Saturday, July 15, 2006

High School MEAP Scores for 2006 - Another example of the demise of our educational system"

2006 MEAP Test Scores Stink Worse than 2005

Only 52.37% of the students in the graduating Class of 2006 were proficient in math, compared to 56.85% in the Class of 2005. In science, the percent dropped from 58.4% to 56.77%; in writing, from 57.25% to 55.19%; and in reading, from 77.88% to 70.08%. In social studies, 36.79% of the students in the Class of 2006 were proficient, compared to 33.83% in the Class of 2005.

qualityg says ... The numbers are sad. The News release is really sad and more proof the School System is in a state of demise..

Post ON MEAP From Fall 2005

qualityg is still watching you

OK, I have written on this before and if you think I’m going to stop you’re wrong! Please start looking at the big end-to-end picture. You may want to read the post (“We’ll Be Watching You") from April/May post on the same subject as a pre-requisite (one of many on site).

I have color coded some words and paragraphs that should be answered and in some cases questioned further (I ask some). Please remember, I’m just a concerned parent, I have no political or educational stake (i.e., job) at risk, just the future of our children.

If you care, pass on to someone else that needs to know what lays ahead for our Education System.

In the 2005 Michigan Educational Assessment Program test, 5.4% fewer students met or exceeded state standards in science, compared to the 2004 test.

Reading test scores, which jumped by nearly 10 percentage points for the Class of 2004 compared to 2003, showed a continued increase for the Class of 2005. The 84,729 students (77.9 percent) from the Class of 2005 who met or exceeded state reading standards increased nearly two percentage points over the Class of 2004, 80,214 students (76.2 percent).

Results in the other subject areas assessed show declines as compared to previous classes. In Writing, 62,604 students (57.2 percent) of the Class of 2005 met or exceeded state standards compared to 60,979 (57.8 percent) of the Class of 2004. In Mathematics, 62,135 students (56.9 percent) of the Class of 2005 met or exceeded state standards compared to 62,109 (58.7 percent) from the previous class.

In Science, 63,102 students (58.0 percent) of the Class of 2005 met or exceeded state standards compared to 66,901 (63.4 percent) of the Class of 2004.
qualityg says… this reads like an improvement.

The number of students in the Class of 2005 who met or exceeded state standards in Social Studies was 36,151 (33.8 percent) compared to 36,026 (35.0 percent) for the class of 2004.
qualityg says… this is disgusting, do you see what is happening, we have tampered and distorted the whole for the few! What about Art, Dance, Drama, Band, where are they? That’s right, can’t measure them so they drop to second-class status. It's about balance, it's about working together and pulling in the right direction.

The state Board of Education has a special meeting planned for July 28 to discuss high school issues.
qualityg says… I’ll be watching, will this meeting be open to the public? If so where and at what time?

"We're viewing these scores right now as support for the fact that Michigan does need to revise its high school standards in all areas and make them more rigorous," Hughes said.
qualityg says… you are in a reactive mode and you have no reliable facts or data shown on your web site, please provide others that can substantiate this claim?

School districts are viewing the science scores with concern and want to see what's working and what isn't, said Suzanne Klein, superintendent of Grosse Pointe Public Schools, where high school science scores slipped a couple of points from last year.
qualityg says… are you telling me you are not doing this as a whole, but each district will decide? Folks, these are after the fact result measures, where are the process measures that alert you to problems, there are none. This process is NOT stable; in fact it’s OUT OF CONTROL. What is the Process?
Gayle Green, assistant superintendent for curriculum for the Macomb Intermediate School District, said it's important to keep the scores in perspective.

If the district "dropped six points and the state's dropped six points, that's probably a function of the test," Green said.
Dr. Deming says … You should not ask questions without knowledge.

Other scores fluctuated, but not by significant amounts. In reading, 1.7% more students met or exceeded the state standards and fewer students scored in the lowest level. Green said the two-year reading trend, with an 11.7% increase thanks to a 10% jump last year, is good news because it shows the improvement continued into the next year.
qualityg says... how can we continue to use numbers for our children, there is no pain in numbers, show me the faces of the students who are not measuring up to a system where there will always be variation.

"One year does not make or break an achievement score and one year does not make or break a trend," Green said.
qualityg says…what trend? If you think Bar charts shown on the “Trend Reports” listed below they do not tell the story. Bar charts are categorical. Control Charts will show Trends, and will let you know if process or test is stable.

All other categories were down slightly, including a 0.6% loss in writing; 1.8% drop in math and a 1.2% loss in social studies. With the exception of science, the changes between 2004 and 2005 were insignificant.

"Every test is independent of every other test, so a little bit up, a little bit down, it's statistically meaningless," said David Plank of the Education Policy Center at Michigan State University. "It's random noise."

qualityg says… this is not noise, “By what Method” do you make this statement. Please provide data. I see no control charts that show stability, I see tampering from year to year in trying to hit a moving target, if statistically meaningless, why measure at all! Two terms often used in describing the types of variation are signal and noise. Variation that is expected, usual and typical is called noise. Variation that is really unusual and unexpected is called signal. We must understand the difference in signal and noise before we can properly respond to either.

qualityg recommended (even sent an Email) in May to Dr. Plank – “I learned from a very wise man (Dr. W. Edwards Deming - that when you’re dealing with statistics it’s best to be trained by a master, if not more damage can be done. Not falling into that category (I consider myself an applicationist) I would suggest Mr. David Plank co director of the Education Policy Center at Michigan State University contact an expert from their Statistics Department (preferably a theoretical statistician). Please ask that person to explain Dr. Deming’s Funnel Experiment before you continue to recalibrate a system that sounds like it is out of control.

MEAP Summary Reports (following reports produced by the Michigan Department of Education)

HS Class of 2005

No comments: