• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Ratings of California Schools Vary

Posted on: Saturday, 3 September 2005, 21:00 CDT

Aug. 31--Whether California's public schools are awesome or awful depends entirely on the report card. Federal and state reports released Wednesday differ as dramatically as if they'd been penned by Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

Some 44 percent of California's schools are failing by federal measures. The grim total includes nearly 300 East Bay schools and 19 school districts.

Over a hundred schools will face sanctions under the No Child Left Behind act. And 31 must either close their doors or re-create themselves this year -- or, like West Contra Costa, play a dicey game of chicken with the federal government.

California's poor school showing means the state as a whole failed to meet federal goals. California's Department of Education will face intervention by its federal colleagues if the state fails again next year, according to Darla Marburger, federal deputy assistant secretary of policy.

From the state perspective, the picture is considerably rosier.

California's Academic Performance Index, the 1,000-point ranking system based on test scores, shows schools making enormous strides. Some 83 percent of the state's public schools improved this year, compared with 64 percent last year, and 27 percent posted scores of 800-plus.

In the East Bay, 34 percent of Alameda County and 40 percent of Contra Costa schools are already above the 800 benchmark, and many schools have crested the 900 mark.

"It's another indication that public schools are headed in the right direction at every level," said state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell. "(But) we cannot forget the significant work still ahead of us, specifically on closing the pernicious achievement gap" between demographic subgroups.

That gap plays into these Jekyll and Hyde evaluations, which stem from two very different approaches to school accountability. The state system tracks academic growth and sets individual school targets based on how close a school is to the 800-point goal.

The federal system sets the same academic proficiency bar for everyone. That bar just jumped. Last year, an elementary school could squeak by if 13.6 percent of its students were proficient in English and 16 percent in math. This year it's 24.4 in English and 26.5 in math. The numbers will rise again in 2007- 08.

"The starting line is not the same for all our students," O'Connell said. "The reality is that once that arbitrary line increases in a few years, if you're not already over the line, it's going to be next to impossible."

And there are 44 different ways to fail. Three Livermore schools failed because not enough Latino children and English learners met goals.

The "failed school" list includes 174 schools and eight school districts in Alameda County, and 113 schools and 10 school districts in Contra Costa. Some 55 Solano schools and four school districts -- including Vallejo -- also failed.

Schools that receive federal funds may eventually face sanctions ranging from transfers to school closure.

"The theory is that the sanctions will make them want to improve," said Susan Magnone, Contra Costa County's assistant superintendent of educational services. "We're just now about to find out if that theory works. There are people monitoring, but no one enforcing."

An escalating series of sanctions kicks in when schools fail two years in a row.

Thirty East Bay schools -- including 10 in West Contra Costa, Berkeley's Parks, and Pittsburg's Central and Hillview junior highs -- have entered the final and most drastic stage of sanctions. They must restructure as charter schools, replace staff, hire an outside overseer or request state takeover.

Pittsburg, replaced its school administrative staff, hired an outside expert, re-trained teachers, and redesigned the master schedule and course offerings.

But West Contra Costa, under federal mandate to develop a detailed restructuring plan last year, did not. Last spring, the school board voted to take another year to plan, hoping the 10 schools passed in 2005. Nine did not.

Richmond's King Elementary, for example, saw its API rank jump from 585 to 706, but just 17.7 percent of its English learners scored at proficient levels.

"It's not just a matter of making it or not making it," said chief academic officer Kaye Burnside. "It's also the amount of progress."

The current plan does not call for the overhaul outlined in federal guidelines, but more money and resources, Burnside said. That includes "learning centers" at each school to provide tutoring help -- essentially an expansion of year one sanctions.

The state monitors districts' self-reported plans, but the big question is whether anyone will enforce the law. Marburger said it was the states' responsibility.

"We go into select districts to see what they're doing," she said. "We give the states an opportunity to correct them."

But it's more than a matter of following the law, she added.

"The whole point is to help schools take the steps they need to make (federal goals) and help students achieve," she said. "If a school chooses to not take the steps they need to, it's not necessarily in the best interests of the students."

Reporters Shirley Dang and Eric Louie contributed to this story.

-----

To see more of the Contra Costa Times, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.bayarea.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, Contra Costa Times, Walnut Creek, Calif.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

Source: Contra Costa Times (Walnut Creek, Calif.)

More News in this Category