|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Board of Education at the San Ramon Valley Unified School District is set to review the district’s latest data on student assessments and progress as part of a presentation on the district’s strategic directions on deep learning and innovation.
Part of the review of the effectiveness of student success strategies over the past year will include considering the district’s scores in the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress over the past year, with data having been released by the state education department last month.
The district’s overall CAASPP scores in the English and Language Arts category dropped slightly over the past year, with 78% of students tested under the state assessment process meeting the standards it measures compared with 80% last year.
“This performance significantly outpaces both the State (47%) and County (50%) averages,” wrote Deb Petish, executive director of curriculum and instruction in a staff report prepared for the upcoming meeting. “However, a slight decrease is noted when compared to the previous academic year of 2021-2022, where the proficiency rate was at 80%.”
“This minor downturn can be attributed partly to a 5 percentage point decline (from 81% to 76%) in 8th grade scores,” Petish continued. “Additionally, a more pronounced drop was recorded at one of our high schools, further contributing to this year’s overall lower proficiency rate.”
Petish noted that data from the district’s Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills – which evaluates kindergarten through second grade students – is also considered in the review of student success measurements over the past year. CAASPP assessments are conducted in third through eighth grade students and eleventh grade students.
“These combined data sources enable us to measure and enhance ELA proficiency and advancement across all grade levels, offering a holistic understanding of students’ educational trajectories,” Petish wrote.
For math, the district’s overall CAASPP results held steady over the past year, remaining at 72% in this year’s data. However, she noted that some schools had struggled more than others in the assessment over the past year, with scores in elementary math coming in higher than those across all grade levels.
“This rate is much higher than both the State (35%) and County (40%) averages,” Petish wrote. “While there was a slight uptick in scores at the elementary and middle school levels, the high school level saw a decline, driven by the scores at one of our high schools.”
In addition to CAASPP data, the district’s measurement of math learning success includes a review of Fastrbridge results, which measures math proficiency in elementary school students.
The upcoming presentation and ensuing discussion at the next board meeting will also include a look towards the future and consideration of what actions to implement to improve overall student success rates
The SRVUSD board is set to meet at 6 p.m. on Tuesday (Nov. 14) for their regular meeting. The agenda is available here.
In other business
* The board will hear an annual update from the district’s human resources department.
* The board will hold a public hearing on an initial proposal for labor negotiations between the district and teachers in the San Ramon Valley Education Association, as well as consider approving a joint initial proposal for reopener negotiations of the 2022-25 collective bargaining agreement
* In a closed session ahead of the public meeting, the board will discuss appointing a new elementary school principal.
California’s Academic Performance Index (API) testing, quietly ended in 2014, rated schools from 1 to 10. And when compared merely to all other same-grade schools in California, SRVUSD schools were nearly all 10s.
But SRVUSD was already among school districts exposed in a 2007 book entitled “Not As Good As You Think.” The District routinely concealed a second API rating — one which compared each school to 100 demographically similar California schools. In those similar-school ratings, SRVUSD averaged only 5.6 or 5.7 out of 10.
Now, the District blurs its poor CAASPP test results — first by omitting 2015-2019’s pre-COVID numbers in the present comparison, instead comparing 2023 results only to already poor 2022 numbers; secondly, by comparing itself to the rest of Contra Costa County and to California as a whole, rather than say, to high-performing districts like La Cañada, San Marino, or even Dublin Unified.
Third, SRVUSD spin doctors deceive further by attributing 2023’s drop largely to a decline at one high school. And yes indeed, San Ramon Valley High’s especially miserable test performance adds to its record of scandals over the years.
But see the data (including the part which SRVUSD hides now) at https://www.srvexpositor.com/grading-for-equity . There, note that at least 5 of 8 middle schools and all 4 of the high schools have declined scandalously in math and/or science — along with English (ELA) declines at 2 middle schools and 2 high schools.
Cal High also contributed substantially to overall low numbers. Meanwhile, Dougherty Valley — and the District’s high-achieving Asian students in general — even with their own test-result drops — still helped prevent aggregated results from dropping even lower.
Meanwhile, SRVUSD continues pushing overtly racist so-called equity programs, LGBTQ and “gender identity” indoctrination at all grade levels, and depraved pornography in libraries and classrooms. SRVUSD’s “Deep Learning” puffery is in fact a Deep Fake.
so, everybody should enroll their students in another district? Private school? Interesting.
Good question, and interesting indeed! In 2018, SRVUSD projected an enrollment approaching 37,000 students by now. But it’s presently about 29,200. Some of the loss was certainly due to COVID-motivated changes, some due to move-out general disgust with California.
But I personally know parents who’ve said “Enough, already” in reference to SRVUSD’s systemic perversions of its delegated teaching/learning task, with “Equity” posited as the District’s watchword instead. The parents are homeschooling or they’ve taken their kids to other schools.
SRVUSD defines “Equity” as a condition in which “All students are empowered to reach their full potential and all students are valued and supported.” So far, so good.
At Nov. 14’s Board meeting, an “Equity” presentation listed four tributary goals: (a) safety and a sense of belonging; (b) cultural responsiveness; (c) instruction that supports diverse students; and (d) staff diversity.
Academic achievement was conspicuous by its absence, both in philosophy and in fact.
Ed Source has posted a useful, interactive graph of SRVUSD’s CAASPP English and Math RACIAL GAPS since 2015 ( https://caaspp.edsource.org/sbac/san-ramon-valley-unified-07618040000000 ). Hovering over dots there shows year-by-year percentages of students District-wide who’ve met or exceeded basic standards, showing data for each of four racial cohorts, with ALL of them dropping over time, especially in math.
Again: the “Deep Learning” shtick is a Deep Fake. Instead of overtly racist “equity” lessons, replacing geography with “ethnic studies” brainwashing, LGBTQ indoctrination in all grades, double standards and differential penalties for bad behavior, depraved pornography in high school libraries and English classrooms — and ultimately, instead of converting education into unlicensed, amateur psychotherapy — it’s time to return to the teaching and learning of traditional knowledge and skills, along with today’s technology when it’s actually helpful.
so 50-60k parents and not much volume posting they are unhappy and one of the highest rated High Schools in the country. Huh. Interesting.
“50-60k” is roughly DOUBLE the number of SRVUSD school parents. Supt. Malloy’s defamatory “Cal High Racist Incident 5.23.22” letter of last year, in which Malloy slandered Cal High’s Stunt Team girls ( https://www.srvexpositor.com/stunt-team-defamation ), was reportedly transmitted to all 14,000 District-student households — presumably, with one or two parents each.
And speaking of Mr. Malloy: Nov. 14’s Board meeting included an “Equity” presentation. One of the items mentioned was SRVUSD’s “Responding to Discrimination and Hate Handbook.” It advises, “Don’t let misinformation take root in the school or community,” and “Do not jump to conclusions. If you are hasty, you may spread misinformation yourself.”
That describes Malloy’s own misconduct in the Stunt Team incident. It became a matter of “Equity” for one, Justice for none. But SRVUSD’s irresponsible Board extended Malloy’s contract and gave him a raise.
“One of the highest rated High Schools in the country” presumably refers to Dougherty Valley High, listed in September’s “2023-24 U.S. News and World Report Best High School Rankings” as 18th in California, 153rd nationwide.
Factoring into DVHS’s ranking were its reported proficiency percentages in English (“Reading,” 96%), math (88%), and science (74%). But those were DVHS’s 2019 CAASPP numbers, now respectively 87%, 77%, and 70%.
SRVUSD has suppressed its 2019 CAASPP scores, hiding precipitous 2022 and 2023 declines. Expanded comparisons for all SRVUSD schools are tabulated, however, at https://www.srvexpositor.com/grading-for-equity .
The dot-line graph there, along with student surnames in the District’s National Merit Scholarship test results ( https://www.cccoe.k12.ca.us/news/news_press_releases/2023-24_national_merit_semifinalists ), show (a) that SRVUSD’s high-achievers of Asian parentage, though falling off themselves, are preventing even worse declines overall and (b) that SRVUSD’s “Equity” schemes are at best counterproductive, at worst….
As to limited public postings of parental dissatisfaction, those are likely related to unawareness, fear, and cost of alternatives on the part of parents, as well as concealment and militant radicalism on the part of SRVUSD personnel.
>those are likely related to unawareness, fear, and cost of alternatives on the part of >parents
You know this how? Do you have students in the district currently? Ever? So, you are saying the parents aren’t aware of anything going on currently? Did you really mean to imply that?
Again, I ask with all your opinions and posts why aren’t many thousands of concerned parents rioting in the streets and/or moving away?
I THOUGHT that last part might draw further response!
Cost of alternatives? For many parents, often both of them working hard to afford living here, private-school tuitions represent large additional burdens.
And SRVUSD’s concealment and militant radicalism do indeed interlock with parental unawareness and fear.
Parents were deliberately left unaware, for example, of the extent to which “LGBTQ” indoctrination invaded their kids’ school days. An internal, early 2021 campaign led by one teacher in particular ended the OPT-IN parental permission slips originally required for 4th and 5th grade PRISM (LGBTQ) Club participation.
Supt. Malloy and other administrators had required the permission slips initially, but then quietly allowed their termination four months later.
After national exposure on Fox News of the cover-up in December 2021, the permission slips were re-initiated (again, quietly), but only in deficient OPT-OUT form, the wrong default when young kids are involved. See https://www.srvexpositor.com/lgbtq-activism – especially the videos there (and https://www.srvexpositor.com/lgbtq-activism-ii ) , for further background and initial timeline.
At that second link, take note of Korby Saunders’ email, telling other teachers that they must not inform parents of a child’s (even a TK 4 or 5-year-old’s) claims of new sexual orientation or gender identity, unless the CHILD gives permission (following school-based indoctrination, of course).
SRVUSD’s Central Office has confirmed to me that “Gender Support Plans” implemented in such instances are likewise kept confidential, unless the child permits disclosure.
Three months late, SRVUSD has just posted the new “ANNUAL PARENTS’ RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES NOTICE,” required statutorily at the school year’s beginning. It still lacks inclusion of the District’s Administrative Regulation 5145.3, which reiterates Korby Saunders’ stipulation, and adds a requirement of WRITTEN consent.
Much more yet to say….
This comment page wasn’t picking up the full URL for the second link above. It’s https://www.srvexpositor.com/lgbtq-activism-ii . That seems now to work OK!
Dodging CAASPP comparisons (above) is a concealment. Mr. Malloy’s Stunt Team caper was another. So was/is the Nicholas Moseby case ( https://danvillesanramon.com/news/2022/09/16/san-ramon-valley-teacher-cheer-coach-charged-with-sexual-misconduct-against-minor ) and ( https://www.danvillesanramon.com/news/2023/10/08/ex-srvusd-admin-embroiled-in-arrested-teacher-scandal-permanently-ousted-as-principal-in-lafayette ) and others like Moseby’s ( e.g., https://thewildcattribune.com/16772/opinion/srvusds-sexual-abuse-records-infected-with-lies-and-misconduct , a student’s own comment).… Moseby himself goes to trial in March.
Our kids are long gone, in happy marriages and highly successful careers, with accomplished kids of their own. Their K-8 years alternated between SRVUSD and private schooling, depending on which lead teachers they would experience. Their high schools were private ones.
These days, I gain SRVUSD information from current school-parent networks and via records requests, including communications which parents and other taxpayers were evidently never meant to see.
Parents here aren’t known for rioting in the streets, as are certain groups which get by with more than a little help from their media pals. But as for thousands leaving SRVUSD? Well, yes — as in 7,400 fewer students enrolled now than were projected five years ago.