This from the Glasgow Daily Times:
All understand them, but some do not like results from their use
By GINA KINSLOW
Glasgow Daily Times
GLASGOW — The Kentucky Board of Education has decided to continue using a concordance table for 2008 CATS results and to apply it to accountability index scores for 2007 and 2008.
A concordance table, which put the CATS scores in a bell curve, was used to determine the scores that were released by the state last week. Because a concordance table was used, many district scores, as well as scores for individual schools, dropped after they were adjusted, putting them further away from reaching their goals.
That is what happened with Caverna Middle School. The school had an overall academic index of 70.2, which means the school would have been considered progressing. After the school’s score was adjusted, it fell to 66.7, which is below the assistance line.
Dr. Sam Dick, superintendent of Caverna Independent Schools, was happy to hear the state school board’s decision.
“I’m glad that the department (Kentucky Department of Education) is clarifying some issues concerning the concordance,” he said. “I am still interested in seeing how this is going to affect our accountability levels, since the goal and assistance level was not put up against a concordance table.”
Concordance tables were used to determine the 2007 CATS scores because of changes in core content and the Kentucky Core Content exam, plus a legislative requirement that the state’s public school students participate in the ACT and its companions PLAN and EXPLORE exams.
This spring all high school students statewide will be required to take the ACT. The test will count 5 percent of districts’ and schools’ accountability.
This year was not the first time changes have been made in regards to the state’s accountability system.
In 1999, Kentucky switched from the KIRIS (Kentucky Instructional Results Information Systems) to the CATS. When those changes occurred, the state used a regression table rather than a concordance table and established new baseline scores.
Dick doesn’t understand why the state didn’t use regression tables this time instead of the concordance tables.
“There were probably, in my opinion, as many changes, if not more, to the tests when we switched from KIRIS to CATS,” he said.
Benny Lile, director of instruction for the Barren County School System, said the regression table had its “shortcomings” too.
“The regression model was how you compared to everyone else,” he said. “So, I think that probably what the department did was use a little bit cleaner model, a model that had a little bit more of direct statistical link back to the system. I think this one was a little bit smoother even with all the confusion and comments thrown in and around it.”
Sharon Reeves, instructional supervisor for the Glasgow Independent School System, said she can understand why the state school board decided to use concordance tables next year.
She also said she can understand why some district administrators are upset about the use of the tables, especially when their districts and/or schools’ scores dropped so low that they fell into assistance levels.
Glasgow, however, did not experience that problem even though most of the districts’ scores dropped after being adjusted.
“I’m frustrated about it, too, even though our district is not having to deal with that particular problem,” she said.
No comments:
Post a Comment