Patrick Henry Performance

The estimable Jim Bacon raised the question of the performance of Richmond’s Patrick Henry, a charter school.

As to the 2019 SOL pass rates, the answer is: fourth place among the Richmond elementary schools on the reading tests (but 1.9 points below the 75% nominal benchmark for accreditation), seventh place in math (and 6.9 points above the 70% math benchmark).

image

image

But the testing universe is more complicated than that. The major predictor of school performance is none of the usual input measures such as class size, teacher salaries, teacher degrees, or the like; the students’ socioeconomic background is the most important factor. As to matters at the school, teacher quality is most important, ahead of facilities and curricula.

Virginia resolutely refuses to measure teacher quality but we do have data on the major factor, poverty.

The (very nice) VDOE database offers pass rates of students who are, to use the official euphemism, “economically disadvantaged,” (here “ED”), or not (here “Not ED”). So let’s look at Patrick Henry in light of those data.

On the 2019 reading and math testing, Patrick Henry was 40.3% ED, well below the Richmond median of 76% in the group tested in reading, 75% in math.

image image

For reference, the state average elementary ED population on these tests was 44%.

The 2019 Not ED reading pass rate at Patrick Henry was 86.25, behind only Munford and Fox, and well above the 75% benchmark. The math rate, 87.5, was one notch farther down the list but still in good company and far above the 70% benchmark.

image

image

Note: Jones and Fairfield Court are reported with no data because they had too few Not ED students to get past the suppression rule.

In terms of its ED students, Patrick Henry was eleventh in Richmond on the reading tests with a 53.7% pass rate; it was tenth in math at 61.1 and still farther behind the Richmond leaders.

image

image

In short, Patrick Henry owes those pretty good SOL averages to its very good Not ED scores and its relatively small population of ED students.

In reading, the ED students at Patrick Henry were 32.6 points below the Not ED; in math, it was 26.4. Statewide, the ED/Not ED average differences for the elementary grades were 22.4 and 16.5. That leaves Patrick Henry’s ED pass rates lower than normal by just about ten points.

image

Another ten points on the ED pass rates would put Patrick Henry’s reading at 64, still too low but among the leaders in Richmond, and its math at 71, above the math benchmark.

This is a surprisingly poor showing as to the ED students for a school where the families care enough to apply for admission, to commit to contribute 24 hours per year, and, by implication, to provide an encouraging environment at home.

Of course, these data do not measure the degrees of affluence or poverty within the ED and Not ED groups. Nonetheless they suggest that Patrick Henry is doing quite well with its Not ED students (at least as measured in the Richmond milieu) but not well with its ED kids.

BTW: Patrick Henry joins Fox and Munford in this respect.

It would be interesting to know whether the Patrick Henry principal and the RPS Superintendent are doing something about this gap. Patrick Henry was accredited this year (on the Board of Education’s new, Lake Woebegone system) so we might doubt it.

Patrick Henry Starting to Produce?

The other school in our neighborhood is Patrick Henry, a charter school.  The State Board denied accreditation to PH this year based on a four-year history of warnings that culminated this year with a near-miss in math.

image

Let’s look at Patrick Henry’s performance in some detail, starting with math.  Recall that the accreditation benchmark for everything but English is 70%, based on the pass rate with some arcane “adjustments” that often raise the actual pass rate by a few points.

First, the third grade:

image

The new math tests in 2012 lowered scores statewide; the effect was magnified in Richmond because our former Superintendent failed to align the curricula with the new tests. 

Here we see that PH, despite its measure of independence from the failed Richmond system, did not act to avoid the Superintendent’s negligence.  It’s taken four years for the third grade pass rates to recover.

The fourth grade scores took a larger hit and recovered in two years, only to deteriorate this year.

image

The fifth grade pass rates survived the new tests, only to plunge (to 19%!) the next year and then recover for the following years to about the state average.

image

The fourth grade scores this year dragged the average into denial of accreditation.

On the reading tests, the third grade performance pulled the average to up to 72% and the “adjustments” moved that (barely) to the 75% benchmark for accreditation.

image

The fourth grade pass rate survived the new tests in 2013, only to deteriorate afterward.

image

The fifth grade scores recovered in 2014 but then slid back below the benchmark.

image

After a difficult year with the new science tests in 2013, the science numbers have settled in near the state average.

image

PH is outperforming Richmond (which presents a low threshold: two-thirds of Richmond schools are not fully accredited this year) and approaching state-average performance in several respects.  We can hope they’ll continue to improve.  Carver (which is not a charter school) offers a good target.

It’s interesting that the really poor performances at PH have usually lasted only one year: It appears that PH is dealing with the instances of really inadequate teaching, quickly for the most part.  Would that the other schools in Richmond might do the same.