Every time I read statistics put forward by Superintendent Nancy McGinley of the Charleston County Schools I remember the title of a mathematical classic, How to Lie with Statistics. as true today as it was when first published in 1954. Its author states, "The secret language of statistics, so appealing to a fact-minded culture, is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify."
One reason that such tactics are so successful is that the majority of Americans, and that includes reporters, by the way, are incapable of interpreting them.
Take the latest statistics to emerge from CCSD's mandated literacy interventions (a result of actual investigative reporting from the P&C). At least McGinley does state that the "overall" report is encouraging; the reporter apparently couldn't figure out where the weakness in the program endures.
You tell me: does the following statement make any sense? "49.6 scored in the lowest percentile in the fall." See what I mean? Perhaps quintile? I don't really know.
Putting aside the shambles the reporter made with the statistics, several aspects stand out.
- Focusing on literacy in the early grades does indeed pay off. That does raise the question of why it wasn't a focus previously, but whatever.
- Except for the Third Grade Academies, the large majority of students receiving special attention were not on the pre-fourth-grade level of reading (two-thirds of first grade; one-half of third grade; and three-fourths of sixth grade)
- Notice anything? Well, I did. The most successful programs had a larger percentage of students in the lowest category of reading! Someone could take a hint from this phenomenon!
Buried at the end of the article is the reality that the Sixth Grade Academy is failing to succeed in its mission--and it is the oldest of the bunch. To improve from 24.5 percent in the fall to 22.2 percent in the spring means that seven of the 298 students reached the fourth-grade level or better. While any advance is an improvement, this is something like an elephant laboring mightily and bringing forth a mouse!
Dare we ask what happened at the Sixth Grade Academy to the scores of the students who were already reading above the fourth-grade level? Why do I surmise that some of them regressed?
It should be obvious: to focus on the poorest readers means putting only the poorest readers together. Duh.
Posts
6 comments:
Let's be very clear about something: Nancy McGinley was NEVER concerned about literacy as Chief Academic Officer of CCSD until the Post and Courier exposed the problem. Literacy had been a problem for years, particularly in the North Area (Brentwood and Morningside Middle Schools, for example.). Any proactive attempts by principals to implement literacy initiatives in their respective schools were basically ignored by McGinley. She never made that a point of emphasis. Never. I defy her to produce even a shred of documentation during her tenure as CAO that would contradict this assessment of her.
I generally agree with the previous post.
Let's add some more for clarification. Chairman of the School Board, Chris Fraser, got it totally wrong recently when he gave credit to former board member Gregg Meyers for being the one who was responsible for bring literacy to center stage. Meyers was part of the problem and he was just joining the parade once the spotlight was turned on.
Even the Post and Courier wasn't exactly on top of the literacy issue. Some constituent board members had become very frustrated with literacy problems they saw in disciplinary hearings, adult ed applications and transfer requests. McGinley, the administration and the county board were no help at all. They all ignored the complaints. Constituent boards saw the literacy problems as a direct contributor to the other issues and were at their wits end with McGinley's refusal to address the problem.
When McGinley and her associate superintendents didn't respond, some constituent board activists took the issue to the Post and Courier. Only after overwhelming evidence was presented to the P and C did the reporter and her editor allow it to become a story. And only after it appeared in print on the front page did McGinley and Meyers do anything.
Leadership within the school district is totally lacking. No one wants to take responsibility and all too many are willing to take credit when none is due. If literacy is just now taking center stage, where the hell were they before. McGinley's total lack of honesty, working in league with equally inept and dishonest people on the county board like Meyers, have been the problem all along.
Like everything else reported by this administration, I wouldn't take anything they say without checking it against all the data. More schools and the students within them are failing to meet expectations today than ever before.
You have no idea just how right you are. If you'd like to see a copy of the report, send me an email address to send it to. rddvl65@gmail.com
Knowledge is power. Looks like McGinley's greatest (and only) strength is keeping people as uninformed as possible. How ironicis it that the public's education chief in Charleston is all about disinformation.
Fault a board that is bigger on words than deeds. I think they have forgotten that McGinly works for them, not vice versa.
I think if information was more accessible, and operations were more transparent, and Diette Courrege was a bit more aggressive in reporting...
1. Schools like James Island Charter, Wando, the Academic Magnet, School of the Arts and Garrett would lose a bit of its lustre.
2. Schools like Stall, Burke, West Ashley, North Charleston, and Lincoln might be seen in a more favorable light.
3. The public would see more areas of waste, while also seeing more areas where we have under-invested.
Ultimately, though, it is up to a group of 6 people (who spoke big on the campaign trail)on the board to stop talking about how open and honest they want the district to be and to act in that way.
Amen.
Post a Comment