The State of Education in Rhode Island, Part 2 Take 2
Oftentimes, information communicated in terms of underlying counts gives people a sense of what is reasonable and what is possible that can be lost when results are presented solely in terms of percentages. So before moving on to the part 3 post in the State of Education in RI series, I am going to post in a tabular form the numbers that the part 2 graphs were based on.
In the tables below, the second column shows the change (by district) in total number of students proficient or better, as measured by the 8th then 11th grades NECAPs. The absolute numbers of students used to calculate these differences were presented in Part 1. In all cases, this column provides the numerator of the percentage shown in column five.
The third column is the number of students who were proficient or better on the 8th-grade NECAPs. In cases where the total number of students who were proficient or better decreased between 8th and 11th grade results, column three is used as the denominator of the percentage in column five, defining column five as the change in the number of less than proficient students in a district, between grades 8 and 11, as a percentage of the number of students who were proficient or better in grade 8.
The fourth column is the number of students who were less than proficient, i.e. who scored “partially proficient” or “not proficient”, on the 8th-grade NECAPs. In cases where the total number of students who were proficient or better increased between 8th and 11th grade results, column four is used as the denominator of the percentage in column five, defining column five as the change between grades 8 and 11 in the number of proficient or better students in a district, as a percentage of the number of students who were less-than-proficient in grade 8.
In other words, if the number of students who were proficient in a district went up between 8th and 11th grades, column five is the percentage of less-than-proficient students as measured in the 8th grade who advanced. If the number of students who were at least proficient went down, column five is the percentage of proficient-or-better students as measured in the 8th grade who declined. As stated in Part 1 of Part 2, this split metric isn’t ideal. In the case of districts that experienced declines in number of students proficient, no distinction is made between those who advanced a large number (or large percentage) of already proficient students, versus those who advanced smaller totals. This is why it is useful to plot results described here in conjunction with the starting percentage of students proficient or better from each district, to provide a look at the changes over time than can occur in districts that start from similar levels (when you look at a horizontal slice of the 2D-plot) or from different levels (when you look at the entire plot) of academic achievement.
Results in this post are sorted from highest percentage to the lowest. Part 3 in the series to appear on Monday.
|Community||Change in # of Students PoB at Reading, between 8th and 11th Grades||# of 8th-Graders Proficient or Better at Reading, ’05 & ’06 NECAP||# of 8th-Graders Less-than-Proficient at Reading, ’05 & ’06 NECAP||Change in # PoB at Reading, between 8th and 11th Grades, as % of ’05/’06 8th-Graders LtP|
|Community||Change in # of Students PoB at Reading, between 8th and 11th Grades||# of 8th-Graders Proficient or Better at Reading, ’05 & ’06 NECAP||# of 8th-Graders Less-than-Proficient at Reading, ’05 & ’06 NECAP||Change in # PoB at Reading, between 8th and 11th Grades, as % of ’05/’06 8th-Graders PoB|
|Community||Change in # PoB at Mathematics, between 8th and 11th Grades||# of 8th-Graders Proficient or Better at Math, ’05 & ’06 NECAP||# of 8th-Graders Less-than-Proficient at Math, ’05 & ’06 NECAP||Change in # PoB at Math, between 8th and 11th Grades, as % of ’05/’06 8th-Graders PoB|