(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)
The Baton Rouge Advocate reports that the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education discussed an analysis showing that the A-F grading system adopted in that state would find 46% of schools either D or F rated. The story makes clear that it could be higher next year. If the system had been used this year, the grade distribution would have looked like:
- A — 75 schools.
- B — 236 schools.
- C — 375 schools.
- D — 513 schools.
- F — 81 schools.
Louisiana had the lowest 4th grade reading scores in the nation of any state in 2009, and has been either near or at the bottom for a long time. A majority, 51% of Louisiana 4th graders scored “Below Basic” on 4th grade reading- making them functionally illiterate. Twice as many Ds as Bs sounds about right, maybe a little low.
The details of the Louisiana grading system differ from Florida. Schools will earn + and/or – along with their letter grades depending upon whether growth targets are met, and factors such as attendance influence the letter grades. With that noted, the chart that Louisianans should tatoo on to their foreheads until the gales of controversy blow over is below:
In the first year of the Florida grading system, 677 schools graded out D or F while only 515 schools earned A or B grades. The year before, in 1998, Florida’s 4th Grade NAEP reading scores were 5th from the bottom, so this was truth in advertising. On four separate occasions, policymakers raised the standards to receive an A or B grade, but you can see the trend for yourself: now there are more than 10 times the number of A/B grades as D/F.
Sidebar: I often get asked on the road why the total number of schools goes up so much in this chart. The number of charter schools took off, Florida experienced a good deal of population growth, but probably the biggest factor is the shrinkage of the C category, which is offstage in this chart.
NAEP serves as a source of external validation for this progress, and the rigor of the FCAT exam has remained steady against NAEP.
Arizona, Indiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Utah have all adopted A-F school grades in the last two years, following the lead of Florida and New York City. Additional states have been/are still considering adopting the policy.
School grading is a tough love policy. It’s a lot easier to throw extra money at schools, call yourself the “education governor” and kick the can down the road. School grading can work, and in fact has worked in Florida and New York City, but it could also easily fail if policymakers lose their nerve in the face of opposition. It requires an attitude similar to Churchill’s, who in his first Cabinet meeting as Prime Minister pronounced that he had nothing to offer but “blood, toil, sweat and tears.”
There is nothing magical about the Florida policies: they require moral courage, hard work, perseverance and patience to show results. Floridians rallied around their underperforming schools, ignored the howls of the reactionaries, rolled up their sleeves to get the job done.
Louisana spends $10,082 per year per child in the public school system, but fails to teach half their students how to read. Lock and load, Louisiana- it’s time to rise to the challenge.
Jay P. Greene's Blog 
[…] and is filed underneath school accountability. You can follow any responses to this entrance by a RSS 2.0 […]
” School grading can work, and in fact has worked in Florida and New York City . . . ”
On what basis are you stating as settled fact that school grading has worked in New York City? (I am a New York City public school parent.)
Remember, until those meddling kids at NYSED redefined the proficiency cut scores on state exams, the mayor and chancellor were happily giving something like 70% of elementary schools an A grade and giving only <3% of all schools a C/D/F grade. They proudly pointed to this distribution as irrefutable proof of the strength of their reforms, and there is no evidence to suggest that they wouldn't have been happy to maintain this ridiculous charade forever.
There's been hardly any improvement in the city's NAEP scores, and any increase in graduation rates (which are a primary component of a HS's grade) is tempered by the fact that only 79% of the city's high school graduates are actually college-ready.
Where's the silver lining? What about school grading is truly "working" here?
Tim-
There has in fact been quite a bit of improvement in NAEP scores in NYC, which you can look up for yourself here:
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/dataset.aspx
In 2002 (the earliest the data go back for NYC) the citywide average for free and reduced lunch children on 4th grade reading was 201. That is about a half a grade level lower than the lowest scoring statewide average for all students on the 2009 test (LA).
In 2009, NYC poor children scored 214. That is more than a grade level worth of progess better than the score in 2002 and it is higher than the statewide average for ALL students in 8 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico and Nevada.
I live in Arizona, so our statewide average includes all of our kids, including the 52.5% of students who do not qualify for a free or reduced lunch. Our Scottsdale, Flagstaff, Prescott and Catalina Foothills wealthy kids are included in our statewide sample. The fact that NYC poor kids are outscoring up on NAEP is first a signal that we badly need to get our act together (out statewide average of 210 is pathetic) but also quite an accomplishment for NYC.
The NAEP serves as an external barometer to whatever is going on on the state test. I have read about the typical funny business going on with cut scores, but that is a state rather than a city issue. The NAEP indicates that NYC is making progress despite the state’s shenanigans.
My apologies: you’re right about NAEP, and I should have been more specific. What I meant is that the NAEP gains in New York City aren’t head-and-shoulders better than NAEP gains in other urban districts, many of which are considered inhospitable to reform: http://eyeoned.org/content/joel-klein-vs-the-so-called-apologists-for-the-failed-status-quo_237/
In any case, what is the link between school grading and NAEP (or any other measure) improvement?
As for the NYC poor kids vs. other states’ fourth-grade scores issue, my amateur take is that A. in reality, there are actually not that many truly dysfunctional NYC district elementary schools (and remember, 96% of NYC public school kids go to traditional district schools). I’ve had the opportunity to visit a few low-scoring/poorly graded schools, and I’ve noticed a lot more similarities to high-performing schools than differences. It’s middle schools where the wheels start to fall off. B. In general New York City probably has superior (and more expensive) wraparound services than those states.
Tim-
The NAEP graphic linked to above does not make any control for student demographics. I ran a quick analysis on 4th grade reading scores from 2002 to 2009. The gains in NYC for low-income kids were 62.5% larger than for the other districts.
You are correct that there are other possible explanations for NYC impovement, and I have not examined the NYC case closely. Let me therefore clarify and say that while I am confident that NYC realised significant academic gains over the last decade, I cannot confidently ascribe them to any single policy.
Louisiana does poorly in education! Gee when did that start.
Perhaps when you Canadians moved in…