A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
Report Links and Info
Old report card topics
Test Indicators
Adequate Yearly Progress
Performance Index Score
Value-Added Measure
Schools in School Improvement
TPS Building Ratings
School Teacher Information
Continuous Improvement?
Determining the Rating
Area School Ratings
Fulton County
Lucas County
Ottawa County
Wood County
Miscellaneous Info
Toledo Property Taxes
TPS Levy success
TPS Teacher Residency
School Spending
Fulton County
Lucas County
Ottawa County
Wood County
From jr's workspace   

2007-2008 School Report Card

Toledo Public School system info :

If a school district meets AYP OR scores at least 80.0 on the PI, then the lowest a district can be rated is Continuous Improvement even though TPS only met 5 of 30 indicators. For the 2007-2008 school year, TPS was 0.2 PI points away from being rated Academic Watch again.


Report Links and Info

Old report card topics

Past Toledo Talk report card threads:

Test Indicators

For 2007-2008 school report card : To meet a test indicator for grades 3-8 and 10, at least 75% of students tested must score proficient or higher on that test. Other indicator requirements are: 11th grade Ohio Graduation Test, 85%; Attendance Rate, 93%; Graduation Rate, 90%.

Report cards released in August for the previous school year:

Adequate Yearly Progress

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a federally required measure. Every school and district must meet AYP goals that are set for Reading and Mathematics Proficiency and Participation, Attendance Rate, and Graduation Rate. These goals are applied to ten student groups: All Students; Economically Disadvantaged Students; Asian/Pacific Islander Students; Black, non-Hispanic Students; American Indian/Alaskan Native Students; Hispanic Students; Multi-Racial Students; White, non-Hispanic Students; Students with Disabilities (IEP); and Students with Limited English Proficiency (LEP).

If any one of these groups does not meet AYP in Reading or Mathematics Proficiency, or in Participation, Attendance Rate, or Graduation Rate, then the school or district does not meet AYP. AYP also can affect the state designation that a school or district receives in one of two ways. Not meeting AYP for consecutive years will have both federal and state consequences. Federal consequences could include a school or district being identified for improvement. State consequences could include a reduction in the state's rating designation.

TPS 2007-2008 AYP (identical to 2006-2007)

Performance Index Score

The Performance Index Score reflects the achievement of every student enrolled for the full academic year. The Performance Index Score is a weighted average of all tested subjects and grades. The greatest weight is given to advanced scores (1.2), and the weights decrease for each performance level. This results in a scale from 0 to 120 points. The Performance Index Score can be compared across years to show district achievement trends.

TPS PI over time :

Value-Added Measure

Your district's value-added rating represents the progress your district has made with its students since last school year. In contrast, achievement scores represent students' performance at a point in time. A score of "Above" indicates greater than one year of progress has been achieved; "Met" indicates one year of progress has been achieved; "Below" indicates less than one year of progress has been achieved.

Scores reflect grade level and overall composite ratings for the 2007-2008 school year.

+ = Above Expected Growth
^ = Met Expected Growth
- = Below Expected Growth

Grade 4Grade 5Grade 6Grade 7Grade 8
Reading--+-+
Mathematics^---+

TPS's Overall Composite - Below Expected Growth

Schools in School Improvement

Generally, a school will enter School Improvement (SI) after missing AYP for two consecutive years, and it can exit SI only after meeting AYP for two consecutive years. Every school in SI has to create an improvement plan. If a school in SI receives federal funds, it may have to offer Public School Choice and/or Supplemental Educational Services. Being in SI for three or more years requires more extensive corrective actions and, eventually, restructuring.

Name of Schools Identified for Improvement and Years in Improvement Status

Allied Health Academy 1
Arlington Elementary 1
Arts and Media Academy 1
Birmingham Elementary 3
Bowsher High 4
Burroughs Elementary 1
Byrnedale Middle 5
Chase Elementary 5
DeVeaux Middle 3
East Broadway Middle 4
East Side Central Elementary 2
Edgewater Elementary 1
Fulton Elementary 7
Garfield Elementary 5
Glendale-Feilbach Elementary 3
Hale Elementary 5
Hawkins Elementary 2
Human Services Academy 1
Humanities Academy 1
Keyser Elementary 2
Lagrange Elementary 3
Larchmont Elementary 1
Leverette Middle 5
Libbey High 3
Lincoln Academy for Boys 3
Longfellow Elementary 2
Marshall Elementary 2
Mayfair Achievement 1
McKinley Elementary 2
McTigue Middle 5
Navarre Elementary 2
Newbury Elementary 3
Oakdale Elementary 3
Old Orchard Elementary 2
Pickett Elementary 9
Raymer Elementary 2
Reynolds Elementary 3
Riverside Elementary 5
Robinson Middle 5
Rogers High 5
Rosa Parks Elementary 5
Samuel M. Jones at Gunckel Park Middle 5
Science Math And Related Technologies Acdmy 1
Scott High 4
Sherman Elementary 2
Start High 4
Waite High 1
Walbridge Elementary 1
Whittier Elementary 2
Woodward High 5

TPS Building Ratings

Building NameRating
Allied Health Academy High SchoolAcademic Watch
Arlington ElementaryEffective
Arts and Media Academy High SchoolAcademic Watch
Beverly ElementaryEffective
Birmingham ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Bowsher High SchoolEffective
BTI Academy High SchoolContinuous Improvement
Burroughs ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Byrnedale Junior HighContinuous Improvement
Chase ElementaryAcademic Watch
Cherry ElementaryAcademic Emergency
Cowboy Academy of Business High SchoolAcademic Watch
Crossgates ElementaryEffective
Cummings-Zucker High SchoolNot Rated
DeVeaux Junior HighContinuous Improvement
East Side Central ElementaryContinuous Improvement
East Toledo Junior HighAcademic Watch
Edgewater ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Ella P. Stewart Academy ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Elmhurst ElementaryExcellent
Fulton ElementaryAcademic Emergency
Garfield ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Glendale-Feilbach ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Grove Patterson Academy ElementaryEffective
Hale ElementaryAcademic Emergency
Harvard ElementaryEffective
Hawkins ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Human Services Academy High SchoolAcademic Emergency
Humanities Academy High SchoolAcademic Watch
Jones Junior HighAcademic Emergency
Keyser ElementaryAcademic Watch
Lagrange ElementaryAcademic Emergency
Larchmont ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Leverette Junior HighAcademic Watch
Lincoln Academy for Boys ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Longfellow ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Marshall ElementaryAcademic Watch
Mckinley ElementaryAcademic Watch
McTigue Junior HighAcademic Watch
Navarre ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Newbury ElementaryAcademic Watch
Oakdale ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Old Orchard ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Old West End Academy ElementaryEffective
Ottawa River ElementaryEffective
Pickett ElementaryAcademic Emergency
Raymer ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Reynolds ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Riverside ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Robinson Junior HighAcademic Emergency
Rogers High SchoolContinuous Improvement
Sherman ElementaryAcademic Emergency
SMART Academy High SchoolContinuous Improvement
Start High SchoolContinuous Improvement
Toledo Technology Academy High SchoolExcellent
Waite High SchoolContinuous Improvement
Walbridge ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Whittier ElementaryContinuous Improvement
Woodward High SchoolAcademic Watch

2007-2008 Building Totals


2006-2007 Building Totals

School Teacher Information

Under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, states are required to report certain data about schools and teachers. Data presented here are for reporting purposes only and are not used in the computation of the state designation for districts and schools.

Your DistrictState
Percentage of teachers with at least a Bachelor's Degree98.999.2
Percentage of teachers with at least a Master's Degree53.258.8
Percentage of core academic subject elementary and secondary classes not taught by highly qualified teachers0.01.5
Percentage of core academic subject elementary and secondary classes taught by properly certified teachers90.598.3

Continuous Improvement?

If only looking at the number of academic standards TPS met, which was 5 of 30, TPS would be rated Academic Emergency. But the state provides a couple of chances for the poor performing school districts to appear to be doing better than they really are. That would be AYP and PI.

If a school district is Academic Emergency based upon the number of indicators met, but the district meets AYP, then the lowest the district can be rated is Continuous Improvement. This is how TPS got the Continuous Improvement rating after the 2004 and 2005 report cards.

If a school district is Academic Emergency based upon the number of indicators met, and the district fails to meet AYP, but the district scores at least an 80.0 on the PI, then the lowest the district can be rated is Continuous Improvement. This was TPS's situation in the 2006 report card when TPS did not meet AYP but scored 80.4 on the PI, and that's also the situation for the current report card for the 2007-2008 school year when TPS's PI score was 80.1.

Determining the Rating

Determining your district's report card designation is amulti-step process. The first step is to determine a preliminary rating, which is based on the following components: 1) the percentage of indicatorsmet, 2) the performance index score and 3) AYP status.

The preliminary rating results from identifying the higher value between the percentage of indicators met by your district and your district's performance index score. AYP then is evaluated to determine its effect on the preliminary designation. There are three ways in which AYP can affect the preliminary designation.

  1. If a district meets AYP in the current year, it can be rated no lower than Continuous Improvement.
  2. If a district does not meet AYP for three consecutive years and in the current year it does not meet AYP in more than one student group, it can be rated no higher than Continuous Improvement.
  3. In all other cases, AYP has no effect on the preliminary designation. Once the preliminary designation is determined, value-added, the fourth measure in the accountability system, is evaluated to determine the impact (if any) on the district's final designation.
  1. If your district's rating is restricted to Continuous Improvement due to AYP, then value-added will have no impact on the designation and the preliminary designation becomes the final designation.
  2. If your district experiences above expected growth for at least two consecutive years, your district's final designation will increase by one level.
  3. In all other cases, value added has no effect on the rating and the preliminary designation becomes the final designation.

Area School Ratings

A school district's 2007-2008 rating and the number of academic indicators met out of a possible 30:

Fulton County

District NameRatingStandards MetAYPPI ScoreValue Added-Measure
Archbold-AreaExcellent with Distinction29Met103Above
EvergreenEffective26Met98.3Above
Gorham FayetteExcellent27Met99.1Above
PettisvilleExcellent29Met104.2Below
Pike-Delta-YorkExcellent28Met99.5Above
SwantonEffective20Met92.4Below
WauseonExcellent29Met101.8Above

Lucas County

District NameRatingStandards MetAYPPI ScoreValue Added-Measure
Anthony WayneExcellent29Met104.4Above
MaumeeExcellent with Distinction28Met100.9Above
OregonEffective23Met94.6Met
Ottawa HillsExcellent with Distinction30Met109.7Above
SpringfieldEffective27Met98.3Above
SylvaniaExcellent with Distinction30Met102.5Above
ToledoContinuous Improvement5Not Met80.1Below
Washington LocalExcellent21Met94.4Above

Ottawa County

District NameRatingStandards MetAYPPI ScoreValue Added-Measure
Benton Carroll SalemEffective25Met97.3Met
DanburyEffective22Met94.4Met
Genoa AreaEffective21Not Met94.8Below
Port ClintonEffective21Not Met94.8Below

Wood County

District NameRatingStandards MetAYPPI ScoreValue Added-Measure
Bowling GreenExcellent30Met100.6Above
EastwoodExcellent with Distinction29Met101.5Above
ElmwoodEffective20Not Met93.8Below
LakeEffective23Not Met93.2Met
North BaltimoreEffective23Met96.1Above
NorthwoodExcellent23Met97Above
OtsegoExcellent26Met98.7Above
PerrysburgExcellent with Distinction30Met103.3Above
RossfordExcellent25Met96.3Above

Miscellaneous Info

Toledo Property Taxes

From the fall Fall 2007 Lucas County Tax Distribution and Levy Estimator ...

Breakdown on where a Toledoan's property taxes are spent :

Toledo City School District
LeviesPercentage
General Fund50.61%
Bond Retirement8.40%
Permanent Improvement2.17%
Permanent Improv Fac0.70%
Subtotal61.88%

TPS Levy success

At least one TPS levy will be on the November 2008 ballot.

TPS Teacher Residency

From the TFT Web site :

The Toledo Federation of Teachers (TFT) represents Toledo's 3,000 teachers, paraprofessionals, and substitute teachers

From a March 2004 thread titled Mayor Ford loses support of black teachers :

Mr. Rahwae Shuman said : "What Mr. Ford failed to realize is that 70 percent of Mrs. Lawrence's membership lives outside of the city and can't vote for him."

Karen Shanahan said in an April 2007 Glass City Jungle thread :

... are you aware that 60% of the teachers and administrators of TPS live outside Toledo

School Spending

FY04 data posted by historymike.

Per-pupil by district for FY05 and FY06

(will add FY07 data later if available)

Fulton County

DistrictFY05FY06
Archbold-Area$8,818$9,800
Evergreen$8,242$8,436
Gorham Fayette$9,184$10,246
Pettisville$7,530$8,390
Pike-Delta-York$8,094$8,883
Swanton$7,077$8,135
Wauseon$6,637$7,234

Lucas County

DistrictFY05FY06
Anthony Wayne$7,923$8,169
Maumee$10,116$10,022
Oregon$9,678$10,979
Ottawa Hills$11,504$11,639
Springfield$8,977$8,912
Sylvania$8,980$9,400
Toledo$10,604$11,202
Washington Local$9,682$9,993

Ottawa County

DistrictFY05FY06
Benton Carroll Salem$9,374$9,900
Danbury$12,417$12,028
Genoa Area$6,975$7,933
Port Clinton$10,155$10,793
Put-In-Bay$23,090$25,749

Wood County

DistrictFY05FY06
Bowling Green$9,346$10,180
Eastwood$8,265$8,414
Elmwood$7,727$8,560
Lake$6,824$6,720
North Baltimore$8,319$8,946
Northwood$9,151$9,076
Otsego$7,837$8,123
Perrysburg$8,582$9,194
Rossford$10,516$10,816

Source from the Expenditure and Revenue data page at the ODE Web site.


Tuition at Toledo Central Catholic High School for the 2008-2009 school year is a little over $7,000.

created by jr on Aug 26, 2008 at 11:21:40 am
updated by jr on Aug 26, 2008 at 07:20:41 pm
    Comments: 26

print      source      versions

tags: education   

Comments ... #

I guess I'm happy to be in an "Excellent with Distinction" district. (Even though my kids go to Catholic school anyhow.)

But it still makes me sad for the residents of TPS. From the details, it doesn't sound like the bump from "Academic Watch" to "Continuous Improvement" was the sign of any real progress. What a shame.

posted by mom2 on Aug 26, 2008 at 11:28:16 pm     #



Prediction: COSI will use these figures to bolster their levy request.

posted by GraphicsGuy on Aug 27, 2008 at 12:32:23 am     #



jr or others, maybe you can answer this question for me: Ottawa Hills' school district (according to its Superintendent's staff) does not accept out-of-district students, but DOES accept "tuition" students (at approximately $9,800 annually). The state will not allow O.H. to offer scholarships (again, this is what the staff said). Does this make sense to anybody?

posted by MrsPhoenix on Aug 27, 2008 at 05:49:48 am     #



So if you get straight As at a failing school, does that make you a failure?

Or doesn't sending your kid to a failing school make you a failure as a parent?

Education is a controlled substance apparently MrsPhoenix.

posted by charlatan on Aug 27, 2008 at 07:44:57 am     #



"Education is a controlled substance ..."

Indeed. Many oppose school vouchers, which give kids at failing public schools a chance for something better.

May 2007 - Toledo Blade - TPS rallies for Strickland education plan :

The governor's plan calls for an end to Ohio's statewide voucher program that uses public money to pay private school tuition for children in low-scoring schools, a moratorium on the creation of new charter schools, and a prohibition against charter schools being run by private, for-profit companies.


April 2007 letter to the Blade :

It is distressing that Ted Strickland, in one of his first initiatives as governor, proposes taking away freedom of choice in education given to his constituency by the legislature.

How ironic that he stated, "Wastefulness and giveaways can no longer be tolerated" as the reason why the EdChoice voucher program must be eliminated.

It is precisely because wastefulness and giveaways can no longer be tolerated that the EdChoice voucher program was initiated in Ohio and why it is sweeping the country from coast to coast.

Taxpayer money given in vouchers is not wasted; it is, rather, a very good use of taxpayer money, as evidenced by the success of private and parochial school students. Nationally and locally, a host of civic, business, professional, legal, and educational leaders are products of private and parochial schools.

Governor Strickland is clearly out of step with the majority of Americans on this issue. Like most anti-choice voices, he is more concerned with propping up failing systems than with serving people that the systems are failing.

Speak up now to preserve freedom of choice!

RONALD OLSZEWSKI

President
St. Francis de Sales High School


April 2008 - Toledo Blade - Interest in tuition vouchers up in Ohio; More students seek plan; more schools accept


Don't know the latest voucher info for the 2008-2009 school year, but for last year :

The following school buildings have been in academic emergency or academic watch for two of the last three years, making their students eligible to apply for vouchers:

TOLEDO
Chase Elementary
Cherry Elementary *
Fulton Elementary
Garfield Elementary
Nathan Hale Elementary *
Jones Elementary
Lagrange Elementary
Leverette Elementary
Libbey High
Lincoln Academy for Boys
McTigue Junior High
Newbury Elementary
Pickett Elementary *
Raymer Elementary
Reynolds Elementary
Robinson Junior High
Scott High *
Sherman Elementary
Woodward High *

(*) Currently in program

SOURCE: Ohio Department of Education

posted by jr on Aug 27, 2008 at 08:11:04 am     #



Many oppose school vouchers, which give kids at failing public schools a chance for something better

I agree with Charlatan's assessment. If you get A's at a failing school, does that make you a failure? Vouchers are a scam.

posted by pink_slip on Aug 27, 2008 at 08:24:08 am     #



"Vouchers are a scam."

What evidence do you have to support that claim?


"If you get A's at a failing school, does that make you a failure?"

It means the student is an A-student. The student is not a failure. The failing grade applies to the building. It's an overall grade based upon all the students' scores in that building. You know that.


2007-2008 info for Pickett Elementary :

Building Rating = Academic Emergency (Grade F)

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 39.7

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 42.6

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 37.0

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 38.3

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2007-08) = 51.1

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 27.1

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 22.0

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Social Studies Achievement Test (2007-08) = 16.9

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Science Achievement Test (2007-08) = 10.2

Student Attendance Rate (2007-08) = 95.5


Attendance looks good. Even though the number of students scoring proficient or higher is low, it doesn't mean all the students are failing.

posted by jr on Aug 27, 2008 at 08:57:22 am     #



Vouchers are just another taxpayer subsidy to private industry. It amounts as a form of double taxation since we already fund public schools. Vouchers ensure that we also fund private schools as well. There is also no evidence that schools receiving voucher money perform any better than public schools. Often, as voucher programs in Milwaukee, Cleveland, and DC have shown us, the opposite is true. It all adds up. (X + Y)/Z = SCAM

posted by pink_slip on Aug 27, 2008 at 09:22:27 am     #



"There is also no evidence that schools receiving voucher money perform any better than public schools."

What about the student who uses the voucher money to enroll in another school? Does that student perform better?

What about those parents or guardians who cannot afford to move to a better school district or cannot afford a private school? Should these people be denied school choice? Should their kids be forced to attend failing public schools?

If you're worried about wasting taxpayer money, what about the millions of dollars wasted on public schools that get a failing grade year after year? Why do some school buildings perform poorly while others do well?


2007-2008 info for Elmhurst Elementary :

Building Rating: Excellent (Grade A)

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 96.4

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 90.6

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 82.2

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 77.8

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2007-08) = 80.0

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 87.8

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 71.4

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Social Studies Achievement Test (2007-08) = 77.6

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Science Achievement Test (2007-08) = 77.6

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2007-08) = 91.2

Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Math Achievement Test (2007-08) = 82.4

Student Attendance Rate (2007-08) = 96.9


Elmhurst Elementary begins the 2008-2009 school year in a new building that includes a pond to support their youth bass fishing program.

posted by jr on Aug 27, 2008 at 10:25:29 am     #



What about the student who uses the voucher money to enroll in another school? Does that student perform better?

Nope.

What about those parents or guardians who cannot afford to move to a better school district or cannot afford a private school? Should these people be denied school choice? Should their kids be forced to attend failing public schools?

In order to answer this, I would need more info. If the student is doing well, why would they want to leave? If the student is not doing well, then they have the choice to study harder. The parents can choose to get more involved with the child's education.

Why do some school buildings perform poorly while others do well?

Buildings don't perform.

posted by pink_slip on Aug 27, 2008 at 10:50:21 am     #



My and my husband's experience so far with McTigue admin. has been surprisingly good. Our daughter stayed on the Principal's List averaging a 3.9 throughout 5th grade. On the Otis-Lennon School Ability test, she scored a 136 rating in the "Gifted" category. On her OATs, she scored in the "Accelerated" level for both Reading & Social Studies and "Advanced" in Math. Her lowest score was "Proficient" in Science. Once her McTigue counselor saw these scores during last week's Schedule Pick-Up day, she instantly changed her schedule to all Honors classes in those core subjects (including her "weakest" subject: Science).

posted by MrsPhoenix on Aug 27, 2008 at 11:01:53 am     #



"Buildings don't perform."

Tell that to the Ohio Department of Education. These are the government's words: "Building Rating:" .


To comply with pink_slip's word games, why do students in some TPS schools perform much better than students in other TPS schools?


And why does one Toledo school district score and rate much higher than the other Toledo school district?

District NameRatingStandards MetAYPPI ScoreValue Added-Measure
ToledoContinuous Improvement5Not Met80.1Below
Washington LocalExcellent21Met94.4Above


In September 2005, Carty Finkbeiner said :

Toledo has two public schools systems -- Toledo and Washington Local. The Washington Local School District offers a startling contrast when compared to Toledo Public Schools. In state proficiency ratings, Washington Local meets 13 out of 23 state indicators while TPS meets only 4. In addition, Washington Local's Performance Index ranks 92 out of 120 while TPS lags behind at 76. We need to indentify the factors behind Washington Local's successes and replicate them throughout the Toledo Public School System.

In August 2007, Jack Ford asked in his column with the Sojourner's Truth :

And, why are there two separate public school systems in Toledo?

In July 2007, the Toledo City Paper's Dildo column said :

Combine school districts into a county-wide school system. The redundancy inherent in every little township having its own schools, with its own transportation, cafeteria, and administrative systems boggles the mind. Cost savings would be automatic, as would a leveling of educational options for kids. Turf protection is the only reason we can fathom for not supporting this idea. Are the townships and 'burbs that worried about their little fiefdoms?

When it comes to anything related to cooperating with Toledo, it's wise for the other communities to look out for their own best interests. After all, that's the thinking of the mayor of Toledo about the other communities.

posted by jr on Aug 27, 2008 at 01:07:23 pm     #



why do students in some TPS schools perform much better than students in other TPS schools?

The only correlation I've seen that makes sense is money. And no, I'm not referring to money spent per pupil--but instead, family income. If you want to improve education in the US (or locally), you can start with addressing poverty.

posted by pink_slip on Aug 27, 2008 at 03:16:45 pm     #



pink_slip - amen

posted by SensorG on Aug 27, 2008 at 04:01:15 pm     #



pink_slip, you said above :

If the student is not doing well, then they have the choice to study harder. The parents can choose to get more involved with the child's education.

If public school is "free" what does poverty have to do with a child studying harder? Parental involvement doesn't always mean helping the child with homework. It can mean making sure the child goes to school, making sure the child attempts the homework, parent talking with the teachers, and having the child attend a tutoring program if necessary. And I don't see what poverty has to do with this kind of parental involvement.

Example :

From a Jun 29, 2004 Toledo Talk thread titled More evidence that parents are at fault? that pointed to a Jun 26, 2004 Blade story titled Bulk of TPS students ignore free test help From the 2004 Blade story:

When the state gave Toledo Public Schools $380,000 to prepare high school students for the Ohio Graduation Test, administrators were eager to help the students get ready. They scheduled Saturday sessions, before and after-school workshops, and summer programs. All were free. But just a handful of students turned out for the programs, school administrators said.

At the East Toledo school, about 15 students are attending a three-week, half-day summer session focusing on all areas of the test. An additional 20 students took advantage of some before and after-school tutoring in March and April, with another 30 students in Saturday sessions during February, said Robin Wheatley, assistant principal of curriculum and instruction. But those 70 students were among hundreds invited.

"I was extremely disappointed," Miss Wheatley said. "I sent letters to the parents saying, 'Your student refused to be tutored.'"

Teachers called parents at all times of the day to inform them about the free summer session and sent letters explaining the test and the extra help students could get.

At Scott High School, about 46 of the roughly 180 invited students attended the summer sessions that focused on mathematics and reading, said Jose Hernandez, the summer program coordinator. "We send out a letter to parents. We call parents. We talk to parents at freshman meetings," he said. "We have incentive packages - T-shirts and things like that. Right now, we're getting the kids who really want to improve."

In the above example, it appears TPS officials did all they could. What does poverty have to do with this example? All the parents had to do was get their kid to the summer school. Sure, getting a child to attend summer school is tough, but that's when tough love from the parent is required.


Aug 27, 2008 - Toledo Blade - Toledo's household income ranks among poorest cities :

The top 10 large cities with the lowest median household income in 2007:

  1. Detroit $28,097
  2. Cleveland $28,512
  3. Miami $29,075
  4. Buffalo $29,706
  5. Pittsburgh $32,363
  6. Cincinnati $33,006
  7. St. Louis $34,191
  8. Newark, N.J. $34,452
  9. Memphis $35,143
  10. Toledo $35,216
[Toledo's] poverty rate - 23 percent - stayed about the same, and the median income went up by about 0.5 percent compared to 2006. But with the nation's median household income rising by 1.9 percent, Toledo's gains were outpaced by the rest of the country.

Household income is the income of all people over 15 years old living in a single house - whether or not they are related to the owner. All the figures are adjusted for inflation. Mr. Finkbeiner said he was pleased the median income for Toledo had increased in 2007 over 2006.


Radical idea mentioned in this July 2004 Toledo Talk thread titled Paying parents to educate their kids. A cycle-breaker of an idea? Spend extra taxpayer money when the student is young, so the child ultimately graduates high school and gets a good enough job to not be in poverty. Maybe paying parents to parent saves taxpayer money in the long run.

This was an experimental program in Detroit, and I have no idea what the results were.

The lure: Parents are paid to come to monthly classes and work with their child.

The man behind it: Dr. Charles Whitten, a retired distinguished professor and associate dean in Wayne State University's School of Medicine, well-known nationally for his efforts as a sickle-cell disease specialist and for recruiting minorities into medicine. Whitten acknowledges that some may question paying parents to teach their children, but he is adamant that it works.

"We've tried everything else. We found a way to get parents to prepare their children by paying them," [said Dr. Whitten.]

Veronica Morrow, Christian's mother, said she would have signed up for the program regardless of the cash incentive, which was $60 a month for working with the child 15 minutes a day, six days a week.

Whitten said he firmly believes that if parents knew how to teach their children -- and were committed to it -- their kids wouldn't enter kindergarten so far behind. So, with the help of a Wayne State education professor, Whitten created the curriculum.

Many unprepared children are coming from homes where there are few books, few adults reading and few adults reading to their children.

A search on Dr. Charles Whitten showed he died two weeks ago today.

posted by jr on Aug 27, 2008 at 04:39:57 pm     #



Toledo's poverty rate is 23 percent.

From a June 12, 2008 Toledo Blade story :

Read for Literacy, citing U.S. Department of Education data, says that one in five Toledo residents read at or below basic level.

The local library has a Read for Literacy program where volunteers teach adults how to read or how to improve their reading skills.

July 1, 2004 Toledo Blade story titled Toledo: Literacy program makes life richer for many :

After struggling to raise 10 children, LeAnna Faison knew something was still missing in her life. The 65-year-old woman couldn't answer homework questions from her grandchildren because she didn't know how to read. Ms. Faison, through Read for Literacy, Inc., was one of the stars of its awards program last week. She was honored as its Adult Learner of the Year.

Ms. Faison dropped out of school in the eighth grade in Tupelo, Miss., to help her family with chores and make ends meet by picking cotton. She was at a first-grade reading level when she entered Read For Literacy. Now, she can read the newspaper, write letters and use the library. Her tutor Retha Carothers, said the two also read passages from the Bible.

Ms. Kaufman said she has noticed a change in the people approaching Read for Literacy. "We used to see more high school graduates," Ms. Kaufman said. "Now, we're starting to see people who dropped out in the ninth and 10th grades. They weren't able to pass the proficiency test and saw no future and dropped out of school."

posted by jr on Aug 27, 2008 at 05:13:16 pm     #



Thesis: the best predictor for success in education is socioeconomic statis.

posted by Offshore on Aug 28, 2008 at 06:49:33 am     #



Could it also be said that education is the best predictor of future socioeconomic status?

posted by jr on Aug 28, 2008 at 07:07:59 am     #



Yes, the two are complementary.

posted by Offshore on Aug 28, 2008 at 07:19:30 am     #



And I don't see what poverty has to do with this kind of parental involvement.

I don't know what else to tell you, but the correlation is there.

posted by pink_slip on Aug 28, 2008 at 08:11:08 am     #



Financially poor parents can be wonderful parents and greatly involved. But, many impoverished family structures are matriarchal with emphases on survival without a future orientation and education is abstract and not a reality.

posted by Offshore on Aug 28, 2008 at 08:29:01 am     #



"I don't know what else to tell you, but the correlation is there."

Bulk of TPS students ignore free test help

So the above Blade headline for the corresponding TPS story can be explained away because of poverty.

posted by jr on Aug 28, 2008 at 09:29:43 am     #



So pink_slip and Offshore, aren't you making the case FOR school vouchers?

Impoverished students in failing schools can use the voucher money to attend a school with possibly a better learning environment that may allow these impoverished kids to learn more, which will hopefully keep them out of poverty when they become adults.

Does this work 100%? Of course not. But the status quo is clearly not working. Vouchers are an option. It's a chance. It's better than the child remaining in the same failing school.

You keep talking about poverty, but you offer no solutions. Vouchers and paying parents to teach their kids are a couple ideas to help brake the cycle.

Adults with little to no reading skills should spend a year or two in the Read for Literacy program. It would cost these adults nothing except one to two hours a day, two to three days per week. Surely an adult can set aside four hours a week, devoted to learning how to read. With no reading ability, the adult can read at the third or fourth grade level after one year in the program. Naturally, the longer the adult remains in the program, the more advanced the adult becomes at reading.

One of pink_slip's arguments against vouchers was :

If the student is not doing well, then they have the choice to study harder. The parents can choose to get more involved with the child's education.

But now pink_slip is saying parents cannot get involved with their kids' education because of poverty. Then at least allow the child to attend a different school with a voucher, so the kid has some chance to not be like his parents.

I like pink_slip's word choices. The students have the choice to study harder. The parents can choose to get more involved. But let's deny the parents the choice of sending their child to a different school via a taxpayer-funded voucher. I suppose taxpayer dollars won't be used to end poverty.

Is it possible that poor-performing urban public schools are partly to blame for today's poverty rates? So let's keep the kids stranded in some of these failing schools by ending school vouchers.

posted by jr on Aug 28, 2008 at 10:24:43 am     #



"So pink_slip and Offshore, aren't you making the case FOR school vouchers?"

I'm not against school choice but I admittedly need to know more about vouchers before I support to condemn them.

"You keep talking about poverty, but you offer no solutions."

Oh, I don't know about that.

posted by Offshore on Aug 28, 2008 at 10:57:11 am     #



Oops, push wrong button.

I have, and live solutions on a daily basis. But, the differences in our middle-class expectations and that of a culture or poverty cause my skepticism.

posted by Offshore on Aug 28, 2008 at 11:06:25 am     #



So the above Blade headline for the corresponding TPS story can be explained away because of poverty.

In some of those situations, yes. The Blade article mentioned many kids didn't have transportation. I don't know about all of them--I would need more info.

Impoverished students in failing schools can use the voucher money to attend a school with possibly a better learning environment that may allow these impoverished kids to learn more

There is no evidence that this is true. You mentioned parents involvement. Do you think that if you have a kid that is doing poorly, and part of the reason is lack of parental involvement---that suddenly because of vouchers, that parent will become more involved with their child's education?

Vouchers and paying parents to teach their kids are a couple ideas to help brake the cycle.

No they don't. There's no evidence that this is true. You keep implying that taking a child out of one school and putting them in another is going to make them suddenly get better grades. But study after study proves this wrong.

Poverty and Education:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080817/OPINION03/808170318/-1/LIFE04

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/salas.356/home

posted by pink_slip on Aug 28, 2008 at 11:31:19 am     #