Let us imagine that all doctors were placed in categories “Excellent, Mediocre and Failing” based on how healthy their patients were when they came to their clinics. Doctors who had mainly healthy patients who came only for routine checkups ended up on the “Excellent” list. Physicians whose patients came to them with more serious ailments that took longer to cure were put on the “Mediocre” list. Those MDs that had patients with serious illnesses and incurable diseases were put on the “Failing” list and were widely considered the worst doctors.
It is likely all would agree this is a lousy rating system. After all, it may be some of the best doctors receive patients with the most difficult illnesses. These are the very doctors that are exceptional because they often can help patients that no one else can.
Just as it would be foolish to judge doctors on the quality of their patients, it is absurd to judge schools on the entry level of their students. This was discussed last week in regard to judging schools on the basis of scores on a standardized test. Those schools whose students enter with the highest ability do the best on these tests. It says very little about the quality of the school. It says everything about the background from which the students come.
So what is a better model to use in judging the effectiveness of a school? This is the question with which Columbus Public Schools wrestled over the last two years. They believe they have come up with a good answer. It is to measure schools on several key criteria which CPS is calling “Quality Indicators.” The school system has nine which they will measure annually. They include parent and student satisfaction, graduation rates, discipline referrals, student attendance, student activity participation, student achievement, and maintaining a balanced budget.
A key test instrument in this plan will be one that measures student growth. The district focus is not on having students at one arbitrary learning level. The reason for this was given above. Attaining this may be more a matter of what happens outside of the classroom than what happens in it. However, CPS believes that being held accountable for learning growth regardless of student background makes sense. It is a little like judging doctors on their success in helping their patients improve their health versus how well their patients are before they begin their treatments.
The test instrument that is being used to measure student growth is called the “Measures of Academic Progress” or MAP assessments. These tests are given electronically three times a year to each student in grades two through eight in reading, math and language arts. Next year the math portion will also be used at the high school.
MAP tests are not based on some outdated specifications determined by a distant test company. Rather, they are based on current Nebraska state standards. So the tests actually measure what is being taught in the classroom.
Each student’s academic growth is monitored by the test instrument. Likewise, each student’s progress is carefully tracked by the classroom teacher. Then, like a skilled physician, the teacher determines the treatments that need to be applied to help the student attain the growth that is expected of him or her in a given year. These expected growth reports are also shared with parents and students. As a result, a real partnership is formed with them and the teacher.
The goal of the schools is one year of academic growth for each year a student is in school. The partnership between the home and the school makes this goal attainable.
Good doctors should be determined by the improvement in the health of their patients. In the same way good schools should be identified by the learning growth they bring about in their students. This is exactly what CPS is doing through the use of the Quality Indicators and the MAP assessments.
|
