When no one listens the first five times you make your point
(see box), you know it is time to take a different tack. So a simple request:
please look at page 3, the AP scores for one Colorado high school.
AV#95 – “Mismatch - Adding more AP
classes in low-performing high schools” (March 2013); AV#114; AV#126; AV#134;
“OPEN LETTER TO: Denver School Board and Staff”
(March 2017)
|
The Colorado
Education Initiative, with its Colorado Legacy Schools (CLS), has not made
public any Advanced Placement scores for their 47[i]
schools for three years (last mention of results on CEI’s website is from
November 2015[ii]). School
districts rarely publish their scores. Aurora
Public Schools stopped presenting school-by-school results, as it had done
for six straight years, after 2013[iii]; Denver Public Schools no longer
provides a breakdown of the number tested and passed, by course, for each high
school, as it had up until 2016.[iv] Three cheers, then, (and my deep thanks) to the
Harrison School District for
providing the AP results for the past six academic years, 2013 to 2018, at
Sierra High.
If CEI shows different results than what Harrison reports, I
trust it will make them public. Just as
we should be glad to see the details of AP results at two APS and DPS
low-performing high schools, Abraham Lincoln and Aurora Central, schools like
Sierra High that CEI never should have included in its AP push. But again – ever since I included their AP
results in previous newsletters – we see little to nothing.[v]
CEI states:
“Our Colorado Legacy
Schools (CLS) initiative works with 47 high schools across the state to
dramatically increase the number and diversity of Colorado high school students
who are succeeding in AP math, science, and English courses — especially
students typically underrepresented in AP courses such as females, and students
of poverty and color.”[vi]
A “dramatic increase
…” As I have shown before, this never
happened at Abraham Lincoln and Aurora Central. I had hoped anyone who
studied the alarmingly poor results of CEI’s effort there would
have agreed. And – while not a clear
cause and effect, but a factor - the
schools continued to falter. Are we
able to admit our mistakes? Can we see when our desire “to help” is misguided, even
harmful?
At its website, we
read: “Colorado Legacy Schools - College success begins with high school
success.”[vii]
School
Performance Framework
|
Percentage
Points Earned
|
||||||
2012
Prior to CEI AP effort
|
2013
CEI – Yr 1
|
2014
CEI – Yr 2
|
2016*
After CEI AP support
|
2017
|
2018
(Prelim)
|
2018
(Prelim)
|
|
Improvement
|
Improvement
|
Priority Improvement
- Yr 1
|
Priority
Improvement - Yr 2
|
Priority
Improvement - Yr 3
|
Priority
Improvement - Yr 4
|
41.8%
|
|
Aurora
Central High School (APS)
|
Priority Improvement
- Yr 3
|
Priority Improvement - Yr 4
|
Priority Improvement - Yr 5
|
TURNAROUND
- Yr 6
|
Priority Improvement - Yr 7
|
Priority Improvement - Yr 8
|
37.4%
|
*2015 was the third year of the CEI AP Initiative at these
two schools; due to a shift in assessments, no SPF was produced that year.
So much for success. But that is old news. CEI just completed the third year of its AP
Initiative at Sierra High. What follows provides the AP results there—data reported for 2013-14, prior to the Legacy Schools initiative,
and then, over the three years of CEI’s support - 2015-16 to 2017-18. The results show that the work at Sierra
High not only did not “dramatically increase” the number of students there
“succeeding in AP math, science, and English”—if success means a passing score. In those subjects, the number
declined.
The data convinces me
that CEI’s AP Initiative at Sierra failed. The results support the argument I
have made for years: with our lowest-performing high schools, it is a mistake
to emphasize placing many more students in AP classes. Classes designed to offer college-level work
are rarely a good match for schools where the far majority of students are not
reading, writing, or doing math at grade level.
Will anyone argue the CEI effort helped Sierra High School improve?
(See Addendum A for details behind these declining
SPF ratings during the first two years of CEI’s AP Initiative.)
The Harrison School District sent me the number of students
at Sierra High taking and passing each of these AP classes, and the
pass rate per course. My overall tally (next page) excludes the good
story about the success Sierra students have had on the Spanish Language and
Culture class. It was already—prior to
the CEI effort—the one class that stood out for having a majority of the
students pass the AP exam – 58.8%, in fact (10 out of 17 in 2015). It was great to see the 2017 results: 15 out
of 17 students passing this Spanish AP exam (88.2%), and the 2018 scores: 17
out of 20 passing in 2018 (88%). However,
such passing rates have been an anomaly in a school where the percentage scoring
a 3 or better is otherwise terribly low.
So it seems important to note the distinction – the TOTAL WITH and TOTAL
WITHOUT the impressive passing rates for the Spanish AP – in order to capture
if the AP push proved effective during the three years Sierra was part of the
CEI project.
Again, the data here comes from the Harrison School District.
First, my summary of the chart that follows.
SIERRA HIGH SCHOOL –
AP results - Summary
|
(before CEI support)
|
2016 (year
1 CEI support)
|
2017 (year
2 CEI support)
|
2018 (year
3 CEI support)
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
135
|
21.5%
|
29
|
328
|
8.8%
|
29
|
255
|
8.6%
|
22
|
212
|
13.2%
|
28
|
Now, the details. Look closely at the results in English, Math, and Science courses, the
focus of CEI’s work.
SIERRA HIGH SCHOOL -
AP results
2015
(before CEI
support)
|
2016 (yr 1 CEI support)
|
2017 (yr 2 CEI support)
|
2018 (yr 3 CEI support)
|
|||||||||
|
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
Biology
|
NA
|
|
|
31
|
9.7%
|
3
|
11
|
*
|
|
NA
|
|
|
Calculus AB
|
16
|
31.3%
|
5
|
60
|
11.7%
|
7
|
25
|
16%
|
4
|
19
|
21.1%
|
4
|
Calculus BC
|
NA
|
|
|
9
|
*
|
|
12
|
*
|
|
8
|
*
|
|
Calculus BC:
AB Subscore
|
NA
|
|
|
9
|
*
|
|
12
|
*
|
|
8
|
*
|
|
Chemistry
|
13
|
*
|
21
|
4.8%
|
1
|
NA
|
NA
|
|||||
Computer Science Principles
|
NA
|
NA
|
8
|
*
|
NA
|
|||||||
English Language &
Composition
|
28
|
32.1%
|
9
|
52
|
5.8%
|
3
|
63
|
7.9%
|
5
|
NA
|
||
English Literature &
Composition
|
26
|
26.9%
|
7
|
34
|
17.6%
|
6
|
38
|
5.3%
|
2
|
29
|
10.3%
|
3
|
Environmental Science
|
21
|
9.5%
|
2
|
22
|
0%
|
0
|
18
|
16.7%
|
3
|
27
|
7.4%
|
2
|
Human Geography
|
NA
|
25
|
12%
|
3
|
34
|
2.9%
|
1
|
40
|
2.5%
|
1
|
||
Physics I
|
NA
|
NA
|
6
|
*
|
NA
|
|||||||
Psychology
|
17
|
11.8%
|
2
|
16
|
12.5%
|
2
|
15
|
*
|
61
|
24.6%
|
15
|
|
Spanish Language & Culture
|
17
|
58.8%
|
10
|
13
|
*
|
17
|
88.2%
|
15
|
20
|
85%
|
17
|
|
Statistics
|
9
|
*
|
10
|
*
|
11
|
*
|
9
|
*
|
||||
Studio Art: 2-D Design
Portfolio
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
3
|
*
|
|||||||
Studio Art: Drawing Portfolio
|
6
|
*
|
10
|
*
|
5
|
*
|
NA
|
|||||
U.S. Government & Politics
|
NA
|
15
|
*
|
NA
|
NA
|
|||||||
U.S. History
|
NA
|
28
|
10.7%
|
3
|
35
|
2.9%
|
1
|
14
|
*
|
|||
World History
|
27
|
14.8%
|
4
|
39
|
2.6%
|
1
|
43
|
14.06%
|
6
|
22
|
13.6%
|
3
|
TOTAL
W/ SPANISH
|
180
|
39
|
394
|
290
|
341
|
37
|
260
|
45
|
||||
TOTAL
W/O SPANISH
|
135
|
21.5%
|
29
|
328
|
8.8%
|
29
|
255
|
8.6%
|
22
|
212
|
13.2%
|
28
|
A few highlights:
1. By year three of the CEI effort, Sierra
High School had dropped seven AP courses (5 of them in the English, Math, and
Science field – the focus of CEI’s Initiative):
- Biology*
- Chemistry**
- Computer
Science Principles
- English
Language Composition***
- Physics
- Studio
Art: Drawing Portfolio
- U.S.
Government & Politics
During the three years of CEI support, the passing rates on
these seven courses, where shown, were shockingly low. One assumes that was a factor in Sierra
dropping them.
*Biology - 2016: 3 out of 31 passing.
**Chemistry – 2015 – not offered; 2016,
year one with CEI: 21 students, one passed; course then dropped for 2017 and
2018.
***English Language
& Composition – number taking grew from 2015 (28 passing) to 2016 (52) but
the number passing declined, as did
the percentage passing: 2016: 3/52 - 2017:
5/63
2. Growth in the number taking at times led to a dramatic drop in the percentage passing:
English Literature
& Composition: number taking
grew from 2015 during the three-year initiative, but the number and the percentage
passing declined: 2015: 7/26 2016:
6/34 2017: 2/38 2018:
3/29
Human Geography:
not offered prior to 2016, numbers taking grew from 2016 to 2018, yet numbers
passing incredibly low: 2016: 3/25
2017: 1/34 2018:
1/40
Passing rates in several courses were low,
then fell further:
AP EXAM
|
2015
(before CEI
support)
|
2016 (yr 1 CEI support)
|
2017 (yr 2 CEI support)
|
2018 (yr 3 CEI support)
|
||||||||
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
N
|
Pass Rate
|
# Passing
|
|
English Literature and
Composition
|
26
|
26.9%
|
7
|
34
|
17.6%
|
6
|
38
|
5.3%
|
2
|
29
|
10.3%
|
3
|
21
|
9.5%
|
2
|
22
|
0%
|
0
|
18
|
16.7%
|
3
|
27
|
7.4%
|
2
|
|
Human Geography
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
25
|
12%
|
3
|
34
|
2.9%
|
1
|
40
|
2.5%
|
1
|
World History
|
27
|
14.8%
|
4
|
39
|
2.6%
|
1
|
43
|
14.06%
|
6
|
22
|
13.6%
|
3
|
Yes, that
really is a ZERO - 0 out of 22 students
in 2016 - passing the Environmental
Science exam.
In four
years, only 7 out of 88 students
taking the Environmental Science
exam received a passing score. In three
years, only 5 students out of 99 taking
World History earned passing
score.
With such
bleak passing rates, one would think Sierra might drop these AP courses as well.
Accountability.
Transparency. Facts.
What would I
like to see? No more opinions about
how we can make our high schools more equitable
by providing greater access to
students who have previously not had the opportunity
to take rigorous college-level classes. No more arguments about how the results at a school like Sierra High fail
to take into account the benefits of
merely taking a more rigorous courses, whether the student earns a passing
rate or not. We are familiar with such
points. What we have not seen lately – from CEI, DPS, or APS – are the results
of the AP expansion in our state’s lowest-performing high schools. That is what I look for. Once such data is made public – I have not
lost hope – then we might have a discussion based on the facts.
Addendum A – Sierra High School
From Colorado's School Performance Frameworks
2014
Prior to CEI effort
Percentage points/ Rating
|
2016
CE- Yr1
Percentage points/ Rating
|
2017
CEI – Yr 2
Percentage points/ Rating
|
2018
CEI – Yr 3
|
|
Achievement
|
50% /
Approaching
|
42.1% / Approaching
|
29.3% /
Does Not Meet
|
|
Growth
|
64.3% /
Meets
|
64.4% /
Meets
|
48.9% / Approaching
|
|
PWR
|
68.8% /
Meets
|
56.9% / Approaching
|
54.2% / Approaching
|
|
CO-
SAT – EBR (READING)
|
452.4 /
Does Not Meet
|
464
|
||
(STATE
AVERAGE)
|
513.4
|
513
|
||
SAT
– MATH
|
435.5 /
Does Not Meet
|
445
|
||
(STATE
AVERAGE)
|
500.9
|
501
|
Data from School Performance
Frameworks - 2014, 2016, 2017* – and SAT scores from 2018**
** https://www.cde.state.co.us/assessment/cosatdataandresults
[i]
This total of 47 comes from CEI website - https://www.coloradoedinitiative.org/our-work/colorado-legacy-schools/;
CEI’s website also shows another 8 schools (cohort 6) are half-way through
their two-year participation in the CLS program(https://www.coloradoedinitiative.org/our-work/colorado-legacy-schools/colorado-legacy-schools-cls/),
which would bring the total of Legacy schools to 55.
[ii] http://www.coloradoedinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Final_2015CLSStateResults_Cohort3_20151117.pdf And this only had details on ONE school.
“Glenwood Springs High School (GSHS) in Roaring Fork School District is
celebrating incredible first-year results in the program.” GSHS Principal Paul
Freeman is quoted there as stating: “This school year, our student enrollment
in AP courses jumped to 234 enrolled students and 312 students have already
enrolled in AP courses for the 2016-2017 school year — we’re really excited
about our results.” No data reported
on any of those 11 schools in that cohort for years two and three; no data reported on ANY of the 3 schools
in cohort 4 or the 10 schools in cohort 5, which have all completed their
three-year participation in the CLS program.
[iii] From AV#137 (October 5, 2015) - “Up until 2013 Aurora
Public Schools released results on the AP tests at its high schools. But as of [a] year ago March, the APS Division
of Accountability and Research told me ‘our office doesn’t do the AP report any longer.’” (NOTE:
Back in 2014, AV#114 included six years of AP results at Aurora Central High
-2007-8 to 2012-13). In 2017 I asked APS if this was still the policy: The
response from Mya L. Martin-Glenn,
Ph.D., Director,
Assessment & Research, Division of Equity in Learning: “Yes,
that is still the case. We do not post or release AP results at the high
schools and we do not require the high schools to post that information.”
[iv]In 2016 DPS gave results for all STEM tests and all
English tests but no longer gave a breakdown by specific tests/courses. The past two years the public sees even less.
After receiving the 2017-18 AP report from DPS in early November, I asked if
there would be a breakdown of the results by schools and by the tests. The
response from Danielle Johnson, Research and Strategy Manager: “It
will not. This is the reporting structure we moved to using a couple years ago
and the only report we produce internally and externally.”
[v] The
2017-18 results present one line per school. It is intriguing, perhaps a first step
away from the AP push, to see the
number taking AP tests declining significantly at schools like Abraham Lincoln
(493 in 2015, 219 last year); MLK Jr. (413 in 2014, only 36 last year); and
under three digits at JFK (64), Noel Arts (43), and High Tech (30) in 2018.
