A Further Examination of Free and Reduced Poverty Levels

Earlier this month, the New York Times elaborated on a working report by researchers Katherine Michelmore and Susan Dynarski from the University of Michigan. The study focuses on the method used to track school-wide poverty levels and its connection to overall levels of socio-economic need within that school/district. The researchers suggest that looking solely at the Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL) eligibility rates as the primary indicator of socio-economic need provides an inadequate representation of that school's overall level of disadvantagedness.

Why American Schools Are Even More Unequal Than We Thought

Instead, the researchers suggest that the rate of FRL eligibility should be further broken down to examine student persistence within that subgroup. For example, it is not enough to just say that 25% of students are eligible for FRL and thus considered socio-economically disadvantaged. Instead, the University of Michigan team suggests that schools and districts should indicate the overall length of time that students and families have remained eligible for the FRL program. In their research, Michelmore and Dynarski found a substantial negative linear correlation between years spent as FRL eligible and corresponding test-scores in 8th grade. While they do not state causation between FRL eligibility with reduced performance (given that the gaps between affluent peers remains unchanged from the early grades) they do suggest that this measure appropriately recognizes varying levels of poverty within their communities. Thus, while the old measures would label two schools with 25% FRl eligibility as equally disadvantaged, the methodology suggested by Michelmore and Dynarski would further break down that 25% into levels of persistent poverty--a factor that they believe that ultimately suggests higher need.

(null)

Although the study examines Michigan public schools, the researcher's analysis of FRL measures is at the very least anecdotally applicable to San Diego--especially given the high levels of FRL eligibility that exist within San Diego Unified (SDUSD). According to the California Department of Education reporting, 63.3% of SDUSD students were FRL eligible during the 2014-2015 school year--a rate that grew from 62.5% in the previous year (specific statistics compiled by the Ed-Data demographic reporting service). While this statistic does not break this rate down based on grade levels, consistent FRL eligibility, etc., it is reasonable to assume that a large portion of that 62.5% carried over as FRL eligible in the following school year.

Regardless of how it is looked at, the high rates of FRL eligibility within San Diego speak volumes about the socio-economic need of our community.

July Education Recap

In the 2 months since my last post, much has happened in the realm of education--especially in California. For those who have been tuned out for the summer (admiringly, like I have from regular blog-posting) here is a quick re-cap on 2 pressing stories in California education:


California Department of Education Approves LGBT History Curriculum Framework

Earlier this month, the California Department of Education approved a new social studies curriculum framework that includes content standards focusing on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender contributions to California History. The proposed framework was in response to California Senate Bill 48--the FAIR Education Act (passed in 2011)--a provision of which called for the inclusion of LGBT history in California content standards (full text here).

San Diego's NPR affiliate, KPBS, highlighted the framework adoption in a recent story:

LGBT History Lessons Approved For California Classrooms

For more information on Senate Bill, head over to the California Department of Education website.


Teach For America San Diego and San Francisco -- A Tale of Two Cities

Earlier in July, SDUSD voted to renew it's partnership with Teach For America as a method of teacher recruitment. Although the board meeting and vote went on with little resistance or issue, this is not the current atmosphere all across the state.

This past May, the San Francisco Board of Education voted not to renew the Teach for America partnership contract for the 2017-2018 school year and beyond. The news has been met with heavy criticisms from both sides of the issue--especially at a time where California's teacher shortfall remains extremely high entering the new school year.

For more information about this story and the Teach For America response, please see the links below:

New trouble for Teach for America: San Francisco wants out 

Teach For America-Bay Area District Partnerships in the 2016-17 School Year | Teach For America

New Report on National Trends in Student Absenteeism

Earlier this month, State Superintendent of Education Tom Torlakson announced that the state witnessed record high graduation rates for the 2014-2015 school year--a trend that is projected to continue for the class of 2016.

On the heels of that groundbreaking achievement, however, are new findings from the Federal Department of Education exposing the prevalence of a problematic barrier to student success: attendance. In a report released in May, the Department of Education found that over 6 million students (13.1%) were chronically absent for the 2013-2014 school year--meaning that they missed more than 15 days of school in that year. Moreover, the highest rate of these absences occur in high school and among students of minority background.

Breakdown of Student subgroups

Nationwide Findings

How do these findings mirror San Diego County? Although the last report by San Diego Unified on this subject was released in 2008, its findings mirrored current national trends. Released nearly a decade ago, it showed some parts of the county reached 25% and higher for chronic absenteeism in district high schools:

San Diego County Rates of Chronic Absenteeism, 2008.

While current figures for San Diego county are unavailable, the fact that these trends existed in 2008 is still striking. 

The full Federal Department of Education report can be viewed here:

Chronic Absenteeism in the Nation's Schools

Question(s) to Consider:

• What causes students in our San Diego communities to be chronically absent? What steps can we take to minimize this trend?

San Diego Unified Provides Updated Graduation Prediction

Last month, a study conducted by the University of California, San Diego predicted a significant drop in San Diego Unified's graduation rate for the 2015-2016 school year. As examined in this blog, these concerning figures stemmed from the district's recent policy of requiring all students to take and complete the rigorous A-G college preparatory curriculum.

During last night's board meeting, however, San Diego Unified released its own rebuttal to these reports--claiming instead that their internal data predicts a record high graduation rate of 92%. This rate reaches significantly higher than the predicted 72% from the UCSD study and slightly higher than the previous years rate of 89.7%. Why the drastic discrepancy in predictions? According to SDUSD officials cited in this morning's San Diego Union Tribune, the UCSD study was flawed in that it relied on data taken last year during the class of 2016's junior year and failed to account for the interventions administered this school year. District officials are confident that their figures are accurate and that the 

Below are the articles from KPBS and the San Diego UT highlighting today's reports.

San Diego Unified High School Graduation Rates Higher Than Expected

SD Unified predicts record graduation rate

With such polarized predictions, one thing remains certain: only time will tell the final graduation rate for the class of 2016.