 |
 |
Dr. David Hopson |
||||||||||||
February 12 , 2007 I’ve always liked statistics and have done well in the statistical courses that were part of my formal education, but I’m in a quandary to understand the graduation rates recently reported by the state. Like many of you, I was dismayed at the reported graduation rates for the Gateway High School Class of 2006. A graduation rate of 72.7% is, at first blush, totally unacceptable and I asked the high school administration to provide a report on what happened to individual students in the Class of 2006. While this report is not yet complete, I have reviewed the data available on the Department of Education’s website regarding enrollment, graduation rates, and related information. What I found was a statistician’s nightmare. On one DOE webpage, the number of students reported by the school to the state through the Student Information Management System (SIMS) for the school year 2002-2003—the freshman year for the Class of 2006—was 128 students. Yet on the DOE webpage reporting the number of students in the class (original students entering 9th grade for the first time, minus students transferring out, minus student deaths, plus students transferring in) we see 139 students for the same class. In our own reports from our March census, we have 125 students enrolled in the class of 2006 for their freshman year. While I don’t currently have all of the information regarding the class of 2006, I find it hard to believe that we gained that many school choice students to increase class size to the level reported in the DOE graduation data. The other interesting item related to graduation results is what is counted and not counted in the total numbers. For Gateway, the 7.9% of students who did not graduate with their class but are still in school working towards graduation don’t count, nor did the 1.4% of students who attained a certificate of completion (generally special education students who complete the coursework identified in their individual education plans, but who did not pass the MCAS exam), nor did the .7% of students who earned their GED. In addition, the 1.4% of the students who were expelled from school under the auspices of Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 71, Section 37H1/2 (for controlled substances, weapons, or assaults) are factored in against the graduation rate. Whether any of these students should be counted or not is a philosophical question, but if we add them back into the mix, the percentage moves into the mid 80’s (using only the DOE figures). I believe that this information, no matter how inconsistent, is still useful to the district in reviewing what we’ve done in the past and moving forward in considering changes that would help students earn their diploma. In many respects we have a much easier job of this than some urban districts, as we’re able to get the vast majority of our students to meet the state’s competency determination for graduation (based upon MCAS). In looking at MCAS results from some districts and the state’s own findings regarding students (60% of currently enrolled high school students have been deemed to meet the competency determination compared to only 36% of those students who have ‘dropped out’ of high school), I would guess that the reasons for not completing school throughout the state are different and not necessarily related to ability. ### |
||||||||||||