Monday, September 27, 2010

Brush up on "the list"

Just got a query from Joni Trobich, president of the Mecklenburg PTA Council, wondering how to find Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools' presentations on the 59 schools facing potential changes. The school board plans to narrow that list Tuesday, and she was having trouble tracking down what staff has already presented.

I agree; it's tough to find. So for all of you who plan to attend Tuesday's work session (1 p.m., Room 267 of the Government Center) or just want to catch up:

The presentation on the original 32 schools identified is here.

The news release on adding five more to that list is here.

The presentation on magnet schools that don't meet new school board criteria is here. That added 22 magnet schools or programs that hadn't been identified before.

Superintendent Peter Gorman says there will be updates on all 59 Tuesday. For some schools, that will mean recommending no immediate action, or taking them off the list (if the school board agrees). For the rest, there will be more details about possible solutions to low performance, underuse, crowding or magnet weaknesses.

And if you're feeling really energetic, here's a link to the data on all schools that generated a "performance cost indicator" rating, intended to show how much academic bang CMS is getting for taxpayer bucks.


Anonymous said...

That is the plan for those reports! They are simply manipulated numbers readily available but without explanation! This is a way to slip things by the board!Just like Gorman stated that he will be hiring highly effective teachers but the ones hired are "brand new teachers" with zero years of experience! How is this possible.

Anonymous said...

The school my child attends, Hawthorne High School, is on the "list". His school is a drop-out prevention school that services more students than any other school in CMS. I have seen what this school has done to make students productive and lead them on the road to graduation--it is a God-send for my son. I heard that they want to close Hawthorne because it is in an old building. This is not the school's fault. If they would have fixed the school like they were supposed to have done, this school wouldn't be on the list. This school is needed and deserves to be saved!!!

Anonymous said...

Note that even the "manipulated numbers" reflected upon by Anon 1:31 shows that the Olympic Community of Schools are among the highest performers both academically and PCI.


Anonymous said...

Hello Ann~

Any idea on when the 20th day enrollment figures will be released?

VCW said...

What do the PCI numbers mean? Is a high number good or bad? I wish CMS would provide some kind of footnotes or explanation of what this data actually means.

Anonymous said...

As others have mentioned, the table is confusing and without explanation. I tried to find a pattern to get a sense of the numbers, but was unable to see it.

How is Performance Cost Indicator calculated? Obviously, performance (however defined) and cost would be central to such a calculation. Of data displayed, "% Proficient" would likely be part of Peformance and the unit cost, "Cost per Student" would be part of, if not all of the Cost component.

Taking a look at two school, both ranked highly, I note that Devonshire has 69.7% Proficient and a unit cost of $8,448 while Myers Park Traditional has 87.7% Proficient and a unit cost of $6,863. Yet Devonshire with lower proficiency and higher costs ranks higher. Based on data displayed, this doesn't appear to make sense.

Where is the missing data and what are the formulas used to calculate the indices. For something as important as closing and/or changing schools, the process should be more transparent.