GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Growing Up

School report cards stabilize after years of unpredictability

After years of volatility, letter grades on progress reports for the city’s elementary and middle schools are the most stable and accurate they’ve ever been, according to Department of Education officials.

Queens schools had the highest grades on this year’s city progress reports, which were released today, and charter schools received higher scores, on average, than schools across the city. Of the 1,219 schools to receive grades in this year’s reports, 298 schools received an A, 411 received a B, 354 received a C, 79 received a D and 32 received an F.

The city graded schools on a curve, so that 60 percent scored either an A or a B; 30 percent received C’s; and 10 percent received D’s or F’s – twice as many as last year.

That means new additions to the city’s list of schools that it will consider closing. Schools that received a D or F, or three consecutive years of C or lower, are automatically added to the list of potential closures. Last year, 62 schools fell into that group, but this year, the total was 116.

It is the fifth year that the city has issued the reports, which assess schools based heavily on students’ state test scores and their improvement since last year, as well as attendance rates, and feedback from parents, students, and teachers. Schools also earn extra credit for progress made by students with disabilities and English language learners. For the first time this year, schools whose low-performing black and Latino boys made gains also got extra credit.

“By acknowledging progress in schools that help struggling students, we can keep more students on track during elementary and middle school,” Chancellor Dennis Walcott said in a statement.

Changing standards on state tests over the past two years had thrown the DOE’s progress reports into a cycle of unpredictability. Inflated test scores in 2009 resulted in just two schools receiving F’s, while 84 percent earned A’s. Last year, after state tests became harder to pass, almost 70 percent of schools saw their grades drop and a third of schools saw their grades swing – mostly downward – by two or more letters.

This year, the department touted adjustments to the reports and pointed to the fact that most schools’ letter grades didn’t change much: 88 percent of schools received the same rating as last year or rose or fell by just one letter grade.

In a briefing with reporters this morning, Chief Academic Officer Shael Polakow-Suransky said the formula changes — which he said were made after consulting with principals — have led to the most accurate portrayal yet of what the city wants to see from its schools.

“We met with networks to make sure we got it right and we’re hearing from principals that it makes a lot of sense this year,” Polakow-Suransky said.

United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew criticized the reports for their heavy emphasis on test scores and said that they offer all information and no instruction for improvement.

“It’s like 20 doctors standing around telling you what’s wrong, but nobody’s lifting a finger to help,” he said. “I would rather have a report that diagnoses a school’s problem and came up with recommendations to rectify them.”

Here’s a link to all of this year’s progress reports, but we threw in some other highlights below:

A few other highlights:

  • The highest school went to a middle school, Staten Island School of Leadership with a 97.2. The lowest was P.S. 377, with an overall score 4.6
  • Charter schools operated by management organizations scored significantly higher than the citywide average, while independent charter schools actually performed worse, particularly at the middle school level. Charter schools operated by Success Charter Network, Achievement First and Uncommon all had four schools each that earned A’s.
  • One “mom and pop” charter schools, Future Leaders Institute, was one of the 10 lowest-scoring schools in the city.
  • For more detailed breakdown on the charter school results, check out the NYC Charter School Center’s interactive graph here.
  • The actual report cards also received a re-design, featuring more information about the school’s performance over time, as well as how the school is graded based on other measures, such as the city’s Quality Review and the state’s accountability.
  • Charter schools opened since 2004, when DOE began taking a more active role in supporting the schools, have earned a higher percentage of As (38 percent) than before, when just 19 percent earned As. NYC Charter School Center CEO James Merriman called it “another sign” that charter schools are making progress “with some of the City’s most disadvantaged students.”
  • For the second straight year, District 26 in Queens was the highest performing district.
  • One school – P.S. 60 Woodhaven in Queens – did the best job at narrowing the achievement gap for both students with disabilities and for academically struggling black and Latino boys.
  • Charter schools that were co-located in DOE building outperformed charter schools located in private space.
  • Fourth Year Teacher

    When do High School report cards get posted?

  • Ed

    Curious which was the highest performing district in Brooklyn.
    Is this stated explicitly in the report?

  • Gdecker

    Hey Ed, the district with the highest average percentile of schools with A’s or B’s in Brooklyn was District 20. It’s south Brooklyn – I think Bay Ridge and Dyker Heights 

  • Anonymous

    After five years, they are the “most accurate” according to DOE?  So what were they all the other years?  And how do they know? 

    I find Suransky’s claim that “we’re hearing from principals that it makes a lot of sense this year,” especially dubious.  Remember they are still based primarily on one year’s test score gains and losses, which experts say are 60-80% random.  Good luck to those poor students & teachers whose futures will be determined by the DOE’s careless throwing of the dice.

  • proteach

    Divisive and destructive.  These grades are nothing more than front page fodder for the NY Post.  It’s harmful policy for the DOE to release grades that are based on unsound data.  Coupled that nearly everyone looking at the grades barely has a concept of what criteria is used to rate a school.  So the end result is knee jerk reaction that a school is an “A”  or a “F”  without any real idea of what this means or what its implications are.  Close failing schools???  Replace schools with Charters??  NO NO NO.  Charters are separate and unequal in numerous ways that previous posters have explained.  Unfortunately, that will be the takeway for most people.

    Sigh, so goes the spin cycle. 

  • Pogue

    I call BS on school report cards stabilizing anything.  In the other GS article on ‘DOE priorities…” I see the word “tinkering” often.  DOE “tinkering” means moving the goalposts, changing the rules, and doing other underhanded actions to close schools, disrupt children, parent, and teacher lives, and destroying public education.

    The DOE, a stabilizinginstitution? BS.

  • jimteach

    I’m really concerned about 2 new segments in the middle school report: the section that rates the percentage of students that pass core subjects and the section on middle school students who take H.S. classes.  Despite the fact that these 2 do not yet factor into the score the new segment is disturbing because it rates the amount of students passed by core subject teachers.  These teachers are already pressured into passing students and often have theri grades changed by Principals without notification.  This will add to the pressure to passs students who are not meeting standards.  The second segment is concerning because it will lead to principals placing students in advanced classes who do not belong there and have no chance of passing.  This will lead to a decrease in the teachers test scores that as of next year will be used in the teacher’s evaluation.  I can feel the pressure already when students who should be repeating 8th grade due to poor attendence, and non effort, however their grades are changed by principals without consultation with the teacher.

  • Pjg320

    The “D” and “F” schools continue to be clustered in the lowest SES neighborhoods. District 26 (Bayside), the highest SES neighborhood receives the highest Progress scores. Progress scores are arbitrary, the DoE determines cut scores. 

    What are the inteventions?  What special guidance and supports did the schools receive?  Low Progress score schools also had less experienced teachers.

    Monitoring school progress and guiding struggling schools is the prime function of the central office, currently the central office stands on the sidelines and simply closes and opens new schools. 

  • GGGuest

    Does everyone really feel like they have stabilized?  My school has taken dramatic dips both this year and the previous year, despite a general feeling that things are getting *better* in terms of instruction and everything else on testing grades

  • Smith

    Speaking as a parent:  Who cares?  It’s been years since I’ve checked the grades, or even heard about them from others, at either of my kids’ schools.

  • ms. v.

    I am worried about the inclusion of rates of students passing core courses, which I think is new this year. Seems like a weird incentive to pass students who might be right at the border.

    I am also interested in the inclusion of rate of middle school students passing high school exams. I think it’s great for students who are ready to move ahead, and it makes some sense in subjects like Math. But for other subjects, like Science, do we need to rush the kids into tested Regents courses if we could provide a high-quality, more exploratory course appropriate to middle school instead? I don’t think faster is always better.

  • guest

    They aren’t ready.  Math and Science are a mess (English and Social Studies have problems, too).  The teachers (I blame the school’s administration)  in middle school don’t teach the course, they teach to pass the Regents. Most kids who are pushed ahead in 8th grade pass the Regents but don’t know or learn the subject.  Some don’t notice it in 9th grade, but it really hits them in the 10th grade when the classes expect them to have prior knowledge (they don’t have any).

    Many students tell me they were pushed to get a 65 on a regents, but they knew they knew nothing.  They are pissed because they can’t go backwards (they got credit for the course, too) and relearn what they lost out on.  Kids (and then their parents) are having meltdowns about this.  Also, these scores stay on their HS transcripts and usually pull down the kid’s average.

    Some parents are smartening up and don’t allow their kids to take the Regents in the 8th grade and have them do it again in HS.

  • EdintheApple

    Absolutely agree – the rush to 8th grade Regents (or earlier) is foolish … State regs say the student needs an 85 on the Regents to get course credit. Schools ignore the reg, move the student ahead and they stumble badly especially in Math … schools want to create a pool for AP classes … principals want to collect positive data … regardless of the impact on kids.

    Forget about the Regents, a firm foundation is far more important.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Follow GothamSchools

RSS

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

0 comments so far today

Events Calendar

Our Twitter Updates

Archives

February 2012
M T W T F S S
« Jan  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829