Special kids get chance to play
Benefit held for crash victim
WSU vs. Milwaukee
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2007 > August > 15 > Entry
Is it racist to track minority group scores?
I got a couple of curious calls this morning from angry Fairborn residents. One caller was very blunt — based on the story I wrote this morning, either I was a racist or Fairborn Superintendent Dave Scarberry was.
Why?
Because the story noted that in Fairborn, the school district was prevented from making “adequate yearly progress” under the federal No Child Left Behind law because the test scores of the district’s African American students, special education students and poor students were too low.
The callers said it was unfair to single out these groups. In their minds, it was akin to blaming these kids for blocking the district’s success on the state report card.
But here’s the irony of this complaint — No Child Left Behind required school districts to track and report the scores of minority groups and penalized those that failed to help the kids in those groups achieve better as a way to FORCE districts to pay MORE attention to them.
Let’s start with what today’s story actually said:
“At Fairborn, Superintendent Dave Scarberry said the district missed AYP because black children, kids in special education and poor children did not score well enough on state tests.”
(Note: Scarberry actually used the term “African-American” instead of “black” in our interview and my story included that phrase. But it was changed by editors because the Dayton Daily News’ style is to use the term “black.” An editor said paper does not identify any minority groups by their continent of origin in this way. We also use the term “white” rather than “European American” for the same reason, the editor said.)
This is, first of all, completely true. NCLB requires Fairborn to show steady progress for students in nine “subgroup” categories — African American, American Indian, Asian, Hispanic, multi-racial, white, special education, economically disadvantaged (a euphemism for poor) and for those learning English as a second language.
Fairborn made enough progress in six of those categories. For three of them, the school district did not meet NCLB’s expectation — African Americans, kids in special education and poor children. If a district falls short on any of these subgroups, NCLB says they failed to make AYP.
Fairborn was not alone. In the graphic in today’s paper, 38 of the 60 area districts failed to meet AYP. There are a couple of other ways you can miss AYP, but for most of them one of these subgroups didn’t make enough test score gain.
Why does NCLB place such an emphasis on this? Lawmakers were responding to a hidden crisis that was typical to many school districts in the past — schools reported average scores that disguised just how badly they were neglecting minority kids.
Consider a typical suburban district that might have only about 25 percent of kids who fall into one of the “subgroup” categories other than “white.” In the past, this school might have been meeting most of the state standards and looking pretty good come report card time.
But what we didn’t know back then was that while the average scores compared well to other districts, there was a huge disparity between the majority and minority kids within the district. While 75 percent might have been doing very well, the 25 percent of kids who were still learning in English, in special education classes or who were black or Hispanic might have been scoring dreadfully low. And nobody knew about it.
This was a common problem before No Child Left Behind, a big enough problem that lawmakers wrote a law with the expressed intention of shining a bright light on the performance of minority students and requiring school districts to help those kids achieve.
That is the exact opposite of racist.
But it is worrisome that when we tell people what the data shows some react with anger. One caller told me we should not be identifying which groups of kids did poorly and to do so was blaming them and that was racist.
Let’s look again at what the story said. It identified three Fairborn subgroups as failing to make AYP. In the next paragraph, Scarberry is quoted saying the district is studying the test questions and has targeted the kids in those subgroups for extra help.
Again, is this a bad thing? NCLB forced school districts to pay attention to the minority groups that are not keeping pace academically and as a result Fairborn is making plans to help those kids do better.
What is your take on NCLB subgroups? Is it the right or wrong to identify which minority groups are not making progress?
Permalink | Comments (32) | Categories: Testing
Comments
By null
August 19, 2007 1:52 AM | Link to this
Bottomline…it’s very difficult to effect change (improved academic achievement) when the recipient (student/parent) is not interested in doing well. There are a number of cultural groups served who do not value education. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…all the money and the cream of the crop teachers are not going to effect change when student’s do not care about an education and neither do their parents. It doesn’t really matter what race they are. As the saying goes, success is 90% attitude and 10% aptitude. I work with these kids, I know of what I speak. Personally, to the public, “I am sick and tired of caring more about your child’s future than you do. Stop coming to school conferences and attempting to point the finger of blame on the teachers or the school system. Birth control is a far less expensive option than giving birth to children that you have never parented or instilled any values in. Please don’t act surprised when your children come to school and misbehave or underperform academically. You, the perpetually neglectful parent should be asamed of yourself.” Unfortunately, inner city populations are chalk full of these folks, not that they don’t show up in other places, but the apathetic and lazy slops often choose to live in the inner cities where free resources are more attainable. God bless our society.By D.T.
August 18, 2007 6:48 PM | Link to this
Call it what you want, but the issue that Fairborn is having, as Statschick pointed out, is an issue at most schools across the country. Not only is it not racist to track minority group scores, it would be racist to NOT track minority group scores. If a school has a smaller percentage of minorities and those minorities are failing miserably while the majority of their peers are succeeding, that school would be deemed successful even though it was missing an entire segment of its population. In the end, as teachers we cannot change the economic or home situation of our students. We can, however, work to ensure the success of ALL of our students regardless of race, sex, class, or ability.By Caroline
August 18, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this
Joe, You criticize the stipend for some Fairborn teachers, but do you know why they are getting it? I don’t know, but most likely they are spending extra time with students during the day or after school. Can’t we stay on topic here? Why do people waste their time criticizing teacher’s salaries? I could make much more money if I would work as a secretary. Don’t we have enough things to worry about in education (racism, scores, violence, etc.) without bringing up the nonsense about teachers somehow getting rich off of teaching????By Jim
August 18, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this
Statschic has it right. Do you think it’s the kids? Or their parents’? Or their “culture excuse” attitudes? Or the “we don’t pay for school fees” attitude as in a more recent blog topic here? Blaming the teachers for not educating is wrong; the kids don’t learn. You can’t teach those who don’t want to do or don’t feel they have to do because someone will make an excuse for them. Maybe if the black superintendent and black board members started speaking directly to the problem instead of trying to work around it, they could shame them into working harder and better. But there will be someone excusing it as their economcs or their home or community rather than something over which they have control…By lou
August 18, 2007 7:09 AM | Link to this
als, you read the word all in my statement that was not there. I guess I should have said some. But you missed the main idea of my comment. The REAL discrepency is economics.By Joe
August 17, 2007 11:18 PM | Link to this
Eight teachers were just given $75/day stipends added to their contracts for the 2007-08 school year in Fairborn (total of $13,500 each), a grand total of $108,000. This is after getting a recent raise) after Fairborn had to pass an emergency levy. Maybe they can use this money by being good teachers and educate these kids well enough to get better test scores. We don’t need to hire any extra tutors or pay more for additional teachers or help. I understand there were already tutors paid to help students score higher on the tests this past year!By statschick
August 17, 2007 11:02 PM | Link to this
If you look at educational reports for other districts like I have, you will see the same disconcerting data trend. Look at the data for your selves at the ODE website. One school rated ‘Excellent’ in Centerville had 92% of 3rd grade White kids pass the reading test, 70% of disabled kids and economically disadvantaged passed, and 67% of Black children. Math is even worse with 92%versus 54.5%. I think we need to get over pointing fingers and figure out what needs to be changed in order to raise the level of success for all kids.By Scott Elliott
August 17, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
Kara, it’s true the story did not include the play-by-play of my interview with Scarberry. But it also did not include any words that indicated blame for any of the subgroups. Nor was anything in the story inaccurate. Some readers perceived an intent in Scarberry’s comments that simply was not there. I wish there had been more space in the paper for a fuller explanation of the situation in Fairborn. But at least I was able to explain it fully on the Internet.By Kara
August 17, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this
Laura: I am not angry about anything. I just didn’t understand why the superintendent would publicly name the poor performing groups. I fully understand tracking. I just felt by naming the groups that were performing poorly put the children in those groups in an unfavorable public light. That information is something only district administrators, teachers and parents of those individuals need to know. I understand that not every black child did poorly. But who is to know which ones did and which ones didn’t? I would expect that every child that needed help is getting it. And since Scott has fully explained the question — how it was posed and the response — I understand how that information came out. I still think it was unfortunate the way it was written. Again, I’m done.By als
August 17, 2007 10:50 AM | Link to this
Laura, I’m not twisting anything. If I (especially as a teacher) said “middle class white kids do as good, if not better than, middle class black kids” you guys would be all over me on that. I’m just tired of the double standard. If we are going to get past race, lets do it. But Lou’s statement indicated that ALL black students do better than ALL white students. I don’t know why you can’t see through that statement. I think its because people only think of racism as whites against blacks. But there is a tremendous amount of racism against whites going on. I saw it in Lou’s statement, so I called him on it. I don’t hate Lou, but fair is still fair and you cant say that its wrong to insult blacks and then look the other way when whites are insulted (no matter how subtle that insult is). If I am the only white person that will stand up for other whites, then thats the way it goes.By Kara
August 17, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this
Scott: Given your full explanation I understand how the three subgroups were identified. But that’s not how it was reported in the paper! I’m done.By Mary
August 17, 2007 7:48 AM | Link to this
I think part of the culture attitude problem rests with Scarberry and board members. It seems one of their first priorities for money after they finally passed a levy was an over $80,000 salary for a new athletic director. So why not provide some intensive highly paid tutors for minorities instead, or how about a properly certified gifted ed teacher. Seems to me the board and administration have their priorities amiss and then make excuses about test scores.By Scott Elliott
August 16, 2007 10:32 PM | Link to this
Kara, it went like this. Scarberry and I were discussing why Fairborn had missed AYP for the fourth year in a row. He said it was because three of nine subgroups NCLB requires Fairborn to track did not meet AYP. I asked, which subgroups? He then listed the six subgroups that met AYP — white, Asian, English language learner, American Indian, Hispanic and multiracial. Then he said the three subgroups that did not make AYP were African American, special education and economically disadvantaged. So what we had in the paper was completely correct and absolutely nothing in Scarberry’s comments were in any way pointing the finger. I asked him a question and he answered it with the correct information. How is that blaming anyone? And again, one purpose of the law is to inform the public when minority groups are not keeping up. That is what our story aimed to do. Next year, Fairborn faces sanctions that could be severe if the district can’t find a way to raise the test scores of the students in these minority groups. It is important information that if you live in Fairborn, you should know.By Kara
August 16, 2007 9:39 PM | Link to this
Scott: I am lifting straight from what you wrote, �At Fairborn, Superintendent Dave Scarberry said the district missed AYP because black children, kids in special education and poor children did not score well enough on state tests.� If that’s not pointing the finger I don’t know what is. I very happy that they have programs set in place to help those students in need. I just don’t think he needed to name the groups. He could have simply said that the groups have been identified (without naming them)and help will be given.By Jim
August 16, 2007 8:40 PM | Link to this
For Kara the reality is on average black kids underperform. For Will that’s no matter what income level their parents are. There’s a lack of interest in academics and with the race-baiting that goes on they learn to use that as an excuse. The reality is Supt. Scarberry already was giving the groups that need extra help all that the district can provide. Remediation and individual help are expensive. The special education kids should not be required to take the same test, with or without a scribe reading it to them. Their scores shouldn’t count toward the district. Reality is rumors that some districts send theirs to other districts so that the scores don’t count toward their district record. Some districts are more friendly and have very good programs set up encouraging special needs kids to attend. Reality is some parents got their kids declared special so they wouldn’t be responsible for performing to the level other kids had to perform at. But now those kids count on the district records. AND Mary is spot on that all this special attention, study hall tutoring, after school work, etc., takes away from the highly qualified kids in the district because the money goes toward remediation now that the state requirements didn’t exempt special kids other than 1.5% of the number taking the test IIRC. AND the black kids doing poorly aren’t doing it based on economics, it’s a culture attitude. Many kids without a second nickel to rub work well in school because their parents and people around them care. AND it’s not the education system that’s failed. It’s the community allowing parents to now care for the kids they choose to have.By Laura
August 16, 2007 8:34 PM | Link to this
Some people will find a way to twist almost anything to suit their position. Als, I have read and reread and reread the statement by Lou and can not figure out how you label that racist. Kara- you are also looking for an excuse to be angry. I can not figure out how Dr. Scarberry’s answers led you to believe his statements were racist. As Scott has stated more than once, Dave was only answering the question that Scott asked him. If you are bothered by the issue of “tracking” certain subgroups, you need to address your concerns to the legislators.By Scott Elliott
August 16, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this
Kara, that is NOT what Dave Scarberry said nor what he meant. He was NOT pointing the finger at anyone or faulting any kids and he did NOT say every black student, poor and special ed student did poorly. He simply gave an honest answer to my question about what subgroups were not meeting AYP in Fairborn and in the next sentence he promised the district would focus on those kids. Again, this is one of the purposes of NCLB — to bring attention to the needs of underserved minority groups. Scarberry’s words have been misinterpreted by some and twisted by others.By Kara
August 16, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this
I understand that there are children who underperform -black, white, rich, poor, able-bodied and those with disabilities. I have a problem with the way the superintendent stated it and pointing the finger at black children, poor and special education children. As I said I can bet not every black child in Fairborn did poorly. As I’m sure not every poor child did poorly either. It sets the stage for an “us” and “them” mentality.By Skeptic
August 16, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this
The thing that this REALLY tells us is that suburban and rural districts are no better at helping disadvantaged students than the urban districts. The urban districts just have a lot more of the poor/troubled kids to deal with so the averages look a lot worse. We need to regionalize education so that all districts (or one unified district) share these burdens. But the upperclass will never allow this and the result will be more of the same.By Mary
August 16, 2007 6:42 AM | Link to this
The angry callers were just showing the public ignorance about NCLB. A “value added” system would show lots of students being neglected including black and white gifted students. It would show how they are being held back and not learning anything from year to year even though they test “proficient” on a minimum standards test. It’s funny how schools are expected to keep game scores and individual sports statistics, but don’t dare track academic scores. We all know “white men can’t jump” (or dunk).By Will
August 16, 2007 2:13 AM | Link to this
We have to accept that the education system of this country is biased towards middle to upper class individuals. By race it is biased towards whites. If we examine scores we will see that whites score better. If we examine by race students from middle to upper class families will perform better. THis is not a statement about the student or the family but rather the institution and system of American public education. We as a society accept condone and embrace it. Therefore we should not be upset at its results. If we don’t like the results then change the system, but quit pointing fingers at the red herrings of students, families and income.By als
August 16, 2007 12:45 AM | Link to this
Lou, I really don’t care what race you are. Any teacher who makes a blanket statement that one race does better than another is not seeing children as individuals. There may be some black children that do better academically than some white children, but that’s not really what you said. You said black students do as well, if not better…if you cant see the difference, I’m sure I wouldn’t want my kids in your class.By Fred
August 15, 2007 11:52 PM | Link to this
well if the shoe fits wear it.These days anything that comes out of a white persons mouth pertaining to someone other then white is scrutinized for any possible hints that can be translated into said white person being designated as racist.I for one am sick of this attitude it seems we are not the racists any more.By lou
August 15, 2007 11:33 PM | Link to this
als, how does my comment sound racist? I do the stats, I have the #’s to back my statement. Is it because I used black and not afro-American? Or is it because you cannot accept that minorities can do as well, if not better than whites? Maybe you are the racist one. You know so much, am I white or black, or maybe niether, what about both? I don’t know what parent would not allow their child to have a teacher that teaches everyone. Maybe I wouldn’t want your child in my class. Better yet,maybe your child couldn’t pass my class because I have high standards for all in my class and I except no excuses for completing work that is not up to their ability.By charterschoolhater
August 15, 2007 11:08 PM | Link to this
I want you to know there are plenty of poor white children in Eastern Ohio that are doing pretty poor academically. But none save East Cleveland are doing more poorly than Dayton’s students. 609 out of 610 school districts? Wow! I bet the buffoons on the school board give Mack another raise for this one. On a more serious note. Poverty has no color. There are plenty of poor people of every color imaginable. Poverty tends to translate in poor academics whether you are white, black, yellow, green or purple. People who try to bring race into the equation are just copping out. They are part of the problem, not part of the solution, and need to be ostracized from all educational and political institutions.By Peter
August 15, 2007 8:36 PM | Link to this
Lou is correct that students in the “economically disadvantaged” category do not do as well as middle and upper class students, regardless of their ethnic background. I would like to point out that the reason is not finances, but rather the predominance of a chaotic home life and poor parenting. Children who come from poor homes who nevertheless have responsible parents who provide a stable home do well and children who come from wealthy backgrounds who have a chaotic life with poor parenting do poorly. So please, let’s assign the correct reason for the AYP problem. It’s not finances, it is parenting.By Laura
August 15, 2007 7:50 PM | Link to this
I have serious concerns about NCLB in regards to these subgroups and making AYP. How is it fair to penalize Fairborn and other communities who have large numbers of poor, minority groups and special education students? Since many districts have few or none, such as Oakwood, it seems unfair to hold this against them. I have no problem with reporting the discrepencies, but it should not keep them from making AYP. Neither should things that are out of their control such as attendance and drop out rates. Unless the law is changed to stop letting students drop out at 16, it is unfair to hold it against a district. In addition, unless the law will consistently prosecute parents for allowing their children, or even insisting their children skip school for unacceptable reasons, attendance should not be held against the schools, either.By als
August 15, 2007 6:44 PM | Link to this
“Middle class black students do as well, if not better than, middle class white students”? I hope you’re not my kids’ teacher. You sound a little racist, Lou.By Buford
August 15, 2007 5:18 PM | Link to this
Seems to me Scott and the School Superintendent are properly identifying categories as mandated by law. If the law terminology and categorization for tracking scores offends the public - then the public should contact their Representatives and Senators who put such language into that law.By Kara
August 15, 2007 5:00 PM | Link to this
I understand put into context the feds and districts keeping track of scores of particular groups of children HOWEVER, given the state of American his comment would have been better if he had said “Based on the guidelines set by the No Child Left Behind legislation we didn’t perform well. His comments set the stage in Fairborn to do some finger pointing in the classroom.By GTH7
August 15, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this
The Fairborn superintendent was a little blunt in his assessment of the situation. The comment is a little bit of inside baseball: this is the way administrators are forced to look at testing data and they way they talk about it amongst themselves. I hope it doesn’t cost him. I say that because he only spoke the truth. Foks, numbers don’t lie. However, I don’t believe he was blaming the students for the district’s problems. Yes, they bear personal responsibility to become educated, but the harsh reality of No Child Left Behind is that schools are held accountable for their students, regardless of their situations, attidutes or motivations.By lou
August 15, 2007 4:26 PM | Link to this
I hate the box on forms for race. I always mark other because I am an American. Until American is added to the box I will continue to mark other. As for the test scores, the real descrepency is economics. I analyze all of my students scores. Middle class black students do as well as, if not better that, middle class white students. Economically disadvantaged white students and economically disadvantaged black students score lower. The discrepency lies in money not race. Unless you know the students you would not find this stat. I am for taking race off of everything. As long as we still divide things by race, racism will always be present.