jhuppent@hotmail.com 
Member since Apr 23, 2016


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Ex-Education Superintendent John Huppenthal And I Have a Rare Moment Of Agreement, About State Grades

David,

Tomorrow morning, I am flying out to a school district over 1,500 miles away, perhaps the worst school district in the U.S. In Sean Reardon's national ranking, based on academic gains, not test scores, this school district ranked at the very bottom, as low as you can go, the first percentile. What's worse, they are a school district of significant size. Given the normal curve in statistics, that means that some of these schools have to be so bad, that the students go downhill instead of uphill.

That may seem impossible, but in 2013, we had 2,000 students from over 80,000 who scored lower in math in 8th grade than they scored in 3rd grade, 5 years earlier.

I don't know what to expect. I am going to spend five days going from school to school talking to principals making presentations and observing. I've had a lot of luck with this approach, just walk in and ask to see the principal.

Wish me luck. As the Blues Brothers would say, on a mission from God. Don't know if I can do any good or not.

1 like, 5 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 12/03/2019 at 4:03 PM

Re: “They've Improved The State's School Grading System. Now It Tells Us Even Less Than It Used To.

David,

I came back to look at this again. The typical school, meaning the median school in that list, in TUSD ranks at the 30th percentile in statewide gains. You can excuse test scores based on poverty, you can't excuse gain scores. That's your systems. Do they measure teacher job satisfaction? If they do, do they read the suggestions for changes carefully and make the changes? Are administrators out visiting classrooms every day? Are principals frequently in the parking lot in the morning talking to parents?

Are teachers coming to class with prepared lesson plans, ready to teach?

For a district with such resources, that raises major questions.

The danger is that the feedback loop just creates more pressure which most often results in lower quality, not an improvement.

But, if I were on that board, I would be reexamining every system.

0 likes, 11 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 12/03/2019 at 2:46 PM

Re: “Ex-Education Superintendent John Huppenthal And I Have a Rare Moment Of Agreement, About State Grades

David,

Strange to see my name in a headline again, uncomfortable.

But, doesn't matter that we agree, our current education culture grew around annual testing over the last 100 years or so. That culture is in the minds of hundreds of millions of parents and students. Took me 18 years on the education committee and reading every study to fully grasp the impact of annual testing on education culture.

I advocate focusing on parent, student and teacher surveys to reduce the toxicity of annual testing. If you focus on improving quality from each vantage point, you can dilute the toxic effects of standardize testing.

Letter grading amps up the toxic effect of annual standardized testing. Here's a job for you David. Track down all the letter grade states. Find out if there has been a differential shift in NAEP scores between letter grade and non-letter grade states.

I recently looked at Tempe Elementary School District, analyzing their gains the same way I looked at TUSD. Why Tempe? They not only do the annual testing, they test three times a year internally. I like the test they use: Northwest Evaluation Association (computer adaptive). They make almost a perfect case study because they have been doing it for so long. So, has all this testing raised their gains above the statewide average? No. Their average school ranking is 100 slots below the statewide average.

This is a well run district.

Small sample size but interesting.

Three scientists in the 60s revolutionized companies. One of these, Deming, built a revolution around sampling to improve quality instead of inspecting. All these tests are inspections with all the damage done by inspections. NAEP, by comparison, is a sample. A large school district like TUSD could sample instead of inspect.

Its hard to imagine a school district being able to make that cultural leap.

2 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 12/03/2019 at 9:00 AM

Re: “They've Improved The State's School Grading System. Now It Tells Us Even Less Than It Used To.

In 1996, David Garcia (he was my analyst for several years while I was chairman of Senate Education), we set up a NAEP style sampling system for Arizona. But, instead of pulling a sample, accurate to plus or minus 3 percentile points (your comment about Black scores in 2019 noted) and measuring once every two years, the system would have measured twice a year and had a sample size large enough to be accurate to within one percentile point.

Unfortunately, the whole thing just mystified people. No one understood it.

2 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 11/23/2019 at 9:24 PM

Re: “They've Improved The State's School Grading System. Now It Tells Us Even Less Than It Used To.

Let me redo my headings on my chart.



Letter Grade ...........................Percentile of..............Letter..............Growth..................School
Academic Growth ..................all schools..................Grade..............Points
Rank..........................................(higher is.............................................in letter
when compared .....................better).................................................grade system
to 1,335
k-8 schools

51.................................................. 96%.............................. B..................48.......................Ochoa
73.................................................. 95%.............................. A..................47.......................Davis
86.................................................. 94%.............................. A..................47........................Soleng
100................................................93%............................... A..................46.....................Carrillo
135............................................... 90%............................... A..................45.....................Fruchten
173............................................... 87%............................... B..................45.........................Manzo
194............................................... 85%............................... B..................44................John B Wright
199............................................... 85%............................... A..................44.........................Dunham
....
1244................................................7%................................D.................27..........................Pistor
1245................................................7%................................C.................27...........................Bloom
1270................................................5%................................D..................26................Booth-Fickett
1281................................................4%............................... D..................25.........................Gridley
1289................................................3%................................D..................24.......................Blenman
1294................................................3%................................D..................24.........................Robison
1302................................................2%................................D..................23......................Davidson
1306................................................2%................................D..................23.................Mission View
1319................................................1%................................F..................20..........................Safford

Save this data to see how it holds for next year. When they calculate classroom growth data from year to year, 25% of the top quartile of teachers end up in the bottom quartile the next year. In other words, there is a lot of statistical spray and froth in growth data. It's the small n size issue. A large number of students aren't included: kindergarten, first, second and third grade students aren't included and their scale score growth is about 55% of the entire k through 12 total. Another 20 to 30% of students aren't included because they aren't full year students.

Yet, growth data and rankings are the only meaning that you can extract from test score data. All other data is an illusion, which David mentions frequently.

So, in the end, test score accountability is a dead end, doing more damage than good.

2 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 11/23/2019 at 9:18 AM

Re: “They've Improved The State's School Grading System. Now It Tells Us Even Less Than It Used To.

I agree with you on this: the letter grading system does more damage than good. And, I am the guy who originally put it into state law. But, if I hadn't, someone else would have.

They mix two calculations which can't be mixed: growth and achievement.

People would be better off if these two components weren't mixed, just each clearly stated.

The latest letter grade, as you clearly state, puts much more weight on growth. It does this not only by weighting growth more but by creating separate categories of points for growth of Special Education student, Title One students, English Language Learners, etc.

In doing so, it makes those students more important.

Just today, I was explaining to some administrative staff how important it was to provide an opportunity to a group of very challenging, incredibly challenging, special ed students. I used the letter grade system to make my point. This was a C rated school, so they were listening carefully.

0 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 11/22/2019 at 9:56 PM

Re: “"Let Them Eat Choice" And Other Takeaways From the National NAEP Test Results

'Why are Arizona's scores improving while the nation is going down?"

"No one knows."

Really???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

The scientific method is to examine Arizona differences for an explanation and to think deeply as to why, logically, these differences might cause the improvement.

Maybe, it's spending per student
Arizona spent $8,300
The nation spend $12,756
Some states spend as much as $22,358
That's $3.5 billion to $14 billion per year difference

Maybe its the temperature.
Arizona's average temperature is: 60 degrees
The nations average temperature is: 47 degrees

Maybe its annual rainfall.
Arizona's annual rainfall is 8 inches
U.S. annual rainfall is 30 inches

Maybe it's gasoline prices
Arizona's average gas price is $3.03 per gallon
Nation's average gas price is $2.61

Maybe its income
U.S. median household income is $63,179
Arizona's median household income is $62,283

Maybe its Arizona juvenile murders which have dropped from 70 in 1992 to 20 in 2008 to 12 in 2014, the most recent report year. Who knows how low they are now?

Maybe its car thefts by juveniles, dropping from 620 to 289

Maybe its robberies, dropping from 461 in 2008 to 221 in 2014

I don't know, what, oh what could it be???????? What Arizona policy or aspect could be resulting in our test scores going up?

What, oh what, are we doing that's different?

0 likes, 11 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 11/22/2019 at 2:49 AM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2019 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation