As a follow-up about the issues I raised in a recent post comparing PSSA scores over the years and about which I made public comment at last Thursday’s Board Meeting, the District is in the process of taking a look at Math. I am told the two high school principals are collecting data, and that the District plans to share information with the Board through the Academic Standards Committee (whose meetings are public but not televised).
As a reminder, I took PSSA results from three years ago and compared it to results this year for three grade-levels higher (thus, comparing the same general student groups’ performances). In Reading the results over the years for proficiency were generally good, as well as in Writing. The numbers in Math, however, revealed a trend that called for some examination. At every grade level, there was an increase in the number of students performing below basic. In three of the four levels where comparison could be done, the percentage of students who scored proficient or advanced had dropped.
Another issue of concern was the drop-off from 8th grade to 11th grade performance scores in Reading and Math. Although there may be anecdotal stories of high school students not giving the PSSAs the same level of exertion as SATs since PSSAs don’t affect marks or graduation, the results in Writing did not suggest the same thing. So did 11th graders try harder in Writing while not as much for the other two subject areas, or are there other causative factors?
It is important that these numbers be used to check for trends and issues now, because the system will be undergoing change over the next few years. As I posted a few days ago, the PSSA-M tests will begin to be given to students with IEPs in Math this year and in Reading next year. This will change the dynamics of results so the same comparisons won’t be possible. It won’t mean that a problem doesn’t exist, only that PSSA results across the years won’t have the same data bases so no valid comparison will evidence those potential issues. Furthermore, the State is moving toward introducing Keystone exams in high schools in the next few years, meaning another change in the ability to compare students’ progress.
This will bear watching to see what determinations are made regarding curriculum and/or instruction as they relate to lagging test results.
Filed under: Administration, Council Rock, Data, Programs, Students, Teachers | Tagged: Administration, Curriculum, No Child Left Behind, Programs, PSSA, Students, Teachers
Math scores for 11th grade have now dropped so low that Pennsbury for the first time in my long memory outperforms our students.
This may be due in part to the fact that Robert Hawkins the math teacher who spent his time and effort on other things rather than improving math curriculum was the head of the math department.
The bigger issue is that the entire CRHS curriculum is overseen by [name withheld] who has NO experience prior to his being appointed to oversee High School curriculum in curriculum development. [Withheld] is a Gym Teacher by training and was an elementary school principal before landing this plush job that pays him near $150,000 a year.
While CR students are some of the most affluent and well prepared students in the state our PSSA scores now rank us 139th in the state out of 501 districts with regards to students who score below basic (i.e. fail the state math tests). 16% failed last year. We only rank 87th in the state with percentage to be in the advanced category.
These results are unacceptable given the fact the CR teachers are the highest paid in the state and the CR area is extremely affluent with most children attending various pre school and after school experiences before they reach HS.
The HS math curriculum needs to be examined and [withheld] needs to be reassigned to teaching Gym.
This comment has been posted with the individual’s name withheld. The Watchdog is interested on encouraging discussion and bringing issues/concerns to light. However, it is not the intent to publicly put people’s names out there for mass consumption. Faced with the issue of deleting the comment (which contains some valid concerns) or publishing it as is, I felt this was a more reasonable approach.
This poster (crparent) does not have a “valid point”, they have made a post that is completely untrue. A SIMPLE check of the website reveals that the district math coordinator is a woman (who has been with the district for many years) and that souths math department corrdinator is again, a woman (with a doctorate no less) and that north’s department coordinator is again a woman.
These FACTS can be checked here:
http://www.crsd.org/5039062195338/blank/browse.asp?A=383&BMDRN=2000&BCOB=0&C=53990
http://www.crsd.org/50330927132033/site/default.asp
http://www.crsd.org/50330102495513/site/default.asp
Maybe you should check posters comments for accuracy (especially when it is so easily done) or is okay if they are factually inaccurate as long as they’re scathing?
The comment-writer was talking about the person who is in charge of overseeing the entire CRHS curriculum, not simply who is the Math Coordinator. The Director of Secondary Education is not one of the women to whom you refer, it is the man mentioned in that reply to the original post. So pointing out female Math Coordinators to claim the post was inaccurate is specious.
On a second issue, you state that the Math Coordinator at South is a woman, which is true now. But this topic deals with PSSA scores from 2008-09. The Math Coordinator for Council Rock High School South in 2008-09 was Robert Hawkins, terminated this year for allegedly having a relationship with a student.
So on both these points I am at a loss as to your call for me to check accuracy. The Director of Secondary Education is shown at this link to the CRSD website. The name of Mr. Hawkins as South’s 2008-09 Math Coordinator can be found at the bottom of this letter to parents at Back-to-School Night for 2008-09. I welcome you to check these links for accuracy.
I’m at a loss as to how you don’t understand the difference between a District Curriculum Coordinator and a department chair in a building, you being the “watchdog” and all.
CRParent was not more “germane”, not if your readers are looking for facts. The District Curriculum Coordinator for Math who worked to help develop the math curriculum IS a woman and has done that job for YEARS. Bob Hawkins, slime that he is, was the building department chair and was the coordinator for the Math department for that building. He may have affected curricular decisions AT SOUTH, but in no way did he develop the math curriculum for the district.
The fact remains that CRParent disparages the Director of Secondary Ed at CR with mis-statements and represents them as fact when they can easily be checked and you allow it. Why is that?
If you want to address the opinion stated by the poster, that is fine and I encourage you to present an opposing point of view.
Your response stated that the comment posted was “completely untrue” and criticized my allowing it to be posted. However, the fact of the referenced individual being in charge of the entire CRHS curriculum was not at all incorrect. The poster never mentioned the District’s Curriculum Coordinator for Math, whom you cited as a woman to try and show that the poster was off on the facts.
As far as Mr. Hawkins being Math Department Coordinator at South, that was a fact for the year 2008-09, which is the year being referenced in PSSA results. Your first reply was the one that shows a woman who is currently the Math Dept. Coordinator at South for 2009-10, which is after the period when the test results apply. So again, the reference by the poster was not incorrect as to facts.
If it’s the opinions expressed with which you disagree, your comments continue to be welcome.
Everyone knows that gym teachers make better principals than math teachers.