| ||||||||||||
GSCS 'Take Note': "... But acting Education Commissioner Christopher Cerf questioned the reliability of the state’s own data, saying some non-instructional areas, such as transportation and health benefits, should be included when comparing districts...The data are not completely accurate," said Cerf, who was appointed in December and is awaiting Senate confirmation. "They under-represent and drastically understate the per-pupil cost, and I’m committed to doing a better job on this in the future. These data need to improve..." (Star Ledger, 2-8-11)
Njspotlight.com ‘State Releases New School Data’
Star Ledger ‘N.J. School Report Card data shows average per-pupil spending increased statewide, dropped in urban districts’
The Record ‘N.J. high school test results again show poor districts struggle’
Press of Atlantic City ‘How does your school match up? This year's state report cards show some positive trends at South Jersey schools’
Independent Press ‘Chatham's BOE: Top SAT scores but projects $500,000 budget gap’
Njspotlight.com Op-Ed ‘What Do OSA Advocates Have to Hide?’
Njspotlight.com ‘State Releases New School Data’
Star Ledger ‘N.J. School Report Card data shows average per-pupil spending increased statewide, dropped in urban districts’
The Record ‘N.J. high school test results again show poor districts struggle’
Press of Atlantic City ‘How does your school match up? This year's state report cards show some positive trends at South Jersey schools’
Independent Press ‘Chatham's BOE: Top SAT scores but projects $500,000 budget gap’
Njspotlight.com Op-Ed ‘What Do OSA Advocates Have to Hide?’
Njspotlight.com ‘State Releases New School Data’
Make sense of the latest figures, working with NJ Spotlight's updated School Report Card
, February 8 in Education |Post a Comment
New Jersey’s high school scores are improving. Middle school scores took a dip. And take your pick on the direction of elementary school achievement, which often depended on the grade.
Yet one thing is consistent: School expenses continue to rise, with the state averages for most districts topping $15,000 per student last year. And after a tough two years of state aid cuts, local taxpayers are sharing more and more of that total.
Such is the numbers game in New Jersey public education these days. And with data released by the state today, NJ Spotlight’s School Report Card 2010 culls the most important numbers for 2009-2010 for every school in the New Jersey.
Before diving in, readers should be cautious about using this data as the final arbiter of school quality or efficiency, especially as education debate has increasingly become a political one. Case in point, the Christie administration was qualifying its own numbers into yesterday evening, saying a new math for school spending will be used in the future.
In the meantime, the latest data is the only quantifiable statewide measure available, and it gives the public at least some gauge of a school’s performance against its home district, its socio-economic peers and the state as whole.
Student Achievement
Student test scores may be the most important indicator of the group when it comes to judging schools, and there are plenty to pick from. New Jersey tests students on a statewide basis seven times during their school careers, not including the nationwide SAT and Advanced Placement exams.
Depending on the test, New Jersey’s schools could be judged as improving or regressing. In the high schools, there was one of the strongest increases statewide in several years, with close to 80 percent of the students passing the state’s proficiency exams on the first try. Yet the numbers are more mixed in the lower grades, with some equally significant drops in the middle schools.
A better gauge is to look at how a school fares against its peers, and the NJ Spotlight School Report Card 2010 provides a side-by-side comparison for every test.
Financial and Other Data
Since the advent of the state’s reporting more than 20 years ago, New Jersey has measured school spending on a per-pupil basis to make comparisons easier. In the mid-1990s, it further broke the numbers down into different categories that would allow schools to see how much they spend per child on classroom instruction, administrative costs and so on.
NJ Spotlight’s Report Card 2010 includes those breakdowns, comparing them against the statewide averages. In addition, it breaks down where the money comes from, be it local, state, federal or other sources.
Some of these numbers have long been suspect as well, leaving out large sums spent on transportation, special education and other expenses. Other state and national statistics have shown data both well above and well below these averages. The Christie administration said it seeks to clean that up in the future, bringing the spending totals more in line with data collected nationally. The changes will be reflected in future Report Cards.
Star Ledger ‘N.J. School Report Card data shows average per-pupil spending increased statewide, dropped in urban districts’ Published: Tuesday, February 08, 2011, 11:25 AM Updated: Tuesday, February 08, 2011, 12:21 PM
By Star-Ledger Staff
TRENTON — Per-pupil spending in New Jersey increased by an average 6.5 percent in 2009-10 from the previous year, but dropped in Newark and other urban districts, according to the state’s annual School Report Card data being released today.
But acting Education Commissioner Christopher Cerf questioned the reliability of the state’s own data, saying some non-instructional areas, such as transportation and health benefits, should be included when comparing districts. If those costs were included, he said, per-pupil spending would be higher.
"The data are not completely accurate," said Cerf, who was appointed in December and is awaiting Senate confirmation. "They under-represent and drastically understate the per-pupil cost, and I’m committed to doing a better job on this in the future. These data need to improve."
According to the state Department of Education data, the average comparative per-pupil cost statewide rose by $850 — from $12,983 in the 2008-09 school year to $13,833 in 2009-10. But spending fell in 66 of the state’s roughly 600 districts, including Newark, East Orange, Trenton, Jersey City, Camden and Plainfield, according to the data.
In Newark, the state’s largest district, spending dropped from $19,058 in 2008-09 to $16,913 in 2009-10, the data show. Valerie Wilson, the Newark school business administrator, disputed the data, saying actual spending was $18,894.
Gov. Chris Christie has publicly criticized Newark for its spending and poor performance, saying last year that the city spent "$24,000 per pupil and public money for an absolutely disgraceful public education system."
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, a federal reporting agency, per pupil spending in Newark for the 2007-08 school year was at $23,500, a figure that includes costs for instruction, support services and other items.
DATA
Cerf said the state data paint an incomplete picture because they do not include non-instructional costs, such as transportation, health benefits, pension payments and food services.
"If you’re being asked to report how much is being spent per pupil, you should report how much is being spent per pupil, not exclude certain cost categories," he said.
The annual data, known as the New Jersey School Report Card, is a comprehensive collection of information on things such as teacher salary, class size, district spending, graduation rates and scores for New Jersey’s standardized tests and the SAT college admission tests.
To access the school report card for 2009-10, visit the New Jersey Department of Education's website.
The report, which is required by law, is being released one day after new regulations took effect capping superintendent salaries based on district size. According to the data, however, some districts where administrators’ pay would be cut have the lowest per-pupil spending.
Superintendents in Westfield and the Chathams, who face pay cuts of more than $40,000 each once their contracts expire, have argued the reductions, pushed by Gov. Chris Christie, are unwarranted. Higher salaries, they say, bring better talent to their districts.
Westfield spends $12,009 per pupil — 15 percent below the state average while the District of the Chathams spends $11,861. Both districts are among the top performers on the state’s standardized tests.
Julia Walker, Westfield’s school board president, said spending in the Union County district is low compared to similar districts because of Superintendent Margaret Dolan’s leadership. Dolan has been superintendent or assistant superintendent in Westfield for the last decade.
"Understanding the complexities of a district with an $84 million budget, 6,300 kids and 800 employees doesn’t happen overnight," Walker said. "She can see a way to make the district run efficiently because she has experience here."
THE REPORT CARD
The School Report Card divides districts into one of nine categories, or District Factor Groups, based on socioeconomic status.
According to the state data, the lowest spenders in each category were East Newark, Bellmawr, Elmwood Park, Swedesboro, East Greenwich, Harrison, Wenonah and Montgomery. Among charter schools, Classical Academy Charter School spent the lowest per pupil.
The highest per-pupil spending was found in Asbury Park, Sea Isle City, Highlands, West Cape May, Avalon, South Hunterdon Regional, Alpine and Saddle River, along with Englewood on the Palisades Charter School.
Overall, Avalon — a tiny district in Cape May County that consists of one school and 75 students — spent $35,882 per pupil in 2009-10, the highest in the state and more than twice the state average.
David Rauenzahn, chief school administrator in Avalon and neighboring Stone Harbor, which also has one school, said a declining enrollment is driving up per-pupil costs. The two districts already share many services, including his salary, in an effort to reduce costs.
In defense of a per-pupil cost that is more than twice the state average, Rauenzahn said student achievement in Avalon and Stone Harbor, is very good and residents support their schools, he said.
"All I can say is, look at the results," he said.
By Jessica Calefati and Jeanette Rundquist/The Star-Ledger
View the N.J. DOE's full report card database below:
Find your school and click the link “School Report Card (print version)” on the right side, or view the DOE page here.
The Record ‘N.J. high school test results again show poor districts struggle’
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
BY LESLIE BRODY AND DAVE SHEINGOLD
Roughly one out of 11 New Jersey high school graduates failed to earn diplomas last spring through the traditional route and had to resort to a last-chance exam to get degrees, according to new state data.
The traditional graduation test, known as the High School Proficiency Assessment, or HSPA, is taken first in 11th grade and widely seen as a very basic test: Two recent education commissioners said it measured eighth- or ninth-grade-level skills.
Yet thousands of students still flunked it three times and fell back on a last-chance route to a diploma, known as the Alternative High School Assessment. Some seniors repeatedly failed the alternate test, which has a less stressful format, and never got diplomas at all.
Looking district by district, the share of graduates who got degrees via the traditional HSPA largely reflected the achievement gap between affluent areas and poorer ones.
2010 NJ SCHOOL REPORT CARDS
Click here to download district-by-district results (pdf)
Click here to search for your school district
In wealthy suburbs such as Glen Rock, Park Ridge and Ridgewood, all of the so-called “regular” students who graduated did so by passing the HSPA. But 79 percent did so in the low-income city of Garfield. (These figures do not include special education students or English language learners.)
The 2010 school report cards — the annual release of a range of academic and financial performance measures — showed that in North Jersey, Paterson had the lowest rate of regular students graduating through HSPA. At John F. Kennedy High School, 28 percent of graduates passed HSPA, while at Eastside, 39 percent did so. Rosa L. Parks High School, an arts-oriented academy, fared better with 76 percent.
Some educators say that having so many graduating seniors fail the HSPA repeatedly suggests many are being passed from grade to grade without acquiring basic skills. Paterson Schools Superintendent Donnie Evans, for one, said he was disappointed by the results but not surprised.
“Regardless of whether we’re talking about elementary youngsters or high-school youngsters, they should not be promoted to the next grade or pass courses unless they meet expectations,” Evans said. “There are questions about whether that’s happening when you see that kind of performance. I would underscore the urgency of restructuring the schools now. We can’t afford to put it off.”
Evans said he was seriously considering breaking Kennedy High School into small themed academies and making all administrators and teachers reapply for their jobs — a proposal similar to one imposed at Eastside last year. He said poverty should not be used as an “excuse” for low achievement.
Researchers have long described a correlation between family income and success on standardized tests. A range of related factors outside school are tied to student achievement, such as parents’ education and involvement, access to tutoring and expectations. Many educators striving to improve student progress argue that good teachers and principals can help children overcome the hardships of poverty and troubled families.
Evans said he grew up poor in rural North Carolina, and if poverty were an excuse for failure he would never have made it off the farm.
“Thousands of people in this city rose above their circumstances because they had teachers who were effective in delivering instruction and motivating them in school,” he said. “We know how to teach all kids so they succeed. The challenge is making sure that happens every day.”
Boosting HSPA passage is a struggle in many districts. In Bergenfield, where 87 percent of regular graduates passed the HSPA last spring, a five-year-old alternative high school tries to engage a small cadre of at-risk students.
Thirty-eight students from Bergenfield and nearby towns study with nine teachers in the former St. Mary’s parochial school in Dumont. Director Craig Vogt said students came because they had problems with truancy, discipline or passing enough classes. Officials said districts spend about $25,000 per student in tuition and most eventually earn their diplomas.
In recent days they have been preparing for HSPA tests that will be administered in March. John Sheppard, an 18-year-old wrestler, said he was faring better than in the mainstream high school because the alternative program was more “calm and peaceful.”
“Teachers don’t have to worry about so many other students so they’re not stressed,” he added. “They make sure we get our stuff done.”
Students who repeatedly fail HSPA can take several stabs at the last-chance exam. The Alternative High School Assessment debuted last year, replacing a previous alternate exam that was scrapped because almost everybody passed. The AHSA, created to make New Jersey diplomas more meaningful, stirred controversy because it was not tested before implementation and most of the 10,000 students who took it flunked their first attempt.
Department officials said Monday that after repeated attempts to pass AHSA, 2,318 students statewide had still failed the reading and writing sections, and 2,319 had failed the math sections. It was unclear how many of those students overlapped and whether some had been granted diplomas by presenting portfolios of work to show they had mastered sufficient skills.
The report card claims a 95 percent graduation rate for non-vocational schools and 99 percent for vocational schools. But state officials acknowledge those figures are imprecise because they have yet to complete a system for tracking the high school careers of individual students.
E-mail: brody@northjersey.com and sheingold@northjersey.com
Press of Atlantic City ‘How does your school match up? This year's state report cards show some positive trends at South Jersey schools’
Posted: Tuesday, February 8, 2011 12:15 am | Updated: 9:00 am, Tue Feb 8, 2011.
How does your school match up? This year's state report cards show some positive trends at South Jersey schools By DIANE D'AMICO Education Writer pressofAtlanticCity.com | 0 comments
Wildwood High School had a 96 percent graduation rate in 2010, a 16 percent increase from two years ago. The dropout rate was cut in half, from almost 7 percent to more than 3 percent, and
70 percent of the graduates said they planned to attend college, up from 52 percent in 2009.
Wildwood school district supervisor of curriculum Susan Rohrman said the school has revised programs and added more counseling to help prepare all students for college or a job. But, she said, the students themselves are also more aware that good jobs are still scarce and competitive.
"They really do have a greater understanding now of planning for what happens after high school," Rohrman said.
A 2010 report by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce forecasts that by 2018, 63 percent of all jobs will require at least some postsecondary education.
More students and their parents are getting that message, as the statewide annual school report cards released today reflect. Less than 15 percent of the Class of 2010 planned to go directly to work, down from 18 percent two years ago. But locally - especially in working-class and low-income districts - more students are looking to two-year colleges to get job training.
Click here to see the report cards
The annual report cards, produced by the state Department of Education, provide the public with a statistical snapshot of every public, vocational and charter school in the state. The online reports include information about class sizes, test scores, attendance rates, salaries and how much schools spend to educate students.
The statewide graduate rate for the Class of 2010 was almost 95 percent, with almost 85 percent of graduates saying they planned to attend either four-year or two-year colleges. But patterns vary around the state. Statewide, 54 percent of students planned to attend a four-year college and 30 percent planned to attend a two-year college, about the same rate as in 2009. Locally, most students opt for two-year programs, either at a community college or technical school.
"Students here don't have the same accessibility to four-year colleges as they do in (northern New Jersey)," said Gina Skinner, director of admissions and college recruitment at Atlantic Cape Community College. "And there is the cost difference."
Tuition and fees at a community college will average $3,880 for 2010-2011. The cost to attend a four-year state college averages $11,470, not including room and board. Skinner said parents are also more interested in making sure their children take courses that are targeted to a career.
Amanda Moscillo, 19, of Northfield, wants to become a police officer. She's attending Atlantic Cape as a criminal justice major, and receives an NJSTARS community college scholarship, which pays her tuition. She said she never considered going to another college.
"Once I knew I qualified for NJSTARS, that was it," she said. She'll likely transfer to Rutgers to complete her bachelor's degree, possibly attending classes at the Rutgers program on Atlantic Cape's campus.
College attendance has remained stable in suburban districts. About 84 percent of Egg Harbor Township High School's 2010 graduates planned to attend college, equally split between two- and four-year schools. Absegami, Mainland Regional, Ocean City and Lacey Township all sent about same percentage off to college. But at Mainland, 55 percent went to four-year schools and 28 percent to two-year colleges, while in Lacey Township, 34 percent planned to attend four year-schools and 51 percent were heading off to the local community college.
In more urban and working class districts, some students are still planning to go to work. Oakcrest reported about 38 percent each going to four-year and two-year colleges. But almost 19 percent planned to go directly to work. In Pleasantville, 22 percent of the graduates planned to go directly to work and another 13 percent were still undecided about their future plans. Only 16 percent planned to attend a four-year college, though 45 percent planned to attend community college.
The same pattern shows up in Cumberland County, where in Vineland, Millville and Bridgeton, fewer than 20 percent of the graduates planned to attend a four-year college. But more than half planned to attend either the community college or another two-year training program.
Millville High School guidance director Kathleen Procopio said programs like School Counts and NJSTARS, which provide good students with scholarships to community colleges, have enticed more students to attend.
"Families are hard-pressed not to take advantage of them," she said. "How do you pass up two years of college for free? It is making an impact."
Lower Cape May Regional has also reduced its dropout rate and inspired more students to attend college. While about 15 percent of graduates planned to enter the workforce right away, 38 percent planned to attend a four-year college and another 42 percent a community college. School superintendent Jack Pfizenmayer said they now start all students in a college preparatory program. They've added programs like engineering to get students thinking about careers.
"It's really progressed over a number of years, doing a lot of different things to challenge the students," Pfizenmayer said. More than 20 percent of the students in the district have some type of special need, but if they can graduate, he said, at least they have a better chance at a job. If the poor economy is helping to convince them to stay in school, that's fine with him.
A few districts are also seeing a spike in the number of students considering the military. The percentages are still small, but Egg Harbor Township, Lower Cape May Regional, Middle Township, Wildwood, Cumberland Regional and Millville have all seen steady or increased interest in the military, with about 4 to 5 percent of graduates saying they plan to enlist.
Rohrman said 16 seniors and 65 juniors at Wildwood High School took the ASVAB military aptitude test this year.
"They are keeping all their options open," she said of the students.
Contact Diane D'Amico:
609-272-7241
Independent Press ‘Chatham's BOE: Top SAT scores but projects $500,000 budget gap’
Published: Tuesday, February 08, 2011, 7:41 AM Updated: Tuesday, February 08, 2011, 8:37 AM
By Tracy Ness/Independent Press
CHATHAM- TWP. -- There is good news and the bad news for the Chatham School District this morning as the state has just released the NJ School Report Card data and the Board of Education has just completed a rough look at the budget.
First the good news. According to the 2010 report card data, Chatham has once again taken the top spot in the county for SAT scores for the seventh year in a row. The mean score of 1770 also put Chatham High School (CHS) in the top 25 schools in the state and was the only traditional high school to make it that far. CHS also ranked eleventh in the state for traditional high schools and 20th overall.
Chatham's per pupil spending has also decreased to $11,861 according to Assistant Superintendent Mike LaSusa, a number that is lower than last year's spending of $12.248 and significantly lower than the state average of $13,833.
On the not-so-good news side, the BOE took a first look at a rough budget for the 2011/2012 school year and is projecting a shortfall of $500,000. Chairperson Alan Routh of the Finance Committee said the shortfall will make for, "difficult decisions ahead as we look to make trade-offs in the budget."
Driving the shortfall is a projected health benefit cost increase of 15% or $732,000, a 4% increase in special education and further expected cuts to the little amount of state aid that Chatham receives. The district also expects an increase in instructional costs as new state standards come on line this year and enrollment continues to grow.
Njspotlight.com Op-Ed ‘What Do OSA Advocates Have to Hide?’
An even dozen questions to slow down the Opportunity Scholarship Act so we all can see what it really says
By Gordon MacInnes, February 8 in Opinion |Post a Comment
Why is the New Jersey legislature being stampeded to pass the Opportunity Scholarship Act (OSA), a new program that will transform our education policy? Why is OSA, which will drain the treasury of somewhere between $840 million and $1.2 billion, being rushed through the Assembly during the worst fiscal crisis since the Depression?
Do OSA advocates have something to hide?
OSA says to 1.3 million public school students, their parents, and taxpayers: "private, particularly religious, schools deserve top priority." Otherwise, how could a governor and legislative allies take $820 million from the public schools and hand it over to private schools for a generous new program that is being deceptively sold and is almost certain to fail?
Worse, how could the legislature jam OSA through without answering some obvious questions? Here are just a few of those that have been ignored or deflected during two legislative committee meetings on the bill:
1. According to the testimony of OSA’s sponsors and advocates, the bill focuses on "low-income students trapped in chronically failing public schools." If that is the primary intent of the bill, why does most of the money go to students not enrolled in chronically failing schools?
Start with the fact that 25 percent of all funds go automatically to students who are already enrolled in private schools. Then, if vouchers are not fully used by public schools students in failing schools, the funds are shifted to students in other schools in the same district or to students already enrolled in private schools, even private schools that will not accept public school students.
2. Only students in thirteen "targeted" districts are eligible for vouchers to attend private schools. What criteria were used to select these districts? Lakewood, for example, has only 5,200 public school students, but is home to a high number of private schools -- ultra-orthodox, gender-segregated yeshivas. Meanwhile, Atlantic City, Irvington, and New Brunswick—with between 20 percent and 42 percent more students—ignored? And if a chronically failing school is a charter school, why are students in charter schools not eligible under OSA?
3. If New Jersey cannot prevent the layoff of half of Camden’s police officers or thousands of teachers across the state, where does it find hundreds of millions for private school vouchers?
4. What evidence can the sponsors produce -- other than the statements of schools that will benefit from the voucher program -- that very poor children from very poor schools will improve their academic achievement? So far, the only reputable scholar who testified confirms that the evidence is very strong that most students transferring to private schools will do no better and many will do worse than their classmates "left behind" in public schools.
5. This extensive and very generous experimental program is to be managed by a three-person board appointed by the governor with all three persons "representative" of a business subject to the corporate tax. Why should the board not be made up of people who have experience in urban education, in evaluation of educational programs, or managed grant programs?
6. The Senate Budget and Appropriations committee increased the maximum payment to private schools to $8,000 for elementary schools and $11,000 for high schools. Since the tuitions at most parochial schools in and around targeted districts are around $4,500 for elementary and not more than $9,000 for high school, why increase the potential costs to taxpayers?
7. The school district from which a student transfers to a private school must pay the transportation costs for the student. Since students may apply to eligible schools within a 20-mile radius, what are the estimated per-student transportation costs to taxpayers in targeted districts?
8. The criteria for a private school being accepted as eligible to receive students from failing schools are that that they have been in business for five years, with end-of-the year financial statements, and an independent audit. That’s it. Why are there no requirements that the school demonstrate that it knows how to educate children from poor families?
9. A brand-new school can be approved by submitting a proposal that lists its objectives, strategies, board members, faculty (with degrees and experience), facilities, equipment and tax-exempt status under the federal tax laws. Why would the commissioner not be empowered to seek evidence that the new school is run by people who know how to educate poor kids?
10. Eligible schools must give the state tests to their voucher students, but that information will not be available if there are fewer than 10 voucher students in any grade. In short, there will be no information about how well voucher students are performing. Why not require that any eligible school demonstrate that its instruction is consistent with the New Jersey core curriculum standards and that all of its students take the state tests?
11. Since the Opportunity Scholarship Act marks a radical departure in New Jersey educational policy, why not give the new board more than four weeks to set the program up and get it running? Why not, at a minimum, give the board one year to answer all the questions that the OSA does not?
12. If the OSA is truly aimed at helping low-income students in chronically failing public schools get a hand up and out, why not limit the vouchers to low-income students in chronically failing schools and save the taxpayers a bundle of money that they don’t have?
There is only one category of private school that has demonstrated decades of hospitality and concern for children from poor families living in poor neighborhoods: Catholic elementary schools. If the governor and legislature want to help Catholic schools increase their enrollments of kids from poor urban districts, then pass a law that does that. Right now, it looks as if the governor and legislative leaders are more interested in bailing out ultra-Orthodox yeshivas in Lakewood, which will not admit poor black and Latino kids from failing schools. Otherwise, the OSA bill would be consistent with its rhetoric. It is not.
Gordon MacInnes is a fellow at The Century Foundation in New York and previously was a lecturer at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University. He served as the assistant commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Education and was a member of the New Jersey State Senate and General Assembly. MacInnes also directed the New Jersey Network and was the first director of the Fund for New Jersey. He lives in Morristown.
