News-Record.com

Back in June we ran a story about the Advanced Learning Department's efforts make sure the district's gifted student population is diverse and well-served. I included in that story the results of the pilot program review that took place in the spring. I received on Thursday the district-wide program review results. I haven't read through it yet, but roughly one in three schools were not in full compliance with the district's Advanced Learning plan. Here are the highlights, followed by the school by school checklist.

I plan to follow up with a story on this next week.

Concerned citizens in Guilford County are mobilizing to help the Board of Education address the challenges facing black males in the district as well as overcome the hurdles imposed by standardized testing.

This comes with the release of preliminary suspension numbers by Guilford County Schools. The file is too large to upload, so if you are interested in the full report, e-mail me at morgan.josey@news-record.com.

Next week: The long-awaited magnet schools study makes its way to Tuesday's school board meeting. Check out the first half of the report here.

Not so, according to the Fordham Institute, which released this report today.

Statement from Joyce VanTassel-Baska, past president of the National Association for Gifted Children and member of the study’s peer-review panel:

"As our nation makes significant gains boosting the performances of low-achieving students, we continue to shortchange our gifted students. Settling for stagnation or modest learning gains penalizes gifted learners, especially underserved students whose needs continue to go unmet, and jeopardizes our nation's future as we struggle to compete in the global economy.

"Especially alarming are findings that our nation’s teachers do not consider themselves prepared to meet the unique learning needs of gifted students, nor do they feel encouraged by the system to focus on cultivating the talents of our gifted learners. While no one will dispute the critical need of increasing proficiency for students at the lowest levels, doing so at the expense of high-performing students – especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds – only perpetuates the cycle of inequality and results in continued underperformance in the classroom.

"I hope this study serves as a wake-up call if we as a nation are truly committed to leaving no child behind and investing in students from all ability levels to maximize their potential. Nothing less than our future is at stake."

One thing pointed out in the study is that low-achievers have made greater gains than high-achievers over the years. My question is: Is it fair to compare the gains among these two sets of students? While it is possible for a student to score a low 2 on a state exam one year and then a few years later score a high 3, how far can a student who scores a low four go (when the scale is 1-4)?

Update: More Guilford County Schools teachers reported being pleased with their working conditions this year than in 2006, the last time a statewide survey was issued by Gov. Mike Easley’s office. However, the district again posted lower scores than the state average.

A few things stand out about the results, released May 15 (but apparently not announced to the media):
* Eighty percent of Guilford educators responded to the survey, a 10 percentage point increase from 2006.
* More teachers responded favorably to questions about Guilford County Schools in the areas of time, facilities and resources, leadership and professional development. For example, 54 percent of teachers agreed that they have reasonable class sizes, compared to 43 percent in 2006.
* Despite concerns vocalized over the past year about student misbehavior and violence, 85 percent of respondents reported that they work in a safe school environment. That compares to 72 percent in 2006.

You can view the results here.

A report released this week by the Center on Education Policy shows that many states have chosen to postpone raising the bar on NCLB profiency standards, resulting in dramatically higher—and potentially unreachable—achievement goals beginning with the 2008-09 schools year. Other states, including North Carolina, set incremental goals in an attempt to make steady progress toward the 100 percent profiency targets.

Read the full report here.

Taking incremental steps is not without its own challenges. North Carolina students have struggled in the past to meet the stricter standards the state has set. The Department of Public Instruction is still waiting to hear back from federal officials on a request to not count the reading scores for grades three through eight for Adequate Yearly Progress sanction purposes. You can read the state's rationale in the attached letter (page 3 of the letter).

I talked to Gongshu Zhang, GCS's chief accountability officer, about this a month ago, and he said that he expected fewer schools will make AYP if the federal government doesn't allow the exemption. Zhang, who used to work for DPI, said that the department did not properly prepare educators for the increase in standards (which occur every three years) and so teachers have been discouraged when students perform poorly on the exams. Zhang said he thinks the state should have piloted the increased standards before implementing them state-wide.

Zhang said the percentage point increases in targets, for example, increasing from 76.7 percent in reading to 84.4 percent, appears arbitrary. He suggested increasing by a smaller percentage.

"You must give us solid rationale as to why this amount is scientifically based," he said.

That of course begs the question, how do you meet the federal goal of 100 percent by 2014?

Update: Story here.

Also, a response from Sharon Ozment, chief finance officer with GCS:

"Let me begin by saying that Guilford County Schools (GCS) is continually looking for ways to improve communication and information sharing. We will contact the John Locke Foundation and ask which districts are getting a grade of A and review their respective Web sites to determine what GCS might do differently with respect to online transparency.

"I will hasten to add that the 'Superintendents' Recommended 2008-09 Budget' is currently on our Web site. We will also add our financial audit for the year ended June 30, 2007 as well. With that said, it is important to note that we often have discussions about how best to communicate and share information and much like students with different learning styles, our citizens have different preferences as to how to receive information. It would be interesting to find out how many school districts in NC conduct a line-item review of their budget that is televised live and broadcast at least two other times after the fact. There are also some external measures by which we assess the quality of our financial documents and operations."

------------------------------------------------
The Johne Locke Foundation issued a report today that graded local governments on how transparent their budget and spending information is on their Web sites. Guilford County Schools scored a C minus. Scores ranged from C to F.

Go the the GCS Web site and you can easily find the superintendent's budget recommendations and brief annual report. Not so with the line item budget or the annual financial audit. Want to find out how much in federal dollars each Title 1 school gets? Good luck.

To GCS's credit, school officials do link many documents on the Board of Education's agenda, but it takes a saavy user to track those documents down, especially months or years after the fact.

Budget information can get tedious and complicated but that is no excuse not to provide more information online, particularly the final editions of the local, state and federal budgets. The district also should post quarterly cashflow bond forecasts, such as this one for the 2003 bond.

What would you want to see online?

By the way, the new district relations officer, Lekan Oguntoyinbo, started today. He replaces Sonya Conway, who left in March to work for American Express. Any questions for him?

Perhaps these reports have been around forever, but it seems to be popular these days to count up the economic costs of students not earning a high school diploma as a way to support a smorgasbord of educational initiatives. I just got an e-mail from the Alliance for Excellent Education this week with the headline "Nation's dropout rate decreases tax revenue," which somewhat states the obvious.

Read the summary and full report of the brief below:

GREENSBORO --- An analysis released Friday by the Center for Business and Economic Research at UNCG found that Guilford County Schools had a local economic impact of $1.32 billion and supported 15,777 jobs during the 2006-07 school year.

That impact is close to the economic and jobs impacts of Moses Cone Health System, the High Point Furniture Market and UNCG, according to the center's Director Andrew Brod, who did the study at the request of the district. The analysis includes the total impact of the district's operations, and indirect savings stemming from a lowered drop-out rate, increased scholarships and Advanced Placement collge credit.

"This gives you a feel for what kind of footprint Guilford County Schools has in our local economy," Brod told elected officials gathered at a breakfast in Greensboro on Friday.

The study also included a separate total of the amount of direct and spillover dollars spent in Guilford County as a result of the 2000 and 2003 school bonds.

Brod calculated that the previous $500 million worth of bonds contributed $787.1 million to the local economy. He estimated the 2008 school bonds, totaling $457.3 million, would contribute $656.8 million.

Brod will present the report again to the public at 4:30 p.m. on Monday at Andrews High School and at 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday at Smith High School.