SOL by School, 2016 and 2017

Here are the Richmond SOL pass rates by subject and by school for 2016 and 2017.  First the elementary schools.

BTW: The accreditation benchmark for English is 75; for all the other subjects, 70.

image

image

Next, the middle schools.  Please recall that Franklin has high school grades as well as middle, and has a select student population, so its numbers are not directly comparable to the other schools.

image

image

image

image

image

Last the high schools.  Franklin, Community and Open have select populations; Franklin also has middle school grades.  None of those schools’ performance is directly comparable to the five mainstream high schools.

image

image

image

image

image

2017 SOL v. Poverty

The excuse we often hear for Richmond’s poor performance on the SOL tests is poverty.

VDOE has data on that.  They define a student as “economically disadvantaged” if that student “1) is eligible for Free/Reduced Meals, or 2) receives TANF, or 3) is eligible for Medicaid, or 4) [is] identified as either Migrant or experiencing Homelessness.”  They formerly had a handy database front end for enrollments; that looks to be under repair just now but they have the fall division enrollments in a pair of spreadsheets here.

Juxtaposing the 2017 Division pass rates with the ED percentage of the enrollment, we see the following for the reading subject area:

image

The R-squared of 35% tells us that 35% of the variance in the pass rates is predictable from the %ED.  That is, to a considerable degree, the pass rates and %ED are related.

(Remember that correlation does not imply causation, so these data don’t say that increasing the ED population causes some portion of the decline in the pass rate.)

Statistics or no, the graph tells us that Richmond (the gold square) grossly underperformed the peer jurisdictions (red diamonds, from the left Hampton, Newport News, and Norfolk) and, indeed underperformed all the Virginia divisions except for Greensville County and Danville, higher poverty or not.

Our Math performance was nearly as dismal, beating out only poor Petersburg and, to the rounded value, getting a tie with Danville.

image

Similarly, the five subject average.

image

For sure, we have a lot of students with low family incomes.  For sure, those kids on average don’t perform as well as students from more affluent families.  But that does not come close to explaining, much less excusing, the awful performance of our schools.

Change. And Not.

When looking at the pass rate changes from last year, it might be helpful to glance back at the starting point: The schools that did very well in ‘16 (e.g., Community) didn’t have much room to improve.  So, if a school enjoyed a large increase or suffered a large decline, that’s news; if it stayed nearly the same, we should look at where it started before we draw any conclusions.

With that caveat, here are the changes in Richmond’s elementary schools.

imageimageimageimageimage

It’s really good to see the progress at Patrick Henry.  The decline at Westover Hills, my neighborhood school, is another matter.  And what happened at Carver?

Next the middle schools.  Please remember that Franklin is not directly comparable to the other schools.  It has a select population and its scores include those from the high school, as well as the middle school, grades.

imageimageimageimageimageimage

And the high schools.  Please remember that Open and Community have selected student populations.  And, as above, Franklin has both middle school and high school grades.

imageimageimageimageimageimage

Richmond ‘17 SOL by School

A reader (the reader?) rightfully jumped on me about those complicated elementary school graphs

Here, as a penance, are the 2017 Richmond elementary pass rates by school and subject.

imageimageimageimage

While we are at this, here are the middle schools.  Remember that the Franklin numbers include high school pass rates and that Franklin has a selected population.

imageimageimageimageimage

And the high schools.  Please recall that Open and Community, as well as Franklin, have select populations and should not be compared directly with the five mainstream high schools.

imageimageimageimageimage

How’s that for readable?  Not to mention distressing.

High School Lows

Turning to the high school results from the 2017 SOL data, let’s start with reading.

image

Franklin has both high- and middle school grades so its numbers are not directly comparable.  Moreover, Franklin, Community, and Open have select student populations, so the important results here are those of the mainstream high schools, Armstrong, Wythe, Huguenot, Marshall, and TJ.

Of that Five, only Wythe (barely) made the 75% benchmark for accreditation in English.  Huguenot’s pass rate fell 19% this year; Armstrong’s, 15%.

Next, writing:

image

Of the Five, only TJ beat the writing benchmark.  Huguenot dropped by 17%; Armstrong, by 14%.

History & Social Sciences:

image

The History & SS benchmark is 70%.  Marshall and Huguenot met that requirement.

Marshall improved by 13% this year.  Armstrong’s pass rate rose 7%, but only to 48%.

Math:

image

Even Community had problems with the math tests, and that was a nine point improvement from 2016.  None of the Five made the 70% benchmark.  Armstrong dropped by 14% (to 34%!); Wythe fell by 11%; Marshall, by 9%.

Science:

image

None of the Five made the 70% science benchmark.  Armstrong fell 21% to a 39% pass rate; Marshall dropped by 18%; Huguenot, by 10%.

Five Subject Average:

image

The average of the five pass rates shows 11% declines at Armstrong and Huguenot, a 5% drop at TJ, and a 2% decrease at Wythe.  Marshall rose by 1%. 

The 39% average at Armstrong is a disaster.  Wythe, Huguenot, Marshall, and TJ all did much better than Armstrong, but surely not well enough.

After the middle school numbers, especially MLK, even Armstrong looks pretty good.  But that happy aura dissipates once we notice that the high school pass rates are boosted by Richmond’s dropout rate (Richmond’s cohort rate was 9.9% last year, vs. 5.3% for the state average).

Middle School Shambles

VDOE posted the 2017 SOL data yesterday.  They are bad news for Richmond, particularly for the middle schools.

Here, for a start, are the middle school reading pass rates.

image

I’ve included Franklin, which has middle school grades, but the numbers there are not directly comparable because the high school grades are included in the Franklin averages.

Notice that Elkhardt and Thompson disappeared in 2016, being merged into the new Elkhardt-Thompson.  That didn’t do anything for the pass rates but it did create a “new school” that can’t be denied accreditation for another two years.

Franklin aside, none of these schools made the accreditation cutoff of 75%.  Henderson, Boushall, Elkhardt-Thompson, and, especially, MLK all are disastrously below 50% (i.e., above 50% failure rates).

The writing scores improved this year, from appalling to merely terrible.

image

Again, Franklin aside, no school made the accreditation cutoff.

The history & social sciences numbers are better: Three schools, other than Franklin, made the 70% benchmark.

image

The math scores are another disaster, with only AP Hill (barely) making the 70% accreditation cutoff.

image

Two schools (other than Franklin) beat the science benchmark.

image

The average of the five subject pass rates shows three schools below 50% with Boushall barely above that and headed the wrong way.

image

I said “bad news” at the top of this post.  That is far too weak.  I’m not sure there are words that are acceptable in polite company that describe the magnitude of this assault on Richmond’s schoolchildren.

Bad News at Westover Hills

On the four subject average (reading, history & social sciences, math, and science; they’ve discontinued the writing test for the elementary grades), our neighborhood school dropped fourteen points this year, to fourth lowest among Richmond’s elementary schools.

image

That decline is the composite of lower scores in all four subject areas:

image

image

image

image


Elementary, My Dear Bedden

Here we have the SOL pass rates for Richmond’s elementary schools for 2011 to 2017.

For sure, these graphs are cluttered.  The only way to paint a complete picture is to include all the schools on one graph, albeit the resulting information density makes it difficult to follow some schools.  For a nice picture of the recent results at any particular school, see the VDOE page here and put the school name in the search box.

To start: the reading tests.  The schools in the legend are sorted by the 2017 pass rate.

image

Nice improvement this year at Redd and Mason; nicer still at Stuart (24%!).  Problems at Carver and Francis.

The new English tests in 2013 hit most of the schools quite hard.  Some have recovered; many have not.

Our star performer, Carver, has slid (Dizzy Dean would have said “slud”) to fourth place.

History and Social Sciences did not have a new test to lower the scores but too many of our schools found a way to slide anyhow.

image

Big gains here at Stuart (28%), Patrick Henry (25%), and Ginter Park (21%).  Chimborazo, Swansboro, Cary, and Westover Hills all went the other way.

Next math.  The new tests came in 2012; a number of schools suffered a further hit in 2013, perhaps because of fallout from the new English and science tests that year.

image

Stuart was the big gainer here (after a similar loss the year earlier).  Carver, Francis, Westover Hills, and Bellevue led the losers.

Next, science.

image

2013 was the year of the new, tougher tests

I didn’t have the heart to expand the axis to include Woodville’s 82% failure rate in 2017.  But that was from a mere 3% drop in the pass rate: Westover Hills fell 24% and Oak Grove 20%, with Francis, Ginter Park, and Southampton all more than 10%.

Finally, the four subject average.

image

Stuart was the big gainer here at +17%, followed by Blackwell at 10%.  Westover Hills dropped 14%; Carver, 12%; Swansboro, 11%; and Francis, 10%.

For the view from thirty thousand feet, here are the averages of the elementary school pass rates:

imageimageimageimageimage

The accreditation benchmark is 75 for English, 70 for the other subjects.  So we see the average of the Richmond elementary schools not only declines on every subject but reading; it flunks on every subject but Hist & SS.

But if you think this is bad (and it is), wait for the middle school numbers, up next.

Bedden Blew It

Dana Bedden started in Richmond in January, 2014

We can ascribe the awful performance of the Richmond schools that year, and probably the next, to the previous Superintendent who had failed to align the curricula to the new math tests in 2012 and the new English and science tests in 2013.

After that, Bedden gets the credit.  Or the not credit.

The 2017 school year was Bedden’s third full (and last) year in the saddle.

We got a preview of his performance from the “division-level academic review” conducted by VDOE in the spring of 2017.   For the most part, the resulting report is a bloated batch of bureaucratic babble.  Nonetheless, some truth shines through.

On a scale of zero to three, where zero and one are failing, Richmond received a “0” for student “Outcomes” (no surprise there), a “1” for “Curriculum Alignment,” and a “3” for “Support for Instructional Leadership.”

So, after two+ years of Bedden, the curricula still were not aligned?  And student “outcomes” were zilch?  But the “instructional leadership” was fine?  Please!

Today VDOE released the 2017 SOL results. 

The database with the full (and not rounded) data is not available as I write this.  The summary spreadsheets are available here.

Those spreadsheets give us a measure of Bedden’s performance:

Reading: Second or third lowest pass rate (not counting the school for deaf & blind), up from last place last year but down two points.

image

Writing: Bottom of the barrel, down from 2d worst last year, despite an eight point gain.

image

History & Social Sciences: We beat poor Petersburg again with a constant 67% pass rate.

image

Math: Last year we beat Lancaster; this year, Petersburg, with a pass rate that dropped four points.

image

Science: Next to last again, beating only Petersburg but with a five point drop in our pass rate.

image

Five Subject Average: Beat only Petersburg, up from last place last year; our pass rate dropped slightly, theirs more.

image

Note: These are averages of the five subjects’ pass rates, not of all tests.

It appears that the School Board did well to get rid of Superintendent Bedden. 

Trouble is, now we go part (most?) (all?) of the 2018 school year with an interim Super and the new Super will need at least a couple of years to get any traction.  In the meantime, Richmond’s schoolchildren continue to suffer in our awful schools.

Of course, it could be worse: We could be Petersburg, laboring under Memoranda of Understanding from the Board of Education (that doesn’t know how to fix their schools) for thirteen years and still competing to be the worst school division in Virginia.

I’ll post more Richmond data as they become available.

How ‘Bout Those Elementary Schools

While I have the data (and while trying to not remember that 2017 results will be out in a week or so), here is the performance of the Richmond Elementary schools on the reading tests, by year.

image

The numbers here are averages of the pass rates of the three tested grades (3, 4, & 5).  Schools are sorted by 2016 pass rates.

The Big Dip in 2013 coincides with the new, tougher reading tests.  As you see, some schools were barely touched by the new tests; some were clobbered and have recovered; some were clobbered and remain that way.

The threshold for accreditation is 75%; only seven schools (of twenty-six) made that cutoff in 2016.  Six schools were below 50% with Woodville firmly in last place at 33%.

Next, math:

image

The schools again are sorted by the 2016 numbers so most of the color codes are changed from the reading graph.  (Sigh!)

The new math tests came in 2012.  Note the 2d round reaction in ‘13 at some schools.

The accreditation threshold here is 70.  Thirteen schools made that cut in ‘16; thirteen did not.  Four were below 50%.  Swansboro beat out Woodville for last place, 33% and 39%, respectively.

Stay tuned for the 2017 numbers that should give the final measure of Superintendent Bedden’s success or failure.  (The ‘17 data will tell us nothing about the Board of “Education” that has been busy adopting a “Memorandum of Understanding” instead of doing something useful to fix Richmond’s awful schools.  But, then, even they have noticed that they don’t know how to fix urban schools so perhaps that Mt. Everest of sterile MOU paperwork will keep them from more harmful meddling.)