This is your 'jump' page to access graphic representations and data relating to important aspects of the research study we are using in class. I have also included some special links to information directly connected to assessment and accountability as defined informed by the data. Listed below are those links and the graphs with a brief description of what each is intended to show. Bear in mind that full explanation is given in class, not here.---> Please be advised that while every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of both the data and the graphs, minor errors may occur. However, the errors that may be found on the graphs are miniscule... if you are looking at a particular district, the error should not effect the relative positioning of the district with any significance. IF you find a significant error, please Email me immediately so I can make the correction. The data array underlying the graphs has been triple checked for accuracy, so if errors exist, they are most likely very minor and do not alter the conclusions of the study. All data are taken from EMIS files only, so this study and the State of Ohio are utilizing the same data pool.
Go Directly to the online Data!
- Overview of SB 55: Ohio School Report Card Criteria: In order understand the full impact of Ohio's efforts to hold educators accountable for student performance, the elements of SB 55 need to be understood. Likewise, the data we are examining also points conclusively to the conspicuous lack of validity that the Ohio School Report Card carries in its hidden agendas. In class, we will demonstrate how the data illuminate this lack of validity in terms of what the Presage Factor is telling us.
- Preliminary Reseach Findings and Overview: This is my first online material regarding the study. Although the site is a bit sloppy, it does provide a basis for understanding some of the direction the research as taken, especially in terms of the Presage Factor. There are several graphs on this site that my help you or interest you. I will deal with these items in class paying particular attention to the distribution of district scores across socio-economic factors. There is also some explanation of how to read the graphs contained within this site which will also be given in detail during class. This site also contains links to the Cincinnati Enquirer study done several years ago that had findings similar to my own, but were ignored in their interpretation.
- The Presage Factor: This graph shows the degree and extent of how the Presage Factor plays out across % of students passing the 1996 tests by school districts. This graph is critical in understanding my thesis that "the greater the degree of economic, social, political, and evironmental disadvantage as measured by the Presage Factor, the lower the district's passing rate will be." This graph is derived from marking the standard deviations within the scale of the Presage Factor to create catagories of districts that are: Advantaged, Typical, Disadvantaged, and Extremely Disadvantaged. The next graph places the districts represented by members of the first workshop group on the visual.
- Class Member's Districts & Presage Factor: This graph shows class member's home districts placed according to Presage Factor scores and % passing (1996) within the district.
- Presage Factor Across Sums: This graph substitutes % Passing with "Sums" for better visualization and more robust correlations. The term "Sums" represents the summing of the percent of students passing reading,writing, math, and citizenship on the 1997 4th, 9th, and 12th grade tests.
- Class Member's Districts, Presage Factor on Sums: This graph uses the sums of the percent passing the four different sections on the 4th, 9th, and 12th grade tests in 1997 (see: Presage Factor Across Sums) with class members' home districts identified on the graph.
- Selected High Presage Factor Districts (mostly urban): This graph shows the clustering of the urban districts in the lowest Presage Factor standard deviation area of "severely disadvantaged." It shows clearly that they also share the characteristic of having low rates of passing.
- Proposal for Alternative Baselines for Assessing Districts: This graph represents to alternatives for assessing the degree to which districts are performing optimally in preparing students for the Ohio Proficiency Tests. The proposal will be discussed at length in class and reasons given for how and why these alternatives are vastly more valid representations of district performance than that used on the Ohio School Report Cards.
The two Baseline Performance lines are calculated from what the Presage Factor tells us about the nature of the students enrolled in any given district. They recognize the forces and factors affecting standardized test performance that is entirely beyond the control or remediation of traditional classroom learning activities... something requisite to fairness and justice in both testing and educator accountability.- 4th, 9th, and 12th grade performance graphs on all test sections (1997) across the Presage Factor. These graphs will soon have class member's districts and other related districts noted on them as time permits... this is very time consuming work.
--->NOTE: ALL test Graphs now have selected local districts identified on them... whew! AND... Special 'thanks' to my GA, Derek Mihalcin, for a ton of help with this.
4th Grade Math
4th Grade Reading
4th Grade Writing
4th Grade Citizenship
9th Grade Math
9th Grade Reading
9th Grade Writing
9th Grade Citizenship
12th Grade Math
12th Grade Reading
12th Grade Writing
12th Grade Citizenship
- Selected Local Districts on New OSRC Baselines Graph: This graph places selected local districts of class members and others on a graphing of Presage Factor by Sums that includes the two new proposed report card baselines (See: Proposal for Alternative Baselines for Assessing Districts). This graph may be used to get a general idea of overall district test performance relative to below average, average, or above average expected levels of performance given the Presage Factor the district is dealing with. Districts significantly (significance to be determined by using standard deviations of district regression line residuals calculated from the two baselines.) below the given base line are below performance expectations, near or on the given line are performing as expected, and those significantly above are performing beyond Presage Factor expectations. To get a more precise view, this principle for determining baselines will be applied to the tests used on the OSCR and then revised performance ratings will be presented showing how many OSCR criteria are actually met with the revision. (See: Item #12.)
- Assessing District Performance as a function Expected Performance: This graph grades districts based upon whether districts are performing above, at, or below what the Presage Factor predicts (residual scores). The grading scale is based upon the power shown by the Presage Factor's ability to predict performance... in other words it is based upon the correlation coefficient's significance (r=-0.74). Note though while this means for assessing school district performance results in an easy to read system ('A' through 'F'), it is not without its weaknesses in perhaps slightly under estimating performance of very high scoring (% passing) districts and slightly over estimating performance of very low scoring (% passing) districts. However, as one element of a multi-element system for assessing district performance it is, I believe, interestisng.
There is also an interesting by-product of this graphical analysis. There is a strong correlation between percent passing and residual performance (r=0.60). What this says is that lower scoring districts tend to perform below expected performance and that higher scoring districts tend to perform above expected performance. We will discuss this finding in class. This finding has some interesting spin for a district such as Youngstown City in that YCS strongly bucks this correlational trend by showing a significantly high, positive residual score signifying above expected performance. In other words, this is another source of evidence I would offer in support of the case for giving credit to districts such as Youngstown City for doing a good job schooling their pupils.
- Working District Performance Graph: This is a different version of the graph shown in item 11. It is to be used in class for group work and discussion of district performance.
- DATA: District Presage Scores (Third Generation Data Analysis) To be used in class for group work and discussion of district performance based upon the third generation data analysis and your prospectus project.
- DATA: District Residual Scores: % Passing 1996; Total Sum for 1996 and 1997; % for 1996 and 1997 (Third Generation Data Analysis) To be used in class for group work and discussion of district performance based upon the third generation data analysis and your prospectus project.
- DATA: District Residual Scores: 1997 4th, 9th, 12th Grades (Third Generation Data Analysis) To be used in class for group work and discussion of district performance based upon the third generation data analysis and your prospectus project.
- NEWEST! (As promised) DATA: District Presage Scores, Sums13, and Residual Scores. (Third Generation Data Analysis) To be used in class for group work and discussion of district performance based upon the third generation data analysis and your prospectus project. The graph of these data is Item #17 below.
- NEWEST Graph!: District Performance by Presage and Sums "13". (Third Generation Data Analysis) To be used in class for group work and discussion of district performance based upon the third generation data analysis and your prospectus project. The data for this graph is Item #16 above.
- New Item: Coming soon.... School Districts rated on a revised Ohio School Report Card based upon what these data are telling us. This view will give us a much more accurate, valid, and reasoned perspective on district performance. (We need to come up with a good name for this new report card!)
