The REAL A-F Grades in IPS!

That’s one hell of a curve.

A couple days ago, the letter grades came out for all of the schools in Indiana.  A very smart person among us (hats off to MaryAnn Schlegel Ruegger) realized that the grading system was not fair at all.  She uncovered the fact that new charters and IPS Innovation Network Schools are all allowed to be graded on growth only if they so choose.

(They chose).  There are over 40 schools statewide that are choosing to report bogus grades in this manner.

Many of the news articles that have been released discussing the letter grades for the schools did not point this out.

chalkbeat1.JPGindystar1

This, of course, provided a PR field day for IPS and especially the Mind Trust- whose reputation is at stake if their incubated Innovation Network Schools should be reported as failing:

tweet1tweet2tweet3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So these grades are based on growth in scores ONLY, resulting in the A and B grades.  But, what are the REAL scores for these schools?  Let’s take a look at the actual percentages of students PASSING BOTH MATH AND ELA:

Cold Spring:  30.2%

Enlace: 28.0%

Global Prep: no data

Phalen 103:  12.8%

Phalen 93: 38.2%

Kipp Indy: 18.0%

Kindezi: no data

I teach at the college level, and my students would never get an A or B for these scores.  Do the parents know that their child’s A and B-rated school is graded on the sell-out curve?  Do the parents know that in the world of public education, the dollar sign is highly favored over the percentage passing sign??  And bogus grades are being created in order to continue to drive customers to failing schools?

And do the parents know there are some traditional public IPS schools that are performing better than the schools listed above?  But this is the truth that the Mind Trust and IPS don’t want the public or the parents to know, so that the privatization of our public schools can continue.

Please share widely, and if you haven’t already, follow Indy Apples and the IPS Community Coalition on Facebook, or become a member of the IPS Community Coalition at this site.  Those are two groups dedicated to exposing the truth about public education in Indianapolis.

 

*Thanks to MaryAnn Schlegel Ruegger and Indy Apples for graphics and ideas.  Data comes from IDOE Compass or 9/6/17 Chalkbeat article detailing ISTEP scores.

 

(non)democracy at work

Dear constituent,

On May 28th, 2015, in a live-television broadcast it was announced that the AUTONOMY issue, which the entire board had previously had a Sunday afternoon meeting about (dubbed weird, unusual, and a travesty by the media) was going to be DEFINED by a newly-created ad-hoc commitee which only consisted of two board members, two members of administration, and others.  This is especially concerning because it allows for the circumvention of the open door law.  When less than four (majority) of board members meet, then those meetings are not required to be held in public!  I was livid upon hearing this annoucement read on live television without any prior knowledge of this plan.  To make matters worse, the annoucement was read from a prepared written statement announcing pre-selected members of a committee which had clearly taken time to deliberate upon and then craft a statement.    However, I was never given any information about it prior to it being announced at the meeting.  Further, the ad-hoc commitee plan was intentionally revealed at a place in the agenda which did not allow for board member commentary.  When I attempted to make comments about the utter lack of transparency involved in this clandestine assignment of responsibilities, attempts were made to silence my voice.

It’s important that you know.  If you live in IPS district 2, your representation on the Indianapolis Public School board is being marginalized.   If I am not able to speak on issues, then I am not able to represent my people.

The issue of defining autonomy is of such magnitude that it will affect every single decision made going forward.  I believe that every single board member should have input on this critical matter, and I have advocated for the entire board to take on the task of defining autonomy TOGETHER.  It is the collective responsibility of the entire board to chart the course for the future of the district – however this important decision now rests in the hands of only a select few.

 

atifete

My views are my own.  Holla if ya hear me: gayle_cosby@yahoo.com

 Or, fill out the form below: