March 2024
After 14 years of low performance at Aurora Central High, APS
is no closer to a strong plan
When a school has been on Colorado’s school accountability clock since day one of the new system (2010), when this school hit Year 9 on the clock and had to go before the State Board of Education to present an improvement plan (2019) and, in light of its recent performance, the school must do so again in the spring of 2024, one would think it is well prepared.
|
April 12, 2017 |
|
“Stay the course: Struggling Aurora Central will not
face drastic state-ordered changes”[i] “Aurora Central High School will continue ongoing reforms but with help from a management company, avoiding more dire consequences for its chronic low performance over more than five years.” (Chalkbeat Colorado, by Yesenia
Robles) |
One would think the high school, aware of its discouraging track record over the past decade, aware of the serious concerns voiced by the State Board at the 2019 hearing, recognizes why it is on the hot seat.[ii]
Colorado School Performance Framework (SPF) Ratings for Aurora Central High School
|
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
2012-13 |
2013-14 |
*2015-16 |
2016-17 |
2017-18 |
2018-19 |
2019-20 to 2020-21** |
2021-22 |
|
PI |
PI |
PI |
PI |
PI |
TR |
PI |
PI |
PI |
PI |
TR |
TR =Turnaround – lowest rating / PI = Priority Improvement – 2nd
lowest rating / *2014-15-no ratings / **No change due to COVID
|
Nov. 15, 2019 |
|
“Aurora Central High gets one more year to show progress before state weighs more drastic action”[iii] "Acdemically troubled school has been on Colorado’s accountability clock for nine years” (The Denver Post, by Meg Wingerter) |
The above School Performance Framework stops at 2021-22 because APS opened a new program in 2022-23, the Charles Burrell Visual and Performing Arts (CBVPA) magnet school,[iv] located on the Aurora Central Campus. Burrell Arts K-8 started with grades 3 and 6; it plans to add grades each year.
The SPF for the Aurora Central Campus for 2022-23 reads
“Insufficient Data,” but that is due—as its Director, Jessica Brown, made clear
on Feb. 6, to the elementary [and middle] schools only having single grades – thus
having “no correlative growth data to measure.” However, there was plenty of data
for Aurora Central High School. Once again it was rated on Priority
Improvement.
|
|
Points by Level |
Overall Rating by Level |
Academic Achievement % Points Earned |
Academic Achievement |
|
Elementary |
52.7 |
Improvement |
56.8% |
Approaching |
|
Middle |
72.9 |
Performance |
51.1% |
Approaching |
|
High |
39.9 |
Priority
Improvement |
25.0% |
Does
Not Meet |
*Points and Overall Rating by Level were presented to the APS Board on
Feb. 6.[v] Achievement
data is my addition.
On Feb. 6 Brown joined Kurtis Quig, Principal, Burrell/Aurora Central High, and Anne Ferris, Principal, Charles Burrell K-8, to present their “Accountability Pathway” to the Aurora School Board. (Access the video at the APS website.[vi]) The district’s chief academic officer, Dr. Nia Campbell, also spoke. What this presentation emphasized, to my astonishment, was how much the school intends to continue. Change? Only around the edges. In essence, stay the course.
“We are proposing,” Brown said, “that Aurora Central, first, remain
a Community School, keep innovation status, and finally adopt an
external management partner.” (Emphasis mine.) That third feature, “Adopt
management by a public or private entity,” is a return to what a State Review
Panel recommended years ago, in 2017. This led ACHS to connect with Mass
Insight. Its role as the external management partner lasted three years, and
concluded after 2019-20.
ACHS gained Innovation status back in
2016. It adopted the Community School framework in 2019. It now plans to “sustain”
what has brought so little progress. How does this meet the moment?
What is most distressing is how the presentation
wants to tell us about the Aurora Central Campus. The Charles Burrell Visual
and Performing Arts school, which is currently “in a separate building less than
a quarter mile away from the high school,”[vii]
completed its first year in 2022-23. A new choice for Aurora families – good to
see. But irrelevant, in this context. Burrell Arts K-8 has not been on the accountability
clock for 14 years. The new program has nothing to do with the hearing in April
for the high school.
|
I have written
several newsletters on Aurora Central High over the past 12 years. Addendum
A – AV #88 – Aurora Central High - The Case for State Intervention
(2012); AV #109 (2014); AV #202 - A response to Aurora Central’s hearing
before the State Board of Education in November 2019; and AV #233 (2021).
Some of the history in my newsletters might remind the new leadership at both
APS and at the high school that the State Board has also been watching … for
a long time. |
Listen to what Brown, Quig, Ferris, Campbell, and Superintendent Michael Giles had to say on Feb. 6. My comments reveal the confusion. Does APS hope this “narrative” about the “new campus” will distract the State Board from its focus on what has changed (or not) at the high school since 2019? Above all, what does this “story” have to do with accountability for ACHS?
**
I question many points in the “pathway
plan” as laid out on Feb. 6. The Addenda details two concerns, both huge challenges
for ACHS, both given short shrift in the plan. Addendum B: declining attendance.
Addendum C: students’ low reading/literacy skills. There I also produce
data missing from the presentation. The State Board will expect the plan to be
transparent about how ACHS students perform on all state assessments. But
these are not my main complaints.
After the school principal, Kurtis Quig, spoke for
eight-minutes on proposed changes at the high school, Jessica Brown listed improvement
strategies. Slide 18 showed the “Goals and Progress Monitoring Plan.”[viii]
Action steps included what would be done in grades K-2, 2-3, and K-8.
[COMMENT: Why? Just when we thought we were looking at
a HIGH SCHOOL plan?]
The presentation over, Board President Anne Keke expressed
her confusion. Her questions led to responses: first by Ferris, then by Campbell,
and then the superintendent himself weighed in. Attempts to clean up previous
statements. Each failing to clarify. Embarrassing.
Note that Keke never offered any judgment. She merely suggested
what seemed a logical cause and effect. The school and the district, though, seemed
flustered.
Board President Keke: Is this presentation for the high school, or is it for the magnet. I was a little confused because I would think the high school is not part of the magnet, or am I having it wrong? [My transcription – using the transcription offered at the website and what I heard. I apologize for any errors.]
[All four on the panel exchanged looks. Who wanted to
take this question? Had they asked it of themselves? Perhaps they realized they
were stepping into quicksand … After several seconds, Ferris responded.]
Ferris: It’s for the entire campus which makes up both the magnet/Burrell as
well as Aurora Central, so we are one campus.
Keke: I see. But the middle and the elementary are not on the
clock, are they?
Ferris: As a campus we are all on the clock because it’s one campus.
Keke: So the high school data and performance is affecting
our brand new magnet school?
[Here Campbell took the mike.]
Campbell: Thank you. Thank you Madam President. So what I will say is the last time Aurora Central went to the state, Aurora Central was just Aurora Central. But in between now and then our system moved to have a K-12 Aurora Central Campus, our Charles Burrell campus, with the arts pathway that goes all the way through, so we got permission to make sure that when we brought this presentation to our board and the State Board that we represented the full campus – but to be specific, you are absolutely correct …
[Correct about what? What had Keke asserted?]
Campbell (con’t) … the high school has a plan and they have to present to the
state and when we come back we are focused on the high school as well …
[So here we are told it is the
high school that has a plan, that it is the high school that is
going before the State Board. Yes?]
… but it’s still an entire campus and
we didn’t want to have that separation because it is a K-12 campus.
[Does it matter what the district wants
to tell? APS has a 9-12 school that has been on the clock since 2010. Its
campus now includes a magnet school, which only opened last year. Based on the
results given at this meeting, the new program has begun pretty well. But it has
no role in this upcoming hearing. So of course the two programs should be
looked at separately. To include Burrell only muddies the waters.]
… So I wouldn’t say
that the high school is impacting the whole campus – I would say – when we present
moving forward with – it is one campus moving forward, that’s what I’m saying.
[Good grief, I thought. Stop before you sink any further. As she finished
Superintendent Giles chimed in. Perhaps he sensed how unsatisfactory the responses
had been. Even contradictory. Maybe he could put a positive spin on all this …]
Superintendent Giles – I think telling the story of the entire campus also speaks
to the innovation that is going to help support the status of the high school …
[SOME HISTORY: ACHS first gained “innovation status” in 2016 as part of the APS Action Zone. Any evidence this has led to significant improvement? Never mind – a central feature of the proposal to the State Board is to “sustain its current Innovation Plan.” Is Mr. Giles aware of the skepticism about innovation expressed by the State Board to then-Superintendent Rico Munn and ACHS Principal Gerardo de La Garza at the 2019 hearing? A skepticism shared more widely today.[ix] My guess is that the State Board will look for evidence of what the high school has been doing—and, yes, with the waivers that comes with being on innovation—that has led to better outcomes for students. And if not …]
Giles (continues): … So I understand what you’re saying, but at the same time I think the elementary - middle school is a positive part of the story to tell on how we’re going to create engagement and help support Aurora Central [to] get where they need to be.
[See what I mean about “changing the subject” and crafting an upbeat
story? And what, exactly, was Keke saying? Wasn’t it a question … about
whether the high school’s chronic low performance was affecting the magnet?]
**
Before
concluding this part of the Feb. 6 meeting on the “Proposed Pathway” from APS
and Aurora Central Campus, the Board President asked one final question.
Keke: Here we are going for a second time before the state – so
what’s different about this plan than what was implemented over the last six
years that’s going to make sure that this time around – we no longer have just
a high school, we have a whole educational experience that’s coming with it –
that we make sure that it is going to be successful – and at the same time – pull
the whole magnet out of the accountability clock?
[WHICH AGAIN IS NOT, as I see it,
accurate. See above: Ratings of Performance (middle) and Improvement
(elementary). Keke’s question appeared to assume the presentation to the State Board
needed to address how the entire Aurora Central Campus is going forward. (Again,
I see no such need.) Which led to a nebulous answer that wandered even further
away from THE ONLY REASON FOR THE HEARING BEFORE THE STATE BOARD: THE
PERFORMANCE OF AURORA CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL.]
Campbell: You named the first one, Madam President, just to have a K
through 12 educational experience that allows students to engage in a way that
they hadn’t been able to before …
[WHICH IS not relevant, of
course, to the 1,800-plus students at the high school today, not relevant
to the low achievement and below average growth evident in the state
assessments, and not relevant to the woeful attendance we see again this
year.]
Campbell (con’t): The other shift is the way
we are designing and engaging with school leadership teams around the creation
of a plan is really making it about creating systems that outlast specific
human beings and making sure that there is that very clear role and expectation
for partnership, for school, for school sustainability even after the partnership,
and also district alignment and responsibilities. So we have our own, I want to
say, internal accountability system that helps us really manage those metrics
and milestones we are expecting to make sure that nothing is left to chance.
[I call
this DISTRICT-SYSTEMS SPEAK. As clear as mud.]
**
Before the State
Board hearing in April, there is still time to reassess. If the goal for APS is
to show how current plans will produce a different and better high school,
the school director and principal must take the lead. If they speak in plain
English, from a school perspective, it will help. They will need to talk
about how the school’s culture, its expectations, and everything that
reflects on relationships and teaching and learning will be significantly different.
**
Addendum A: Paying attention to
Aurora Central for over a decade
Another View – from 2012, 2014, 2019,
and 2021
9/18/2012 –
AV #88
Aurora Central High – The Case for State
Intervention
“How is it that the state can allow a
school to continue with such low performance, when SB 163 was intended, in
part, to grant CDE more authority so that districts do not let a chronically
failing school survive a day longer than it should?”
2/12/2014 – AV
#109
Why turnaround schools do not turn around
One
reason struggling schools fail to make real progress: Aurora Central High as a
case study
“Twice in the 2012-13 school year
Aurora Central put together a self-portrait that falls well short of what we
should expect of a school performing this poorly. This failure is integral to the modest plans
in the SIG application—lots of new personnel—that cannot begin to address what
the school acknowledges as more deep-seated causes behind its consistently
unsatisfactory results.
“I cannot believe anyone thinks such reports are good enough,
or truthful enough, to provide a useful guide for ‘transformation.’”
11/20/2019
– AV #202 (One week after the Nov. 13 hearing for ACHS before the State Board.)
A Thanksgiving Note to the Colorado State Board of
Education
What if local school boards demonstrated a similar focus on student achievement?
“Same topic – How
is Aurora Central High School (ACHS) performing? – entirely different
responses. The contrast—notably what the Aurora School Board did NOT say when
the district presented its reports on ACHS at board meetings this fall, as
opposed to what the Colorado State Board of Education DID SAY, repeatedly, at
its November 13 meeting—tells us a lot. It might explain why a school district
feels little pressure from its board to address such dismal academic results.”
[AV #202 included quotes from board members Angelika
Schroeder, Rebecca McClellan, Debora Scheffel, and Steve Durham pertaining to
achievement and instruction at the high school. All four are still on the State
Board.]
6/22/2021 – AV #233
Analysis
of one school’s 2020-21 Unified Improvement Plan – Aurora Central High
Weak UIP reveals one way low-performing
schools fail … to see themselves clearly
“I realize that Aurora Central High School just experienced one of the most difficult school years imaginable. And, before that, the spring of 2020—part of the school year which the current UIP is supposed to address—must have been incredibly hard. So I am sure the school leadership and staff are exhausted – or ‘fried,’ as they say. In that light, my criticism of the school’s UIP will seem ill-timed and unkind. We’ve been through hell, ACHS staff might say; give us the summer to recover. So why do I consider it necessary to produce this study? Who does it help?
“I believe we should see any chronically underperforming school in our state as a tragedy for its students. I do not agree that tolerance or ‘grace’ should apply when a school presents to the state a report as deficient as this. It looks as if Aurora Central did not even try. I present this study in the hope it adds to the urgency with which CDE and the State Board ‘monitor progress’ at Aurora Central High.”
Attendance/Absenteeism - Principal Quig’s presentation and the
Executive Summary both failed to address a central problem for the high school:
attendance and absenteeism.
It’s true that the written report
presented at the Feb. 6 APS board meeting, “School/District Pathway Plan
Template: Accountability Clock Re-Hearing (Year 6+) School & District
Pathway Plan,” stated the problem directly. This is from Page 9.
|
Average Daily Attendance
|
In her presentation on Feb. 6, Jessica Brown, Director, Aurora Central Campus, also acknowledged the concern for the high school. Her power points 8-10 included these facts.
ATTENDANCE
|
|
2022-23 |
2023-24
(TO DATE) |
|
Burrell Arts Elementary |
K-3 –
89% |
K-4 –
92.4% |
|
Burrell Arts Middle School |
Grade
6 – 91% |
Grades
6 & 7 – 93% |
|
Aurora Central High School |
9-12 70.1% |
|
|
70% |
Brown added: ““Our average daily attendance continues to drop in high school – from 2016, 2017, 2018, where we averaged approximately 80% ADA, and today our current average daily attendance is 70.%.”[x]
What followed that stunning admission, however – Brown’s look at the “Identified Priority Challenges” (slide 11) and her comments on what questions to ask (“Is our attendance system working? How are we able to leverage a flexible schedule that meets the needs of our students?”) – appeared inadequate for such a fundamental issue at the high school.
Finally, the school’s most recent UIP
is forthright about the issue and the challenge.
From the UIP for ACHS for 2023-24
Colorado's Unified Improvement Plan for Schools –
Aurora Central Campus
Narrative on Data Analysis and Root Cause
Identification (p. 4)
All bold mine
“The Instructional Leadership team established a large
priority for the 2023-2024 school year (see SIP). As we began digging and
looking at our data for the 2022-2023 school year, we were able to see that
we had a major gap in our attendance percentages. We identified that our
students were coming to school less often and their Average Daily Attendance
rate dropped dramatically.”
UIP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS (p. 5)
“Based on the data and the results, the team determined that the data was clear that the Aurora Central Campus needs to focus on student engagement. The data shows us that students have a lower attendance rate, higher behavior referrals, and lower grades and GPA than in past school years… ”
|
63% |
“The Average Daily Attendance rate at Aurora Central High School for the 2022-2023 school year was finalized at an average of 63.13%. This was a decrease from the overall average daily attendance rate from the 2021-2022 school year. Additionally, chronic absenteeism data showed us this school year that we must work on engaging our more chronically absent students.”
Trend Analysis (p. 11) – Trend Direction: Decreasing
Performance Indicator Target: Student Engagement
|
69% |
“The final attendance rate for the 2022-2023 school year ended at 69%. Aurora Central recognizes that our attendance rate has decreased from previous school years, and we are working on a plan to address this.… Additionally, chronic absenteeism continues to be a persistent challenge as our community continues to suffer from the pandemic and we are seeing our high school students forced to work to support their family. We spent time during the 2022-2023 school year re-engaging our chronically absent students.”
Its
2023-24 UIP set this goal:
|
GOAL for 2023-24: Increase to 75% |
Priority Performance Challenge : Student Engagement - Connectedness to the school (p. 31)
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR: Student Engagement
MEASURES / METRICS:
“Attendance 2023-2024: By the end of May 2024, Aurora Central High School (ACHS) will increase the ADA to 75%.”
(2023-24 UIP for Aurora Central High School - https://co-uip.my.salesforce-sites.com/UIPPublicFacingdev_Print?id=a0d6g00000Q1cWkAAJ)
**
Aurora Central compared to three other APS/DPS high schools
on the accountability clock
To show how extreme the attendance/absenteeism issue
is for Aurora Central High School, consider this comparison with three other
high schools on the state’s accountability clock.
Note how much attendance has declined at ACHS.
Our world, post-COVID? Maybe. Still, …
Everything here is from CDE’s reporting on attendance[xi]
- except for the attendance rate for ACHS in 2022-23. The state figure combined
the attendance (and truancy) rate for the students at the new Burrell Arts program
last year with the students at ACHS. This produced a higher percentage for attendance—for
all grades—in 2022-23 (76.5%) than in 2021-22.
But as the presentation to the APS board meeting on Feb. 6 indicated (see above), the attendance rate at the elementary (89%) and middle (92%) was much higher than at the high school (70.1%). So 70.1% is the one figure here different from the state data.
|
|
2018-19 |
2021-22 |
2022-23 |
||||
|
|
Attendance Rate |
Attendance Rate |
Truancy Rate |
TOTAL Days Missed
Unexcused Absences |
Attendance Rate |
Truancy Rate |
TOTAL Days Missed
Unexcused Absences |
|
Aurora Central HS |
79.2% |
74.2% |
21.0% |
54,460 |
70.1% |
N.A. |
61,570* |
|
Gateway HS |
78.2% |
80% |
14.1% |
30,122 |
80.0% |
14.1% |
34,166 |
|
Hinkley HS |
76.4% |
80.7% |
14.4% |
40,991 |
81.0% |
13.6% |
35,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In DPS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abraham Lincoln HS |
85.7% |
84.1% |
12.4% |
19,563 |
84.7% |
11.5% |
18,247 |
*This total would include missed unexcused absences for grades
3 and 6 at Burrell Arts. As noted earlier, attendance there was strong last
year.
Given the
state of basic literacy skills at ACHS, how is this not a central focus
of its school improvement plan?
In his
eight-minute presentation, Principal Kurtis Quig’s power points never addressed
a fundamental challenge for teachers and students at ACHS: the huge number of
students there who are not reading anywhere close to grade level.
The
eight-page Executive Summary touches on reading in generic terms. All that is
stated, under the heading, “Priority Performance Challenge 1 - Reading +
Writing in All Content Areas,” applies to Math as well: “consistent
instructional practices … consistent assessment plan … special and measurable
goals ….” And that heading provides the single reference to reading. In
these same eight pages we see ILT (school leader and instructional team)
referred to 36 times and PLC (Professional Learning Community) referred to 29
times.
The old truism applies: we cannot solve
a problem if we are unwilling to name it.
Reading/literacy as a central issue
at Aurora Central - newly released data from CDE
The Colorado
Department of Education has released data on the number of high school
students still on a READ plan in 2021 and 2022.[xii]
At ACHS the number on a READ plan increased (87 more students) between
2021 and 2022. (2023 data not yet available.) Among all Colorado high schools,
this is the second highest number of students on a READ plan.
High
schools in Colorado with highest number of students on a READ plan in 2022.
|
|
2020-21 |
2021-22 |
|
|
Grades 9-11 |
Grades 9-12 |
|
#1. Westminster High |
335 |
327 |
|
#2.
Aurora Central H.S. (APS) |
203 |
290 |
Three other high schools on the accountability clock (two in
APS)
had a high number of students on a READ plan in 2022.
|
|
2020-21 |
2021-22 |
|
|
Grades 9-11 |
Grades 9-12 |
|
#5. Hinkley High School (APS) |
199 |
225 |
|
#6. Abraham Lincoln H.S. (DPS) |
182 |
224 |
|
#7. Gateway H. S. (APS) |
137 |
190 |
What the district and school presented
to the APS Board of Education misstated which students took the PSAT. And it
gave no data on the SAT.
The 46-page “School/District Pathway Plan Template: Accountability Clock Re-Hearing (Year 6+) School & District Pathway Plan” presents “Aurora Central Campus: High School Data” on page 8.
Two concerns:
1. Academic Achievement included scores
over several years on Evidence-Based Reading and Writing and on Math. The data
is accurate but it is not, as stated, the results for “ALL ACHS students.” These were only the scores for the
9th and 10th graders on the PSAT. (For some reason
the report never defines these as the PSAT test.)
2.
There is nothing on the SAT results
and the Academic Achievement of 11th graders. (If you wonder whether we should use the SAT to assess a school like Aurora Central, see
Caveat.*)
Below includes
what was included in the report presented on Feb. 6, in black,
and what was not included, in red. To give a more complete
picture, I add two more years of data (2017, 2018).
2017-2023 - Data from the
annual School Performance Framework for Aurora Central High School[xiii]
|
|
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2022 |
2023 |
2017 to 2023 |
|
PSAT – R
& W |
386 |
379.6 |
381.8 |
374.8 |
385.2 |
same |
|
PSAT -
MATH |
391.7 |
376.2 |
375.9 |
367.6 |
377.4 |
-14.3 |
|
Percentile
Rank for both R&W & Math |
1% |
1% |
1% |
1% |
1% |
|
|
Growth – R & W |
43 |
37 |
43 |
34 |
38 |
In each category & each
year, short of 50% - the median growth % for the state |
|
Growth - Math |
34 |
41 |
46 |
31 |
40 |
|
|
SAT – R
& W |
423.6 |
422.2 |
406.7 |
396.2 |
397.4 |
-26.2 |
|
SAT - MATH |
405.3 |
409.5 |
400.1 |
382.0 |
381.5 |
-23.8 |
|
Matriculation Rate - All |
26.9 |
35.8 |
37.2 |
23.8 |
29.8 |
Up 2.9 |
|
2 year |
12.2 |
15.8 |
14.7 |
7.3 |
10.3 |
-1.9 |
|
4 year |
12.5 |
17.2 |
14.3 |
13.2 |
18.1 |
+5.6 |
|
CTE |
2.2 |
4.2 |
10.7 |
4.9 |
1.7 |
-.5 |
Scores on
the Reading and Writing portion of the SAT in 2023 show 74% of ACHS
11th graders (248 out of 336 students) scored in the lowest
performance level: Did Not Yet Meet Expectations. On the Math
portion of the SAT, 88% (297 out of 336) of 11th grade
students scored Did Not Yet Meet Expectations.
The Percent and Number of 11th graders who Met/Exceeded Expectations on the SAT:[xiv]
|
|
Reading & Writing |
MATH |
|
STATE of COLORADO |
58.9% |
35.2% |
|
APS |
30.7% |
14.4% |
|
Aurora Central High School |
10.4% - 35 students |
3.9% - 13 students |
ONE
ADDITION
Information
the APS Board might find meaningful – four APS high schools
The
Keystone report combines PSAT/SAT score for all three grades, 9-11
Data from the Keystone Policy Center’s Student Academic
Performance Map (Nov. 2023)[xv]
Results far
below the state average at four APS high schools/high school programs.
|
Colorado Student Performance - Academic
Year 2022-23 - PSAT/SAT Proficiency, grades 9-11 |
|||||
|
|
English Language Arts |
ELA Median Growth Percentile |
|
Math |
Math Median Growth Percentile |
|
STATE of COLORADO |
62% |
49 |
|
40% |
49 |
|
APS |
37% |
44 |
|
20% |
44 |
|
Hinkley H.S. |
26% |
42 |
|
11% |
38 |
|
Gateway H.S. |
28% |
41 |
|
10% |
39 |
|
Aurora West College Prep. Academy (6-12) |
25% |
46 |
|
4% |
37 |
|
Aurora Central H.S. |
21% |
38 |
|
9% |
40 |
*Caveat - On the
questionable value of the SAT for high schools like Aurora Central
We hear of the
lack of motivation for many high school juniors by the time it comes to taking
the SAT. They struggled on the PSAT for two years … and now this?
I do not
include SAT results because I believe they are what we should be using
to assess academic progress in a school like ACHS. I only do so because they
are what we currently use. Until we change this, they will be part of accountability
in our state.
AV #222 - The PSAT and SAT do not work well for perhaps 25% of our
high schools (Jan.
12, 2021)
As we examine how best
to improve the School Performance Framework, let’s ask if these tests are
meaningful – and helpful - for many of our high schools and their students
[i]
“Stay the Course: Struggling Aurora Central will not face drastic state-ordered
changes,” Chalkbeat Colorado, by Yesnia Robles (April 12, 2017), https://www.chalkbeat.org/colorado/2017/4/12/21100392/stay-the-course-struggling-aurora-central-will-not-face-drastic-state-ordered-changes/#:~:text
[ii] At that Nov. 2019
hearing, the State Board only gave the school one year to show
improvement. Then COVID hit.
“Colorado’s state board gives Aurora Central one year to improve its
ratings,” by Yesenia Robles, Nov. 14, 2019.
“The State Board of Education on
Thursday gave final orders to Aurora Central High School in its efforts to keep
improving student achievement, but only gave the school one year to increase
its state ratings.”
“One of the suggestions the state board added to its
order is that Aurora Central should hire outside experts on instruction
who can help accelerate improvement efforts. By law the board can’t order the collaboration.”
https://co.chalkbeat.org/2019/11/14/21055533/colorado-s-state-board-gives-aurora-central-one-year-to-improve-its-ratings
“State school board
recommends Aurora Central hire additional private firm,” by Grant Stringer, Nov.
18, 2019.
“State education decision-makers decided
Thursday to keep struggling Aurora Central High School on a short leash for
another year and recommended the school hire an additional private management
company to work with teachers.”
“The meeting Thursday between APS officials
and the state board is the latest development in a long effort to get Central
students up to speed. The school reached its deadline to improve enough and
escape state oversight in 2014.”
[iii] “Aurora Central High
gets one more year to show progress before state weighs more drastic action,” The
Denver Post, by Meg Wingerter (Nov.
15, 2019), https://www.denverpost.com/2019/11/15/aurora-central-high-school-state-accountability-clock/
[iv]
From the presentation to the APS Board of
Educatiion, Feb. 6, 2024. “In August 2022, a new magnet pathway was launched as
a result of Aurora Public Schools’ (APS) Blueprint Strategic Plan. This plan
was based on community feedback and aimed to develop seven magnet schools over
the next three years. Aurora Central became Aurora Central Campus (ACC*) with
the addition of a new pathway: Charles Burrell Visual and Performing Arts
(CBVPA) magnet, commonly referred to as Burrell Arts*. Burrell Arts currently
includes grades K-4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 and will grow to a full K-12 magnet by
August 2026.”
[v]
“Aurora Central SPF Overview,” slide 4, from Aurora Central Campus
Accountability Pathway, https://go.boarddocs.com/co/aurora/Board.nsf/files/D22SV2746938/.
[vi] “APS BOE Work Session, 2/6/2024,”
YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y1Vxp9Ubc4.
[vii]
From “Aurora Central Campus Rehearing Report, 2023-24, Feb. 6, 2024,” page 4, https://go.boarddocs.com/co/aurora/Board.nsf/c4cf1644198dfd9986257503000d636f/3e51ad1e32359b6e85258ab60074691a/$FILE/EiL-Aurora%20Central%20Campus%20Rehearing%20Report%202023-2024%20Feb.%206,%202024.pdf
[viii]
“Aurora Central SPF Overview,” slide 18, from Aurora Central Campus
Accountability Pathway, https://go.boarddocs.com/co/aurora/Board.nsf/files/D22SV2746938/.
[ix] “A ‘mixed bag’ — again — for test
scores at Colorado innovation schools, new report finds,” by Melanie Asmar, Chalkbeat Colorado (Dec. 22, 2023),
[x]
YouTube of the Feb. 6, 2024, APS meeting of the Board of Education, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y1Vxp9Ubc4
[xi]
Attendance, Colorado Truancy Rates By School, Colorado Department of Education,
https://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval/truancystatistics.
[xii]
From my report on reading: “After the Read Act - Beyond third grade, how well
do our students read?” - Another View
(February 2024), https://anotherviewphj.blogspot.com/
[xiii] “Performance Framework
Reports and Improvement Plans,” Colorado
Department of Education,
https://www.cde.state.co.us/schoolview/frameworks/welcome
[xiv]
Colorado Department of Education, https://www.cde.state.co.us/assessment/sat-psat-data
[xv] The Colorado Sun/Keystone
Policy Center, https://coloradosun.com/colorado-student-academic-performance-map/
No comments:
Post a Comment