Madhu Pai on achievement gap and data analysis

Everyone knows there are clear advantages to economic privilege. I’ve always pondered if it would have been easier to teach in an affluent school district. Working in less affluent schools, however, allows for an awareness that advantages come in many packages unrelated to income. Unfortunately these kinds of advantages don’t always translate into success on tests created by other privileged people.

I’m not even sure what you’re arguing now.  Is it that standardized tests are biased, and/or not able to capture or reflect some other advantages (like?) or intelligences inherent in students devoid of economic privilege, to such a large extent as to make up a significant portion of the achievement gap? 

To Annielou. The people

Who wrote those last few posts expressed my thoughts so much more eloquently than I did.  

What is termed the “achievement gap” is in actuality a test-based measure, whether it’s  called PARCC or any of its predecessors. Some of the same people who argue against such narrow indicators of accomplishment also place a great deal of emphasis on their results. It is a sham pushed on our children, many of whom are proud and bright and encouraged by their families, but who are also negatively affected by constantly hearing that they are on the wrong end of a test driven achievement gap. It is especially disheartening to think that the data derived from such testing never seems to make its way into our classrooms.

Why isn't the PARCC data shared with teachers in your school? It has been available for months.

I see the PARCC as only a snapshot.  I know what my child us like.  I know his strengths and weaknesses.  I know about where his grades are going to end up, and why.  When I see his PARCC results they tend to mirror exactly what I expected.  I do not see it as achievement or lack of achievement.  I see it as "here is where this student is".

FilmCarp said:

I see the PARCC as only a snapshot.  I know what my child us like.  I know his strengths and weaknesses.  I know about where his grades are going to end up, and why.  When I see his PARCC results they tend to mirror exactly what I expected.  I do not see it as achievement or lack of achievement.  I see it as "here is where this student is".

When looking a class, or school, or district as a whole, if there is a specific domain that the whole group struggled with, it can be used as an indicator of a hole in the curriculum, or an area that a teacher may want to review how they taught and assessed it in the classroom. The school/district/teacher may want to use the feedback to inform a different approach this year. 

I agree completely.  My point was really that on an individual level we don't worry about it.  I like the fact that it provides a lot of data to analyze.

sprout said:

FilmCarp said:

I see the PARCC as only a snapshot.  I know what my child us like.  I know his strengths and weaknesses.  I know about where his grades are going to end up, and why.  When I see his PARCC results they tend to mirror exactly what I expected.  I do not see it as achievement or lack of achievement.  I see it as "here is where this student is".

When looking a class, or school, or district as a whole, if there is a specific domain that the whole group struggled with, it can be used as an indicator of a hole in the curriculum, or an area that a teacher may want to review how they taught and assessed it in the classroom. The school/district/teacher may want to use the feedback to inform a different approach this year. 

What about the achievement gap being seen outside of standardized testing ? -

In Providence, Rhode Island, a kindergarten teacher is helping to run program Providence Talks. Here is the article - https://www.npr.org/2014/03/17/289799002/efforts-to-close-the-achievement-gap-in-kids-start-at-home

from this article - 

"Riquetti now helps run Providence Talks, the city's ambitious effort to change this so-called word gap that researchers discovered two decades ago. They found that professional parents tend to chat away to their children, using sophisticated language even before kids are old enough to understand, while low-income parents tend to speak far less and use more directives: "Do this, don't do that."

On average, by the time they are 3 years old, children in professional families have heard about 30 million more words than children from lower-income households. Through a yearlong series of home visits, Providence Talks aims to coach low-income parents to speak more, and differently, to their children."

Another view addressing before birth and infancy - https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/addressing-the-achievement-gap-the-earliest-intervention/277141/

From the article - 

"But with much of a child's brain development occurring in the first three years of life, advocates at the Ounce and elsewhere say even that is too late, thrilled though they are by the preschool proposal. Poor babies as young as 9 months show a gap in cognitive development compared with wealthier peers, a gap that triples by the time they are 2 years old."

Another article about economic status - 

http://www.epi.org/press/achievement-gaps-exist-as-early-as-when-children-begin-kindergarten/

You would think that would be the case, but I have no idea what is on the PARCC test.  When I help administer it, I have no way of seeing what the questions are that are being asked.  Secondly, I have no idea how any of my students score on the test.  Third, by the time students receive their scores, they have already moved on from my class.  I don't think my district is unique in this. 

Another point is that I teach high schoolers.  Before the state required passing PARCC as a graduation requirement, many of them didn't even bother to try because they knew it didn't really matter.  I literally had some students fall asleep during the test or finish a section in 5 minutes. And once they fulfill the state's requirement, most students don't bother to take it after that.  In fact, my district was scolded by the state for not having enough participation. We use delayed openings on PARCC testing days and to me, it's a giant waste of time that could've been better used in actual class time and learning.  

sprout said:

FilmCarp said:

I see the PARCC as only a snapshot.  I know what my child us like.  I know his strengths and weaknesses.  I know about where his grades are going to end up, and why.  When I see his PARCC results they tend to mirror exactly what I expected.  I do not see it as achievement or lack of achievement.  I see it as "here is where this student is".

When looking a class, or school, or district as a whole, if there is a specific domain that the whole group struggled with, it can be used as an indicator of a hole in the curriculum, or an area that a teacher may want to review how they taught and assessed it in the classroom. The school/district/teacher may want to use the feedback to inform a different approach this year. 

the discussion by h4 Daniel is what I was trying to describe. Thanks

Really, safetyfirst? And with the same intention? Whether the infamous “gap” starts during the pre-school years or in the maternity ward, it does not preclude efforts to do what is best within our classrooms, schools, and districts.

Perseverance said:

You would think that would be the case, but I have no idea what is on the PARCC test.  When I help administer it, I have no way of seeing what the questions are that are being asked.  Secondly, I have no idea how any of my students score on the test.  Third, by the time students receive their scores, they have already moved on from my class.  I don't think my district is unique in this. 

1. I believe the score reports provide some information by standard, so it's not about seeing the questions as much as seeing if there are any content standards that were a struggle for students, and understanding the expectations of those standards:

 http://parcc-assessment.org/resources/educator-resources/model-content-frameworks

2. Districts have the data - not sure why they aren't sharing it. I've seen presentations about developing PLCs to discuss the results to inform curriculum and lesson plans.  I just did a google search and found this one: https://www.njascd.org/cms/lib/NJ01001271/Centricity/Domain/37/PARCC%20Presentation.pptx

3. The scores can be used to inform curriculum and instruction updates for future students. For example, I believe scores were available before the first day of school, so could be used to inform planning for the year.

I'm going on my experience as a teacher that PARCC does nothing to help educators.  We're consistently ranked as one of the top (if not the top depending upon the year) districts in the state.  In my and my colleagues' professional opinion, it's a massive waste of learning time.  

In what universe would I ever personally administer a test to my students where I didn't know what the questions were??  I wouldn't.  It makes absolutely no sense. There would be uproar from the students and parents and rightly so.  If I don't know what the questions are, I cannot help students after the test is over.

But wait! PARCC says just look at the standards that presented problems.  The standards are intentionally vague.  Let's say in theory my students had trouble with reading comprehension.  What about reading comprehension did they struggle with?  Again, I can't tell if I don't have the test questions and how the students answered said questions in front of me.  

Finally, the scores are not released until sometime in the summer.  That is not acceptable practice if one is to be expected to develop planning for the following year.  As many of my colleagues take on summer jobs or go away for the summer, I cannot count on being able to meet with my department to inform planning for the following year.  We use spring professional development to work on upcoming issues/planning/curriculum.  

sprout said:

Perseverance said:

You would think that would be the case, but I have no idea what is on the PARCC test.  When I help administer it, I have no way of seeing what the questions are that are being asked.  Secondly, I have no idea how any of my students score on the test.  Third, by the time students receive their scores, they have already moved on from my class.  I don't think my district is unique in this. 

1. I believe the score reports provide some information by standard, so it's not about seeing the questions as much as seeing if there are any content standards that were a struggle for students, and understanding the expectations of those standards:

 http://parcc-assessment.org/resources/educator-resources/model-content-frameworks

2. Districts have the data - not sure why they aren't sharing it. I've seen presentations about developing PLCs to discuss the results to inform curriculum and lesson plans.  I just did a google search and found this one: https://www.njascd.org/cms/lib/NJ01001271/Centricity/Domain/37/PARCC%20Presentation.pptx

3. The scores can be used to inform curriculum and instruction updates for future students. For example, I believe scores were available before the first day of school, so could be used to inform planning for the year.

OK. Sounds like everything's fine, and you don't really need the feedback. 

(Note: I don't see an ELA Standard for high school called "Reading Comprehension", but maybe I'm missing something).

Wow you're rude. First of all, thanks for not responding to any of my points that I made.

What is your profession?  Are you an educator?  Because if not, I don't tell how other professions how to do their job. 

Please let me know what you do so I can cast judgement in the same way.  Thank you for treating me as a professional. 

sprout said:

OK. Sounds like everything's fine, and you don't really need the feedback. 

(Note: I don't see an ELA Standard for high school called "Reading Comprehension", but maybe I'm missing something).

I'm well aware that educators are professionals. Which is why I was surprised that I couldn't find the 'vague Reading Comprehension standard' you were referring to.

Perseverance said:

But wait! PARCC says just look at the standards that presented problems.  The standards are intentionally vague.  Let's say in theory my students had trouble with reading comprehension.  What about reading comprehension did they struggle with?  Again, I can't tell if I don't have the test questions and how the students answered said questions in front of me.  

Okay.  Obviously this is going nowhere and is taking away from the original intent of the discussion. Yet again, you're not responding to any of my points and are just being difficult for the sake of being difficult.  All I did was very politely offer my perspective on PARCC and how it works in my district and you jumped all over me.  I'm not entirely sure why or what I've done to deserve that.  Regardless, I think you're rude and I think I'm done with this discussion and you.  The only reason why I have the time to participate in this discussion is because I'm on leave to take care of my newborn. However, I think there are far more positive ways to fill my time while he sleeps. 

sprout said:

I'm well aware that educators are professionals. Which is why I was surprised that I couldn't find the 'vague Reading Comprehension standard' you were referring to.

Perseverance said:

But wait! PARCC says just look at the standards that presented problems.  The standards are intentionally vague.  Let's say in theory my students had trouble with reading comprehension.  What about reading comprehension did they struggle with?  Again, I can't tell if I don't have the test questions and how the students answered said questions in front of me.  

OK, here is my response point-by-point:

Perseverance said:

I'm going on my experience as a teacher that PARCC does nothing to help educators.  We're consistently ranked as one of the top (if not the top depending upon the year) districts in the state.  In my and my colleagues' professional opinion, it's a massive waste of learning time.  

It was to this that I was responding that from your end, it sounds like everything's fine, and you don't really need the feedback from PARCC. (Other than that the scores may be used in the high state rankings of your district).

 Perseverance said:

In what universe would I ever personally administer a test to my students where I didn't know what the questions were??  I wouldn't.  It makes absolutely no sense. There would be uproar from the students and parents and rightly so.  If I don't know what the questions are, I cannot help students after the test is over.

But wait! PARCC says just look at the standards that presented problems.  The standards are intentionally vague.  Let's say in theory my students had trouble with reading comprehension.  What about reading comprehension did they struggle with?  Again, I can't tell if I don't have the test questions and how the students answered said questions in front of me.  

With any standardized testing, whether it's NJ ASK, PARCC, AP, PSAT, SAT, ACT, etc., teachers won't know the test questions. One knows the general topics the test will cover, and teach that material, and maybe have some example questions. My understanding is that the state standards (which are currently aligned to Common Core Standards) define the topics the test will cover. Hence my surprise with your critique of an ELA state standard that I don't think exists:

http://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/

Finally, the scores are not released until sometime in the summer.  That is not acceptable practice if one is to be expected to develop planning for the following year.  As many of my colleagues take on summer jobs or go away for the summer, I cannot count on being able to meet with my department to inform planning for the following year.  We use spring professional development to work on upcoming issues/planning/curriculum.  

This seems to be a question for an administrator/curriculum supervisor. Curriculum supervisors are 12 month positions (right?), so it's possible they could incorporate feedback from the PARCC results released over the summer into the previously developed plans. But, again, that's a discussion to have with them.

yes Annielou I agree that the schools should do everything that they can for all students. It is a tall order however. I realize that it is so very complicated. I can see that we are all very passionate about this subject and that can’t be a bad thing. 

annielou said:

We have children in school for seven hours a day and what we do within that time period matters and can make a difference.

My assumption, whatever its worth, is that the task of making up for children’s deficits during the first five years of schooling becomes all the harder for a district if there’s pushback against a lack of stimulation for students who don’t need extra help.

Are there examples of school districts with similar demographics that don't have an achievement gap or at least have a much smaller achievement gap?

If so, what are they doing differently than SOMA?  Has anyone explored this?

yahooyahoo said:

Are there examples of school districts with similar demographics that don't have an achievement gap or at least have a much smaller achievement gap?

If so, what are they doing differently than SOMA?  Has anyone explored this?

I haven’t compared the demographics, but in a letter to the district and on the Black Parents Workshop website, Walter Fields has pointed to Elizabeth, Hackensack and Rockville Centre as models.