Test Scores Show LAUSD Outperforming State Average
The L.A. Times reports as follows the most recent results from the latest round of standardized tests:"Los Angeles Unified, by far the state's largest district, showed gains in almost every grade and subject area, with especially strong progress in the early grades, where the district has concentrated its reform efforts."
"Overall, its gains on the so-called STAR test slightly surpassed those of the state at large, offering validation to district officials who are fighting an uphill battle to fend off a restructuring led by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa."
Under the circumstances, do we REALLY want to hand the 730,000 students to Antonio Villaraigosa?
a) No.
b) Heck no!
c) Dr. No.
d) www.NO.com
e) Si, se puede!
Posted by Walter Moore @ 8/15/2006 06:11:00 PM
16 Comments:
How long will it be before Villaraigoober starts saying HE'S the one responsible for the improvement?
Your mistrust for Antonio has reordered the way you see statistics, I guess. And here I thought you wanted to kill LAUSD, not save it.
And good work framing the school issue as a latinos-vs-anglos issue. They all think alike, they all think differently from us, but we still have a diversity of opinion. So by definition, you can't be racist.
Pathetic.
We would not be in this MESS if it werent for that fuckin idot losserrr, dumb ass, lowlife, wetback,carpet bagger,dumb shit,stupid ass,fuck face,no balls,follower no leader,PRICK,slut,wimp,pussy,smelly breath,DOG,Dirty ears,smelly BO,MIDGET the second, get a life,JOSE HUIZAR!!!!!!!!!!!!
Outperforming a pathetic state average is nothing to brag about much less the abysmal standards of performance considered as acceptable by California, by Jack O'Connell, the state superintendant of public schools.
After ten years of standardized testing, test averages are creeping at rate that statisically one would have a hard time saying the so called increase was not just random error.
Antonio just wants to dumb down the tests, declare victory, and run for governor no more no less than any other aspiring corrupt politician.
a-d.
As bad as LAUSD is, AV simply does not have the credibility. He was a terrible student who became and is an amibitous, self-serving politician. And the unabashed, underachieving CCMs should be ashamed of themselves for throwing their symbolic support behind the mayor.
This isn't about Latino vs. Anglo. The issue is: what policy is most likely to benefit the 730,000 children per year we're trying to educate.
The LAUSD does not have ideal statistics -- far from it. But no one, to the best of my knowledge, has identified a comparable school district, with a comparable student body, budget and class size, but better results.
Add to that the facts that test scores are improving, the fact that Villaraigosa's plan blurs the lines of accountability, and the fact that Villaraigosa has no particular expertise in, or plan for, education, and I think the best available course of action is to preserve the status quo.
Anyone with better ideas about how to run the schools can and should run for the school board.
Mr. Moore, have you considered the fact that no one will ever be able to identify a "comparable school district with a comparable student body, budget and class size, but better results" because LAUSD is unique in the world?
By extention, Los Angeles is unique in the world. Those who wish to lead us should look for imaginative solutions rather than try to copy what has been done elsewhere. Criticism is fine, but criticism leading to meaningful alternatives is better.
Being a politician, I suppose it is easier for you to try to tear down someone who risks failure by offering a bold plan (no matter how flawed) than to try to build up yourself by risking failure and offering a plan of your own.
I sure as hell don't know how to fix LAUSD, but I'm not the Mayor and I'm not running for Mayor. I leave it to you.
Under the circumstances, do we REALLY want to hand the 730,000 students to Antonio Villaraigosa?
a) No.
b) Heck no!
c) Dr. No.
d) www.NO.com
e) Si, se puede!
Race baiting flows out of Republicans like water out of a fountain. Of course it's not about Latino vs Anglo, Walter.
1. Will everyone here who is a "highly qualified" teacher please raise your hand? That's what I thought. My hand is up, yours isn't. That doesn't necessarily make me right, but it doesn't hurt.
2. Actually, I have proposed solutions. When I ran for mayor, I proposed vouchers, so parents and the free market could come up with solutions, that would be copied by other schools. (Remember the "labratory of democracy?") Anyway, I don't think that's politically viable, so I don't advocate it any more. People apparently want a "public education" system, so we've got to make that work.
3. The Number 1 solution I have proposed is smaller class size. Every teacher I talk to -- you know, the people actually involved in this process? -- tells me that's the most helpful thing one could do. Plus, it makes sense. So I think that needs to be our focus, Priority No. 1.
4. I have also noted with approval, on this very blog, efforts to provide "scaffolding" to English learners and, in particular, the efforts of State Senator Escutia in that regard. We have a huge percentage of English learners, and we have to get them fluent in English as rapidly as possible. That, to me, is Priority No. 2 -- and would be accomplished largely through Priority No. 1.
5. Yes, I have indeed considered that L.A. is unique. Indeed, that is the whole point, as per my previous posts on the subject. Or, in the vernacular, 'Duh!' You cannot reasonably expect a school system with students do not yet speak English to achieve the same scores on standardized tests in English as schools in other states. That is my point: the fact that LAUSD's scores are behind other systems' scores does not necessarily mean the LAUSD is doing anything wrong. (You, for some reason, twist this into "trying to tear someone down," when, in fact, it is exactly the opposite.)
6. Change for the sake of change is irrational, especially when you're proposing system-wide change that affects 730,000 children per year, for five years. If anyone has specific proposals for improving education, by all means, conduct a trial experiment. But just handing over the whole show to Villaraigosa, without any specifics on what he would do differently, is indefensible.
7. I personally have met, and seen in action, a fairly significant number of LAUSD teachers and administrators. I am not easily impressed, and these people impressed the crap out of me. They are professional. They are energetic. They are informed. They use "cutting edge" educational methods to follow the best possible practices in education. So forgive me if I reject your suggestion that we throw away these people and their expertise merely because you want a "bold plan," regardless of the lack of any empirical evidence whatsoever to support it.
9:50 -- Get a life! It's called a friggin' joke! Carumba!
I just LOVE it when you use Spanish words, Wacko. . . it's SO Gomez Adams-esque. First in the main blog topic and now in a response (it just gives me CHILLS).
This from a guy who said a few weeks back he could TELL which Latinos were ILLEGAL and therefore not eligible to vote, just by LOOKING at them -- from a perch in a second story window next door.
So much talent, on loan from Gawd-almighty, and yet so few admirers.
Must make you 'umble.
Can everyone start reading the most recent update of the bill? Antonio failed significantly in achieving full mayor control...so the question on this blog is not relevant anymore. I was totally opposed to mayoral control, but I just wanted to emphasize (as other people have pointed out) that the bill is seriously diluted and the mayor will not have full control over anything. The only thing that will happen (as other people have pointed out, again) is that Divaraigosa will take credit for any so-called LAUSD "gain" after January 2007. In the similar fashion that Bush has used the culture of fear over 9-11 to win re-elections, Polloraigosa will use so-called LAUSD gains as seeds for his political future. Whatever so-called gains appear, the majority of youth will still be relatively uneducated and have no job prospects (not enough living wage jobs exist for our large population). So I think it is much more positive if more news gets out about how diluted Antonio's bill and plan is, and more light be shed on how he and is press staff is spinning the whole issue. The LA Times attempted to show Antonio's spin in yesterday's paper, but as usual journalists do not make good researchers or proper folks to really understand and write about what is actually going on. Whatever happens, real plans and solutions need to come from the leadership of the superintendent's office and a broad attempt at creating more living wage jobs for a very uneducated public education graduating student body. There are not enough jobs and opportunities to make the future LAUSD graduating classes successful when compared to the expectations that irresponsible politicians have placed on LAUSD students. The United States is the only country that continues to think that one homogenous success story and educated standard exists. Antonio needs to be more responsible and kill his rhetoric about his past conditions of poverty and pulling himself up by his bootstraps, and then expecting all inner-city youth to follow his tracks. All that spin is a myth and any realistic look at the world shows that class, race, gender, and uneven economic development determines our unequal society. Why does he or anybody else think that this can change with L.A. and LAUSD? In addition, L.A. has one of the widest socio-economic gaps for its residents in the world...so what is all this talk about L.A. becoming something more than it is, which is a city of haves and have-nots, just like any other big city (NYC, London, Caracas, Paris, etc.). Antonio's bill is a farce and will do nothing in the long term except restructure governance and not give him any control at all. It's all disappointing.
Here are the real facts: 58% of LAUSD Is NOT proficient in English; and 60% of LAUSD is NOT PROFICIENT in Math!!!
Proficient means "barely able to pass"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LAUSD happens to have a 95% Mexican student body. They are the poorest of the poor and the dumbest of the dumb.
Quit beating a dead horse! LA and LAUSD is a shithole of filth, gangs, and crime imported from Mexico by Mexican politicians who want an ethnic cleansing of their country.
Having a 1.4 GPA and being the son of an illegal from Mexico, Villagrossa is a perfect example of a wetback who was born here (barely) 53 years ago, and still can't string two sentences together! These illiterate, itinerate campesinos simply do not have brain cells. You can't educate the uneducatable! Period!
Was AV an anchor baby too?
Anything looks like a gain when your when your baseline is at the bottom. Their just playing the percentage game.
The only real solution to LAUSD is to give the schools back to the community by moving forward on breakup.
A Walter Moore le gusta que se la metan chueca!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home