I could spend a big chunk of my morning analyzing the state school report card data tables, which show that thirteen out of 154 South Dakota high schools got more than 90% of their graduates ready for college or careers last year:
| High School | % college/career ready |
| Rutland | 100% |
| Arlington | 96% |
| Faulkton | 93% |
| Montrose | 93% |
| Britton-Hecla | 93% |
| Bison | 92% |
| Lake Preston | 92% |
| Platte-Geddes | 92% |
| Webster Area | 92% |
| Wall | 92% |
| Ipswich | 91% |
| Armour | 91% |
…while seventeen high schools had college/career readiness rates below 30%:
| High School | % college/career ready |
| Washington | 30% |
| Harrisburg | 28% |
| Sisseton | 24% |
| Huron | 24% |
| Bennett County | 23% |
| White River | 23% |
| Frederick | 22% |
| Estelline | 20% |
| McLaughlin | 18% |
| Newell | 17% |
| Andes Central | 14% |
| Eagle Butte | 5% |
| Todd County | 4% |
| Rapid City Alternative | 1% |
| Chester Area Cyber School | 0% |
| Oelrichs | 0% |
| Wakpala | 0% |
But expert in the field and Sioux Falls superintendent Brian Maher tells Don Jorgensen the state report card doesn’t really tell us anything:
“I would say what is troubling is that we are putting that out to the state that says 32 percent of our students are college and career ready and I would say that’s erroneous,” Superintendent Brian Maher said.
Maher says that’s because the state Department of Education gives juniors and seniors a chance to take what’s called the National Career Readiness Certificate exam, but it’s not required.
Since only five of 1,600 students in the district took the exam, it resulted in the low score.
…Maher says the district could improve its state score if it required all students to take the NCRC exam, but doesn’t feel it would make them any more ready than they already are.
“We have to be mindful of what does it mean for kids. If it’s good for kids, we’re all in, but until we are convinced that, we’ll take the ding and answer the questions annually and we’ll continue to prepare kids for the workforce,” Maher said [Don Jorgensen, “Superintendent Says Bad Report Card for School District Is Misleading,” KELO-TV, 2019.01.14].
Sioux Falls Washington scored 30%; Roosevelt, 31%; Lincoln, 36%; and New Tech, 36%. But never mind: in Trumpistan, data and evidence are meaningless unless we want them to be.
Hey, Legislature! Since the biggest school district in the state says the DOE report card is useless, how about we cut the funding for it and divert the savings to that civics test Governor Noem wants? Or will that test produce meaningless scores, too?
The report card is required by ESSA. Complain to the congressional delegation.
ESSA requires report cards, but if the state doesn’t standardize the way data is collected, the data are useless in a comparison of districts. The test may still might be valuable to individual students or to teachers/counsellors of those students. It depends on what is done with the data at the district level, school and classroom level.
That report card and the Sioux Falls superintendent’s comment that only five of 1,600 students took the test is confusing in the extreme. The data table seems to show hundreds of students from each of the Sioux Falls high schools took the test. An easy check on the data would be to compare it with that of students who took the ACT and SAT tests. There is clearly a problem with how this kind of data is reported.
When U.S. achievement scores are compared with that of other nations, there is a huge boondoggle. The U.S. has educational policy which includes and tests all public school students. Other .nations have systems which stream elementary students into different elementary tracks of academic and vocational training. They send only the brightest and most academically ambitious students into the academic track, and those are the students who take the achievement tests. Thus, a very select group of students is compared to the entire student body from U.S. schools. Much of the criticism of U.S. education is based upon this boondoggle, and this latest South Dakota report card seems to be just such a boondoggle.
Absolutely amazing how this story just had to include Trump in some way for Corey. Just proves the point of how crazy the Left is in regards to current administration, politics etc.
Sad. Maher is a Democrat. How about you ask the Teacher’s Union about this? Sioux Falls being the largest teacher employer.
KOOK WATCH – Steve Pearson (paranoid and delusional tendencies)
Because the state does not require all hs students to take the NCRC, reporting data from that test creates a false picture. The test needs to be mandatory or the data should not be reported. Another unfunded mandate?
The data collection is standardized and thoroughly vetted before going public. The state plan in on the DOE website with the details. SF had chosen to not be part of the various programs that contribute to the College and Career indicator. They had ample opportunity to provide input when the ESSA plan was being developed. They are just crying foul because they aren’t perfect.
[Unable to deal with the actual content presented, Steve once again defaults to his flimsy palette of partisan things he’s learned to shout from Fox and Breitbart. You never fail to bore me, Steve, or to open your mouth without letting anything useful out.]
Knitter23, would ESSA allow us to replace standardized tests with classroom observations by DOE personnel?
Cory,
No to observations as the law is written as the technicalities of such a system would never be able to meet the rigors of peer review related to reliability and validity across all students, schools, and district.
The data for the NCRC aren’t collected in a standard way in a standard time frame by each district. That’s fine. I think some standardized tests are fine. I think too many of these standardized tests aren’t good for education. The DOE, apparently, wants to embarrass districts into wasting more time on another test. I’ve had people I’ve helped use similar tests. They can be useful for individuals, but I don’t think they are useful for districts. I think the pants needs to be pulled off the DOE on this one.
Donald,
NCRC is administered in a very standardized manner with staff from the Dept of Labor managing the test administration. It is a district choice to participate but there several other avenues for meeting the Career and College Readiness indicator at the high school. Please read the state ESSA plan before continuing to discredit the process which is evolving to have more possible ways to meet the indicator. This was the first year of the new report card that includes the new elements required by law.
Reminds me of the time many years ago when I was working on a grant application for SD state government dealing with postsecondary technical education. I needed to get current enrollment figures from each of the tech institutes – FAST. Three of the four responded almost immediately, while one ignored me and didn’t return a follow-up phone call. I was so upset that I sent out a “draft” one-page report to all four tech institutes to verify the accuracy of their information. For the institute that hadn’t replied, I said “zero” students were enrolled. Two hours later, that institute provided their missing data. I was a cheeky so-and-so, but I was desperate and it worked!
The point of data should be to inform instruction. After swimming in these numbers I am not sure how to answer these two questions: How are SD schools doing? Really, what is a “good” score? 2) Does this data show we ought to be doing something differently?
If that data does not point me toward an answer, what then is the point? Is this all really about bragging rights — school X has 3.67 points more than school Y — School A sorts out above school B on the list?
When the fog clears, I am willing to bet that the data would show that students from affluent neighborhoods/areas do better than poorer kids. How do we address that chasm in policy?
Excuse me? The Superintendent said this?
Since only five of 1,600 students in the district took the exam, it resulted in the low score.
…Maher says the district could improve its state score if it required all students to take the NCRC exam, but doesn’t feel it would make them any more ready than they already are.
“This clown Maher couldn’t sell ice water at a Queen concert. There are numerous benefits to students to take this test, even if they’re going to a trade school track or the military or an entry level apprenticeship. Is there someone who can do Maher’s job, that actually believes in it’s potential? What else worthwhile do juniors and seniors have to do? Read magazines? What else does a superintendent have to do but promote achievement and acknowledgement? Run for City Council?”
1. The NCRC is not an unfunded mandate. Each district can choose if the students take the NCRC and it is funded by the DOL.
2. The test portion of the career and college readiness is made up of ACT scores, NCRC, and/or Accuplacer. (students who choose to take it-no penalty for students not taking it AND the formula takes the best scores from multiple attempts in the window AND/OR the Accuplacer which students may take in an effort to meet requirements for dual credit).
Here’s a point I’ve made numerous times on DFP. Since the 1978 there has been continuous Republican rule in South Dakota with a succession of education policies advocated and put in place by Republican Legislatures. Every five to eight years there is a lot of griping by Republican Governors regarding the effectiveness of education in this area or the curriculum or that area of the curriculum, but mostly it’s dissatisfaction with education overall. Well, who is to blame?
It’s not as if Democrats have had any power these last 40 years, so the blame for the “failure” of education has to land at the doorstep of the Republican Party. Oh, the Pierre crowd tries to blame districts, but, really, most school boards, while nonpartisan, have ample Republicans on them. My view, after serving on a school board, is that Democrats and Republicans at the school board level want the schools to be the best they can be given the economic constraints. I’m not sure I have that same confidence that state-level Republicans share that view.
When these report cards started out in the early 1990s, they were supposed to solve the perceived problems in education. After 25 years of report cards, what has been gained? Just more Republican bellyaching about THEIR OWN failures.
An interesting point in all these tests is that statistically you would expect the small schools and small districts to dominate the best and the worst places, and schools like Washington or Lincoln or Rapid City Central or Rapid City Stevens to occupy the space pretty close to the middle. And, if you go back through the data, I am confident that is what you will see.
So, what do we learn through these report cards? Not a hell of a lot, but it gives Republicans a chance to bellyache and criticize their own failures, as they scramble to waste some more money stickers and the like.
Donald: “So, what do we learn through these report cards?”
1) That an industrial-educational complex has sprung up to make serious money testing.
2) Poverty hurts children’s education.
3) Minorities tend to be less served in education.
The data shows these consistently. I agree with your final analysis — why we really have learned is that politicians continue to not address these issues — even when identified. Instead too often this data is used to incorrectly push a political agenda of profiteering.