The Team of Eight, or, Honesty is one of two competing policies.
Board President Nannette Vick and Lancaster ISD Superintendent Larry Lewis had what diplomats call "a frank exchange of views" (and the rest of us call 'an argument') about the first part of the first proposition on the new May 2007 bond.
The slide describing the proposal reads:
3 Replacement Elementary Schools
(West Main, Pleasant Run, Lancaster Elementary -- (LES will become 2nd middle school)
Ms Vick Can I interject? I read that 4 or 5 times before I cleared that in my own mind ... When I looked down, I was immediately confused. That's not really hard... But can you make that a little plainer, that we are NOT tearing down the middle school? That could be some confusion out there. So, we need to make sure .. this is not a replacement of a structure.... It's just the use of words.
Russ Johnson: It will have the name of the school in Boardwalk .. Lancaster Elementary.
Vicks: I don't care about the name Lancaster ... That three replacement elementary schools' infers that there's going to be a new West Main, which we want; a news Pleasant Run, which we want, -- a new Middle School -- we're TEARING DOWN a Middle School ? Surely we're tearing down a Middle School? No we're not. We have no intentions of tearing down the middle school. But see how the mind would carry that thought forward? So, let's remove that. And say, ' replacement of two and building of one new elementary ...'
Lewis interrupting : But it's not new. Those kids are going to be ... "
Vicks interrupting back: The structure's not there so it WILL be new. Don't argue. Say, 'Yes Miss Vick'.
Lewis: No. But, I have to explain to you Ms Vick, I think you may be... I don't want you to give out correct --uh -- incorrect information.
Ms Vick: Well, I won't.
Lewis: But the students are already here that are going to go into that new building ...
Vick: Exactly ...
Lewis: ... so it's not a new elementary.
Vick: But ...
Lewis: It's a new building.
Vick: What does replacement say to you?
Lewis: That we're going to replace that school.
Vick: What does replacement say to you when I say we're going to tear down Pleasant Run?
Lewis: It's just a different form of replacement
Vick: It's the use of words, okay? That's all it is. We need to make sure people understand we're not tearing down the middle school.
----
Kudos, for once, to Board President Vick for attempting to clarify to voters that the proposition is to treat current elementary schools in Lancaaster as "tear downs". The sites are great, and the buildings are fine for the students who occupy them now. But when the new kids from all the new construction of new homes start showing up, then those same buildings will not be new and big and modern enough. So, Dr Lewis proposes tearing them down.
And when this "different form of replacement" is challenged by the nominal leader of Dr Lewis's Board, he tells her "No."
Okay, just so we know who's driving this sled. Even for the lead dog, it seems the view never changes.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Not quite ordinary, yet.
Friday, TEA released preliminary data on 3rd and 5th grade reading scores. The Lancaster ISD reported their own gains for 5th graders at LISD at about 20% over last year. The crowd in attendance jumped to their feet and cheered (Except for those on crutches, of course. Even Larry Lewis's miraculous powers only extend so far.)
Now, last year for 5th grade the calculated “gains” in Lancaster were actually DOWN from 04 by about 10% So we might have expected / predicted a pretty good bounce this by the purely statistical pattern of "regression to the mean". And this 5th grade "bounce" is different from the 3rd grade numbers, which seem to be too high to be ordinary for two years in a row.
But a 30% bounce is the 2nd highest gain in my sample over some 111 data pairs.
Crandall, the small district, had a 58% gain one year (the sample max) and a 26% gain another year (the next biggest gain in the data set). Crandall also, predicitably, had big losses offsetting these gains in other years, and represented the minimum FALLS (21% and 19%) among the data. Wilmer-Hutchins ISD also had near max gains of 14% and 15% gains in their “good” (fraudulent) years and crashed back to minimum (falling) gains in their off years. (a 65% fall in the 2004-05 tests.)
Part of the current gain for Lancaster 5th grade results from starting at a low baseline. On percent passing, we fell one percent last year, from 52% passing to 51% passing, at the same time the rest of the state was gaining from 75% to 81% passing. So our relative score fell from 69% (of the state value) to 62% of that value, for a minus ten percent result. Negative gains are reported as a "fall".
Even now, the district is gloating about a passing rate of roughly 66% … which is up 30% over 2005's 51% passing rate. But 66% is still well below the state passing rate of 80% passing. Comparing to the state, 66/80 is, for 2006, about 82%, up from 2005's 62%. This is a 20% gain. It's a great gain but it is not exorbitant; it shows better passing rates, but rates that still are about 20% below "ordinary" for Texas 5th Graders.
TEA reports a significant number of students in all grades who fall short of standards during the first administration of TAKS tests nevertheless prove their ability to pass on the second or third attempt. It's possible the Lancaster 5th graders will continue to gain against state averages as later results are accumulated.
Friday, TEA released preliminary data on 3rd and 5th grade reading scores. The Lancaster ISD reported their own gains for 5th graders at LISD at about 20% over last year. The crowd in attendance jumped to their feet and cheered (Except for those on crutches, of course. Even Larry Lewis's miraculous powers only extend so far.)
Now, last year for 5th grade the calculated “gains” in Lancaster were actually DOWN from 04 by about 10% So we might have expected / predicted a pretty good bounce this by the purely statistical pattern of "regression to the mean". And this 5th grade "bounce" is different from the 3rd grade numbers, which seem to be too high to be ordinary for two years in a row.
But a 30% bounce is the 2nd highest gain in my sample over some 111 data pairs.
Crandall, the small district, had a 58% gain one year (the sample max) and a 26% gain another year (the next biggest gain in the data set). Crandall also, predicitably, had big losses offsetting these gains in other years, and represented the minimum FALLS (21% and 19%) among the data. Wilmer-Hutchins ISD also had near max gains of 14% and 15% gains in their “good” (fraudulent) years and crashed back to minimum (falling) gains in their off years. (a 65% fall in the 2004-05 tests.)
Part of the current gain for Lancaster 5th grade results from starting at a low baseline. On percent passing, we fell one percent last year, from 52% passing to 51% passing, at the same time the rest of the state was gaining from 75% to 81% passing. So our relative score fell from 69% (of the state value) to 62% of that value, for a minus ten percent result. Negative gains are reported as a "fall".
Even now, the district is gloating about a passing rate of roughly 66% … which is up 30% over 2005's 51% passing rate. But 66% is still well below the state passing rate of 80% passing. Comparing to the state, 66/80 is, for 2006, about 82%, up from 2005's 62%. This is a 20% gain. It's a great gain but it is not exorbitant; it shows better passing rates, but rates that still are about 20% below "ordinary" for Texas 5th Graders.
TEA reports a significant number of students in all grades who fall short of standards during the first administration of TAKS tests nevertheless prove their ability to pass on the second or third attempt. It's possible the Lancaster 5th graders will continue to gain against state averages as later results are accumulated.
Extraordinary!
March 5th, Superintendent Lewis presented preliminary results on 3rd and 5th grade reading scores on the Texas mandated TAKS tests.
The preliminary results reported that Monday on 3rd grade reading scores indicate an overall increase of roughly 10% over last years’ scores.
This is the second year in a row of extraordinary gains on 3rd grade reading scores for the Lancaster ISD.
In a sample of 11 districts around Dallas in the Texas Educational Region 10 over the past 12 years, the ordinary (both median and mean) change of scores on this TAKS (formerly TASS) indicator has fallen year to year by about 2%. For only those year-to-year comparisons where districts have shown a gain against all other Texas districts tested, the median gain is 2% and the mean is 4%. No other district sampled since 1996 has posted more than a 10% year-to-year gain in 3rd grade reading, and only one district in this sample, going back to 1994, showed a greater gain than Lancaster '06. That district was Crandall ISD in school year ending 1996.
Well, except for Wilmer-Hutchins.
In 2001, the Wilmer-Hutchins district posted 17% year-to-year-gains for 3rd grade reading. 2001 was a year when state scores for reading in that grade were down by 2%.
The Wilmer Hutchins results were later proven to be fraudulent. Too Good to Be True.
(WH 2001 stories, for the newcomers, can be found here: initial elation --- http://www.clipfile.org/2002/04/28/566/
followed by the sade aftermath WH 2004 http://www.clipfile.org/2004/08/22/701/
Good stuff from DMN's education reporter, Josh Benton.)
The district with dramatic gains that have never been challenged was Crandall. This comparatively small district, due East of Lancaster, ranged from 21.9% gains to 16.3% losses in the 12 years sampled. Small absolute changes in the numbers of 3rd graders passing the tests had outsized impact on their statistics. In 1997, following their extraordinary gains, the gain has scaled back to 3.3% and by 1998 Crandall actually saw comparative scores fall by 10.7% . See more about little Cradndall ISD at http://www.crandall-isd.net/
Anyhow, moving on from the historically fraudulent to the currently statistically extraordinary:
Lancaster ISD’s 2006 3rd grade reading passing percentage scores gained by an (extraordinary!) 12.7% over 2005. This, in a year where the state scores overall were down by 7.7%, indicating the 2006 TAKS test for 3rd graders was more difficult -- even unusually more difficult -- than in 2005.
Every district sampled between 1994 and 2006 saw 3rd Grade reading gains fall off sharply after any double-digit gain. 2001 gains of 17.9% in Wilmer-Hutchins were followed by losses of 36.4%. This fall is a common statistical pattern known, technically, as “regression to the mean.”. Random chance may produce dramatic changes in any measure; but when those changes are purely due to chance they are typically offset in subsequent measures. Lancaster will, if the results hold up, be the first district in the area to show back-to-back, double-digit, gains on the 3rd grade reading measure. The extraordinary statistics, in turn, indicate extraordinary changes in instructional, or testing, procedures.
Friday, the Texas Education Agency released overall 3rd and 5th AEIS reading 2007 scores for all districts. Statewide, reading scores among 3rd graders were unchanged. So it’s reasonable to infer the TAKS test this year is no harder or easier than last year. LISD's preliminary reports of gains on this test indicate an advance not only year to year, but in comparison to neighboring districts.
I calulate “Gains”, for the purposes of analysis, by comparing the local district’s passing percentage on an AEIS measure to the state’s passing percentage on that same measure. The difference of the ratio of current year’s comparison to the prior year, from the expected value of 1, is reported as a gain if greater than 1 or a fall if less than 1. Readers are invited to replicate this analysis by obtaining copies of the AEIS reports for area school districts at
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/.
Or e-mail me for copies of the sampled data in MS-Excel format.
March 5th, Superintendent Lewis presented preliminary results on 3rd and 5th grade reading scores on the Texas mandated TAKS tests.
The preliminary results reported that Monday on 3rd grade reading scores indicate an overall increase of roughly 10% over last years’ scores.
This is the second year in a row of extraordinary gains on 3rd grade reading scores for the Lancaster ISD.
In a sample of 11 districts around Dallas in the Texas Educational Region 10 over the past 12 years, the ordinary (both median and mean) change of scores on this TAKS (formerly TASS) indicator has fallen year to year by about 2%. For only those year-to-year comparisons where districts have shown a gain against all other Texas districts tested, the median gain is 2% and the mean is 4%. No other district sampled since 1996 has posted more than a 10% year-to-year gain in 3rd grade reading, and only one district in this sample, going back to 1994, showed a greater gain than Lancaster '06. That district was Crandall ISD in school year ending 1996.
Well, except for Wilmer-Hutchins.
In 2001, the Wilmer-Hutchins district posted 17% year-to-year-gains for 3rd grade reading. 2001 was a year when state scores for reading in that grade were down by 2%.
The Wilmer Hutchins results were later proven to be fraudulent. Too Good to Be True.
(WH 2001 stories, for the newcomers, can be found here: initial elation --- http://www.clipfile.org/2002/04/28/566/
followed by the sade aftermath WH 2004 http://www.clipfile.org/2004/08/22/701/
Good stuff from DMN's education reporter, Josh Benton.)
The district with dramatic gains that have never been challenged was Crandall. This comparatively small district, due East of Lancaster, ranged from 21.9% gains to 16.3% losses in the 12 years sampled. Small absolute changes in the numbers of 3rd graders passing the tests had outsized impact on their statistics. In 1997, following their extraordinary gains, the gain has scaled back to 3.3% and by 1998 Crandall actually saw comparative scores fall by 10.7% . See more about little Cradndall ISD at http://www.crandall-isd.net/
Anyhow, moving on from the historically fraudulent to the currently statistically extraordinary:
Lancaster ISD’s 2006 3rd grade reading passing percentage scores gained by an (extraordinary!) 12.7% over 2005. This, in a year where the state scores overall were down by 7.7%, indicating the 2006 TAKS test for 3rd graders was more difficult -- even unusually more difficult -- than in 2005.
Every district sampled between 1994 and 2006 saw 3rd Grade reading gains fall off sharply after any double-digit gain. 2001 gains of 17.9% in Wilmer-Hutchins were followed by losses of 36.4%. This fall is a common statistical pattern known, technically, as “regression to the mean.”. Random chance may produce dramatic changes in any measure; but when those changes are purely due to chance they are typically offset in subsequent measures. Lancaster will, if the results hold up, be the first district in the area to show back-to-back, double-digit, gains on the 3rd grade reading measure. The extraordinary statistics, in turn, indicate extraordinary changes in instructional, or testing, procedures.
Friday, the Texas Education Agency released overall 3rd and 5th AEIS reading 2007 scores for all districts. Statewide, reading scores among 3rd graders were unchanged. So it’s reasonable to infer the TAKS test this year is no harder or easier than last year. LISD's preliminary reports of gains on this test indicate an advance not only year to year, but in comparison to neighboring districts.
I calulate “Gains”, for the purposes of analysis, by comparing the local district’s passing percentage on an AEIS measure to the state’s passing percentage on that same measure. The difference of the ratio of current year’s comparison to the prior year, from the expected value of 1, is reported as a gain if greater than 1 or a fall if less than 1. Readers are invited to replicate this analysis by obtaining copies of the AEIS reports for area school districts at
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/.
Or e-mail me for copies of the sampled data in MS-Excel format.
Sunday, March 04, 2007
The Amazing Karnak!
Remember how Johnny Carson used to come to his desk wearing a giant turban, place an envelope to his head, and announce the answer to questions that had not yet been read out? Let's play. I'll predict the answer. I'll even predict the question. And come late Monday night and the end of the LISD Board of Trustees hearing on the "proposed" May bond election, we'll see how good my magic turban is.
Answer: Fifty Cents.
Question: How high with the district propose to raise I&S tax rates?
(The secret -- Larry Lewis ALWAYS proposes to raise I&S to the ultimate limits. After than, he decides how much funding the maximum generates. And finally, he attempts to justify the borrowing with projects that seem to match the available funds.)
Answer: A tax cut.
Question: Will the increase in taxes be presented to the public as an increase or as a reduction -- a tax cut?
(The secret -- the Texas Legislature has forced districts to cut M&O tax rates. Maintenance and Operating funds are now increasingly coming to localities from the state -- with strings attached. But since the M&O will be down MORE than the I&S rates the local district controls will be UP, the TOTAL tax projected for next year, even with a big bond, will be presented as a tax cut. BONUS, the "spin" from the district will be such that a "yes" vote on the bonds will be NEEDED to get the tax cut.)
Answer: A school bus, "technology", and maintenance at the old stadium.
Question: What assets will the district propose to finance with new bonds that have a useful life much less than the length of the bonds.
(No secret -- just more shenanigans from our District.)
Answer: Another bus, even more technology, and a police car.
Question: What projected purchases will STILL be in the bond proposals for 2007 that have been purchased -- TWICE -- in 2006 with 2004 bond funds and windfall tax recoveries from sale of foreclosed real estate?
Answer: More than 20.
Question: How many years will the district propose to draw out payments for assets that fully depreciate in less than one decade?
Remember how Johnny Carson used to come to his desk wearing a giant turban, place an envelope to his head, and announce the answer to questions that had not yet been read out? Let's play. I'll predict the answer. I'll even predict the question. And come late Monday night and the end of the LISD Board of Trustees hearing on the "proposed" May bond election, we'll see how good my magic turban is.
Answer: Fifty Cents.
Question: How high with the district propose to raise I&S tax rates?
(The secret -- Larry Lewis ALWAYS proposes to raise I&S to the ultimate limits. After than, he decides how much funding the maximum generates. And finally, he attempts to justify the borrowing with projects that seem to match the available funds.)
Answer: A tax cut.
Question: Will the increase in taxes be presented to the public as an increase or as a reduction -- a tax cut?
(The secret -- the Texas Legislature has forced districts to cut M&O tax rates. Maintenance and Operating funds are now increasingly coming to localities from the state -- with strings attached. But since the M&O will be down MORE than the I&S rates the local district controls will be UP, the TOTAL tax projected for next year, even with a big bond, will be presented as a tax cut. BONUS, the "spin" from the district will be such that a "yes" vote on the bonds will be NEEDED to get the tax cut.)
Answer: A school bus, "technology", and maintenance at the old stadium.
Question: What assets will the district propose to finance with new bonds that have a useful life much less than the length of the bonds.
(No secret -- just more shenanigans from our District.)
Answer: Another bus, even more technology, and a police car.
Question: What projected purchases will STILL be in the bond proposals for 2007 that have been purchased -- TWICE -- in 2006 with 2004 bond funds and windfall tax recoveries from sale of foreclosed real estate?
Answer: More than 20.
Question: How many years will the district propose to draw out payments for assets that fully depreciate in less than one decade?