobs
Browse Premiere Local Businesses
Home | Login | Local News | Obits | Sports | Business | Opinions | Blogs | Classifieds| Business Profiles
Web Feeds/RSS | Contact Us | Customer Service | Privacy Statement | Common Questions | E-Edition | Subscriptions | Site Map
© 2009 Kingsport Publishing Corporation - Innovation by Times Digital Group
Glad to see that they finally recalibrated scores - value-added scores were still working off criteria set in 1998, so after 10 years something like 70%+ of schools were getting A's. This new data gives parents and others something a little more realistic to work with, and allows them to more easily highlight things they should be concerned about (or proud of as the case may be). Since value-added scores reflect a school's contribution to student learning, I'd be particularly concerned about C and D scores for individual schools.
If anybody wants more information on value-added assessment, they should look at http://www.education-consumers.org/tnproject/tnabout.htm; there's a lot of information on what value-added data is and how it can be used to improve achievement.
neener, neener, neener...
now, let's argue.
jeremiah,
keep on arguing amongst yourselves.
you are trying to create an argument where there isn't one.
are u serious?
I'm not discussing 2009 versus 2008 scores. Yes, I saw that they changed scoring methods. If I was comparing 2009 to 2008 then that would be relevant. But it is not. We have, for 2009, both "criterion referenced achievement scores" and "value added scores". I have pointed out that the article doesn't describe what either of these mean. I also dug up the official definitions of these terms. This was little help either because the definitions are obviously written to be as opaque and unhelpful as possible so that the public can't determine what the heck they are talking about. Then we have others coming along saying that no one should be allowed to even discuss the test scores, which is frankly an absurd position.
jeremiah,
i didn't attack your comments.
all i said is that based on the information, and the fact that the scoring has changed, these grades don't mean a lot until enough time has passed to determine whether or not the scores either increase or decrease.
they have given us the current scores. what do we compare those to? we don't have any previous scores, do we? so, we must wait until next year to see if there is growth...correct?
a grade of "C" may seem bad...unless the score was originally an "F".
this is why i said they should have waited until the full details were available before giving out the information. then, we could base our opinions on the facts of the scores instead of what we all think they mean.
"If a school has an almost 100% pass rate on [a particular class], Value-added says that if the school, grade or system does not improve above that rate, it has failed to meet its benchmark."
If this is truly what it means (which the state web site's definition gives no hint at), then the value added rating is both meaningless and useless, a waste of time and money to even bother calculating.
"this website gives a little more information about why the scores are lower"
I am aware that they have reset the scoring methods and that has nothing to do with my comments.
There are "criterion referenced achievement scores" that we are supposedly good at in comparison to the "value added scores" at which we are doing poorly. So what does each mean? Well, there are the definitions.
"Criterion referenced tests measure an individual student’s performance against a predetermined set of standards which are established based on the curriculum."
"Value-added measures student progress within a grade and subject, which demonstrates the influence the school has on the students’ performance. This reporting provides diagnostic information for improving educational opportunities for students at all achievement levels."
Basically, Value-added is a statistical reference which was developed by Dr. William Sanders formerly of UTK. What it does is look at three years of test scores and then sets a prediction of what the next year's score should be. So, if a school or system or teacher scored a bit higher each year for three years, Value added predicts that that score will continue to increase. It does not take into account any other factors including discipline problems, socio-economics, or even student ability. If, as has happened in several schools locally (but not in this particular report card) a school has an almost 100% pass rate on, let's say Biology I, Value-added says that if the school, grade or system does not improve above that rate, it has failed to meet its benchmark. Letter grades are given based upon how close the average score is to the predicted score. Basically it is a statistical computation that has made Dr. Sanders very wealthy.
i think it would've been best to publish this information at one time rather than give a little bit now and a little bit later.
it's more complicated than assuming the lower scores are the school's fault and the higher scores were obtained by the children through osmosis.
this website gives a little more information about why the scores are lower:
https://news.tennesseeanytime.org/node/3696
basically, the standards have been set higher. it will actually take at least a year (or more) to determine whether there is improvement or not. if a grade is a "B" then what does that mean? what was the previous grade? if the previous grade was a "D" then that shows significant growth.
i'm not going to attempt to explain it because it's not really that simple. for anyone who cares, it's worth researching, asking questions, and hopefully the KTN will publish more information in terms that the general public can understand.
i think it would be worth biting your tongue until the definitions and changes are explained in more depth.
For those interested, the definitions can take a while to find on the state site and are not included in the various pdf reports they have. (I was not able no find the actual 2009 report, that seems to be a "restricted access" document, being kept secret.)
Anyway the definitions are here,
http://tn.gov/education/reportcard/rpt_crd_terms.shtml
"Criterion referenced tests measure an individual student’s performance against a predetermined set of standards which are established based on the curriculum."
"Value-added measures student progress within a grade and subject, which demonstrates the influence the school has on the students’ performance. This reporting provides diagnostic information for improving educational opportunities for students at all achievement levels."
So what does this mean? Sounds like the value added is a test of what the school itself has actually taught. That is where we are doing poorly. Criterion referenced then would be how well the kids are doing based on their own efforts, perhaps by texting, watching sesame street, and so forth.
These sorts of articles would be more helpful if they would explain the meaning of particular technical terms with special meaning such as the difference between the "criterion referenced achievement scores" that we are supposedly good at in comparison to the "value added scores" at which we are doing poorly.