Top 10 of Hawaii's Public Schools & Bottom 10
Lawrence Akutagawa
From Ronna Bolante's article "Grading the Public Schools" in
*Honolulu* May
2008, Vol. XLII, No. 11, page 55 -
/snip/
For a more apples-to-apples comparison, consider Hawai'i students'
scores on
the National Assessment of Education Progress, better known as "The
Nation's
Report Card." This test, administered every other year in all 50
stateas,
has not been overhauled. The national test shows that Hawai'i's overall
scores have improved, but not nearly as dramatically as they have on the
state test. What's more, Hawai'i students' scores continue to trail
national averages, with just 21 percent of our eighth graders considered
proficient in math and 20 percent proficient in reading.
Other things haven't changed at all since we published our first
"Grading
the Public Schools" chart. Scores still get worse as students move
through
the public school system - elementary schools have the highest marks
while
high schools score the lowerst. Schools in Hawai'i's poorest districts
continue to struggle with the most dismal performance overall.
/snip/
from page 56, the top 10 schools with district -
1. Momilani Elementary - Oahu Leeward
2. Mililani Mauka Elementary - Oahu Central
3. Noelani Elementary - Oahu Honolulu
4. 'Aina Haina Elementary - Oahu Honolulu
5. Waikiki Elementary - Oahu Honolulu
6. Ma'ema'e Elementary - Oahu Honolulu
7. Sunset Elementary - Oahu Windward
8. Mililani 'ike Elementary - Oahu Central
9. Palisades Elementary - Oahu Leeward
10. Kula Elementary - Maui
/snip/
from page 70, the bottom 10 schools with distict -
/snip/
249. Moloka'i High - Maui
250. Kaimuki High - Oahu Honolulu
251. Keolu Elementary - Oahu Windward
252. Wai'anae Elementary - Oahu Leeward
253. Wai'anae Intermediate - Oahu Leeward
254. Wai'anae High - Oahu Leeward
255. Kea'au Middle - Hawaii
256. Central Middle - Oahu Honolulu
257. Nanakuli High & Intermediate - Oahu Leeward
258. Na'alehu Elementary & Intermediate - Hawaii
from page 71, Hawai'i's top performing elementary, middle, high and
multilevel schools
Momilani Elementary (No. 1)
Kaimuki Mille School (No. 26)
Moanalua High School (No. 47)
Pa'auilo Elementary & Intermediate (No. 97)
/snip/
Lawrence Akutagawa
wups...didn't think this article is available on the net, but it is! I
should have checked before doing all that typing...my mistake. Here - for
those who want more information - it is:
http://www.honolulumagazine.com/Honolulu-Magazine/May-2008/Grading-the-Public-Schools508/index.php
(short link - http://tinyurl.com/6flss8 )
"Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuN...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:...
Maren at google
On Jul 21, 8:00 am, "Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuNOS...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> wups...didn't think this article is available on the net, but it is! I
> should have checked before doing all that typing...my mistake. Here - for
> those who want more information - it is:
>
who ranked that?
How come that schools that are restructuring due to underperforming in
test
results/improvement are rated higher than schools that are in the
upper
ranks in the National Standards tests and always have been?
It makes absolutely no sense to me that Kaumana El. (which is in
restructuring,
or maybe they got done by now) should be rated higher than E.B.
deSilva
which has always been among the highest ranked elementary schools on
the Big Island, if not in the state. And Waiakea El. is ranked higher
than
Waiakeawaena? That's getting close to "when pigs fly".
(No, I only skimmed that, I didn't read all of it, but there's
something
very wrong here ...)
???
Maren
Lawrence Akutagawa
"Maren at google" <m.pu...@jach.hawaii.edu> wrote in message
news:1216704...@news.lava.net...
Maren -
You gotta read the methodology as explained on the webpage.
Here's Kaumana Elementary -
Teachers: 92.3
Parents: 100.0
Students: 66.7
Math: 46
Reading: 59
Score: 72.80
Here's E.B. deSilva -
Teachers: 73.7
Parents: 93.6
Students: 59.3
Math: 57
Reading: 68
Score: 70.32
So while E.B. deSilva did better in the more objective reading/math scores,
it didn't fare as well in the less objective Teachers/Parents/Students
scores. And these separate scores are not weighted to that final average
score.
Let's see Waiakea Elementary and Waiakeawaena Elementary -
Here's Waiakea Elementary -
Teachers: 90.3
Parents: 83.5
Students: 63.0
Math: 43
Reading: 62
Score: 68.36
Here's Waikeawaena Elementary -
Teachers: 73.3
Parents: 84.3
Students: 55.6
Math: 49
Reading: 59
Score: 64.24
Let's see - the Teachers/Parents/Students scores have Waiakea Elementary
ahead by 23.6 points, while the math/reading scores have Waiakea Elementary
behind by 3 points. So the net difference in points before averaging is
20.6 for Waiakea Elementary. Divide that 20.6 by 5 (the number of
categories) and you get 4.12 - the difference between the two scores. That
17 point difference in the Teachers score accounts for a whopping 3.67 of
that 4.12 difference.
Maren at google
On Jul 21, 11:45 pm, "Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuNOS...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> "Maren at google" <m.pur...@jach.hawaii.edu> wrote in messagenews:1216704...@news.lava.net
>>> http://www.honolulumagazine.com/Honolulu-Magazine/May-2008/Grading-th
>>> ...
>
>> who ranked that?
[...]
> Let's see - the Teachers/Parents/Students scores have Waiakea
> Elementary
> ahead by 23.6 points, while the math/reading scores have Waiakea
> Elementary
> behind by 3 points. So the net difference in points before
> averaging is
> 20.6 for Waiakea Elementary. Divide that 20.6 by 5 (the number of
> categories) and you get 4.12 - the difference between the two
> scores. That
> 17 point difference in the Teachers score accounts for a whopping
> 3.67 of
> that 4.12 difference.
Lies, d**n lies and statistics?
They weighed the scores evenly?
And I wouldn't be too surprised if there was some peer pressure on the
teachers,
maybe in view of the possibility of school closures, restructuring
threats, etc.
Methinks the expectations may be just a tad different between those
different
schools. I know people who moved to get from Hilo Union district into
E.B.
DeSilva district (no, it wasn't us <g>, we were/are living there
anyway). And I
know quite a few people who drove their kids to school for years for
that
geographic exemption (Haaheo was one of those schools too at the time,
I haven't followed things too closely, Haaheo sortof dropped off my
horizon)
Maren
al Guacamole
> Here's Kaumana Elementary -
>
> Teachers: 92.3
> Parents: 100.0
> Students: 66.7
> Math: 46
> Reading: 59
> Score: 72.80
>
> Here's E.B. deSilva -
>
> Teachers: 73.7
> Parents: 93.6
> Students: 59.3
> Math: 57
> Reading: 68
> Score: 70.32
The ratings by parents, teachers and students don't seem to me to be
germane to the ranking. Like Maren says it doesn't tell your much. It
doesn't matter what the ranking methodology is if it's nonsense
anyway. "Garbage in: garbage out." The ratings are not very objective
and the results can vary greatly. For example, how would a charter
school which serves as a kind of magnet-- ie specializing on a theme
of content to learn like the arts or science-- compare against a more
general school.
A better rating might be one like "Newsweek" magazine uses to rate
high schools. It's based on the number AP credits vs IIRC the number
of graduates. You may argue that it is elitist because it only covers
college prep kids and NOT the the future blue collar kids, and it
doesn't cover elementary and middle school grades. However, the
measures are objective and the IIRC the number of kids subsidized for
school lunch is also tabulated with the results-- so a high percentage
like 80% would indicate a very poor neighborhood. This is supplemental
information and not used in the rankings, probably in my opinion,
because it is not objective. Every state has different programs of
lunch assistance programs. A similar kind of ranking could be used for
other education programs. It seems to work very well for the
"Newsweek" system, they have a diversity of programs in the top
rankings. IIRC this year for example, a large number of small charter
schools have done very well in competition with the larger more well
funded schools.
IIRC Hawaii recognizes the significance of this. Have talked to some
politicians and in the coming year, they plan to support new charter
schools of the sort of science magnet schools. Why should Punahou and
Iolani and more recently Kamehameha, provide so many HS graduates that
go on in the math and sciences? The pool of students in the public
schools is so much larger. The answer is that they feel that there
needs to be public support built up for the charter schools that is
more broad based. Years ago the "English Standard" school-- Roosevelt
HS-- in Oahu was killed because of the charge of elitism. Hawaiian
kids in nearby Papakolea could not get in because they could not pass
the entrance requirements on the English language. Many immigrants
were also excluded because their English was poor. IIRC Roosevelt
rivaled or exceeded Punahou HS in academic excellence at that time.
Some Hawaii Charter schools have been accused of financial
incompetence, and poor teaching, but in general, they have been well
run and have had good results. They seem to have a lot of community
support.
I guess the difference with the Roosevelt program is that students are
not selected to attend the charter school. There is no entrance
requirement. So the program cannot be accused of elitism. Any kid from
Papakolea could attend a Roosevelt program today if one were started
there for example. Charter schools do have standards that they can
uphold in terms of behavior and performance, and they do NOT have to
be burdened with retaining those students who cannot meet those
standards. This is common in many public education programs. For
example, anyone can try out for the football team but only a small
number are accepted to stay in the team based on standards that are
non-discriminatory and fair. No one has accused football teams of
elitism. The schools have their choice in more broad based physical
education and health programs but that doesn't seem to be as popular
as football and other competitive sports among students. In my
opinion, charter schools will grow a lot in the coming years when it
will become obvious to the general public that that is the way to
improve our schools.
Lawrence Akutagawa
"Maren at google" <m.pu...@jach.hawaii.edu> wrote in message
news:1216825...@news.lava.net...
yup...their methodology, as explained, is equal weighting of the scores.
And no indication as to exactly how many (by percentage or by count)
participated in the "less objective" categories of
Teachers/Parents/Students. Could have been several hundred participants
per school, could have been fewer than 10.
While I can understand the desire to include these "softer" measures, I
would think that a more fair weighting would be one proportionate to the
number of participants in each category. But they didn't think to ask me
first. :-)
Lawrence Akutagawa
"al Guacamole" <a...@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1216835...@news.lava.net...
OK, Alvin, I'll bite once again. So what are the 10 best and the 10 worst
public schools in Hawaii today? Make sure you cite your source!
al Guacamole
On Jul 23, 3:35 pm, "Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuNOS...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> OK, Alvin, I'll bite once again. So what are the 10 best and the 10
> worst
> public schools in Hawaii today? Make sure you cite your source!
Haven't you answered your own question? I and Maren have said the
criteria in the article are bad. We aren't about to do another study
for you.
Lawrence Akutagawa
"al Guacamole" <a...@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1216950...@news.lava.net...
Alvin, Alvin, Alvin....you really don't get it, do you?
You bad mouth the Bolante article ("Garbage in: garbage out." -
remember?),
talk about the Newsweek survey that covers only high schools, run at the
mouth about Roosevelt High and the "English Standard schools" of years
past,
and provide absolutely nothing as per ranking *all* the public schools
in
Hawaii except to state -
"Haven't you answered your own question? I and Maren have said the
criteria in the article are bad. We aren't about to do another study
for you."
I'm not defending the Bolante survey/study...but I can't find anything
better. I've indicated here on sch my observations on it. Perhaps
someone
here with appropriate contacts with the Department of Education can do
better?
The point, Alvin, is really very simple - you no like dah Bolante
survey/study, go provide one bettah. You no can provide one bettah, mo
bettah you no talk.
Hey - what about those hydroelectric plants being rejected by the Hawaii
constitution and those mythical hydroelectric plant "experiments" of
yours?
You're awfully quiet about all those hydroelectric plants in Hawaii
operating since the 1920's or so. Could it be that yet once again we've
come across something in that strange world of yours that does not
exist in
the reality the rest of us share? If so, I'll just add the following
to the
list of things of that world of yours that exist nowhere else - like the
ethanol process not involving cardon dioxide.
a. In your own little world, the Hawaii constitution rejects
hydroelectric
power - clearly you cannot cite the relevant Article and Section from
the
Hawaii constitution we others share.
b. In your own little world, you are aware of ongoing hydropower
"experiments" in Hawaii - but you cannot provide any kind of
substantiation
as per the reality we others share, much less simply list such
"experiments"
of which you - and it seems, only you - are aware.
[By the way, Alvin, I did correctly quote you there, didn't I? Really
can't
have you once more go around falsely accusing me of misquoting you, you
know.]
Lawrence Akutagawa
"Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuN...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1216998...@news.lava.net...
Following up my own post here, inasmuch as Alvin has been very, very quiet
the past two days both on the Hawaii school ranking and on the hydro
issues.
Dug around a
bit and came up - thanks to Yvonne Jaramillo Ahearn (
http://localism.com/neighbor/yvonneahearn ) - with
http://www.schooldigger.com/go/HI/schoolrank.aspx
As Yyvonne (who presents the Bolante survey/study earlier in her article) -
points out,
"Another resource, Schooldigger.com, also has ranking the Hawaii public
shcools /sic/. In this case, they don't use student, teacher and parents
satisfaction scores to affect the rankings. They do use the same
standardized test scores, however."
Be advised that the Schooldigger ranking does not rank all the Hawaii
public
schools together as the Bolante survey/study does, but instead separates
them into three groups within which the relevant schools are ranked -
elementary, middle, and high schools. Click on the appropriate "Quick
links:" on the top right of the page to access the desired group.
Alternatively, click the check mark to the right of "See rankings for:" to
select the desired group, then click on "Dig!"
To address Maren's concerns, in this Schooldigger ranking - as you can
confirm for yourself:
Kaumana Elementary is ranked 102 of 178
De Silva Elementary is ranked 49 of 178
Waiakea Elementary is ranked 99 of 178
Waiakeawaena Elementary is ranked of 98 of 178
I'm afraid that this Schooldigger ranking, being basically a subset of the
Bolante survey/study, does not at all address Alvin's ramblings about the
Newsweek ranking of high schools by AP courses, Roosevelt High School and
the English standard schools of yesteryear, elitism, private schools
(Punahou, Iolani, Kamehameha), football, etc.
I am a bit surprised at the student teacher ratio: throwing out the
outliers
in each category, the study has the following. The rough median is derived
by figuring more or less that school which has about half the schools above
it and about half below it, excluding the outliers.
Elementary school (outlier The Volcano School of Arts & Sciences, 137)
Highest two:
Holomua Elementary (#69) 20.7
Momilani Elementary (#2) 20.3
Lowest two:
Waiahole Elementary (#170) 9.7
Liliuokalani Elementary (#75) 9.6
Rough median:
Haaheo Elementary (#31) 16.1
Middle school
Highest two:
Kaimuki Middle (#2) 18.6
Kapolei Middle (#18) 18.1
Lowest two:
Kohala Middle (#33) 11.9
Jarrett Middle (#12) 10.5
Rough median:
Waipahu Intermediate (#26) 15.9
High school (outlier Kihei Public Charter High, 158)
(outlier Olomana High & Middle, 5.5)
Highest two:
Molokai High (#38) 23.0
Kealakehe High (#30) 20.9
Lowest two:
Pahoa High & Intermediate (#32) 12.6
Kohala High (#29) 11.6
Rough median:
Aiea High (#18) 16.5
Wow! Given these numbers, it is easy to see how the average public school
student teacher ratio in the islands is around 17. Lookit - aside from the
two outliers, nothing higher than 23! When I attended Hilo Intermediate,
Hilo High, and Kaimuki High "way back when" the ratio ran minimally around
the low to mid 30's. And I can vaguely recall one class with something
like
42 students - teacher complained and some kind of adjustment was made.
Need
to dive into the yearbooks and see!
[Did a quick, random count of home room pix - high school in the lower 30s;
intermediate school in the higher 30s]
And given the ever so sharp, taut, precise, and logical engineer mind of
Alvin yet once more displaying for us all here its usual ambiguous,
equivocal, and vague self, allow me to set the record straight so there is
no misunderstanding whatsoever - Alvin misspeaks ("lies" is perhaps a bit
too strong, though just as accurate) when he says "We aren't about to do
another study for you." Alvin did no such thing as to provide for us here
in sch any kind of 2008 ranking study of all Hawaii public schools in any
way, shape, or form - least of all for me. So if and when Alvin does
provide such a study here for us all/me, it will be his first and only -
rather than "another" - one.
[And Alvin - that is a correct quote of what you said, yes? Don't want you
going around falsely accusing me once more of misquoting you.]
Maren at google
On Jul 27, 11:40 am, "Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuNOS...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> "Lawrence Akutagawa" <lakuNOS...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>
[...]
> Wow! Given these numbers, it is easy to see how the average public
> school
> student teacher ratio in the islands is around 17. Lookit - aside
> from the
> two outliers, nothing higher than 23! When I attended Hilo
> Intermediate,
> Hilo High, and Kaimuki High "way back when" the ratio ran minimally
> around
> the low to mid 30's. And I can vaguely recall one class with
> something
> like
> 42 students - teacher complained and some kind of adjustment was made.
> Need
> to dive into the yearbooks and see!
>
> [Did a quick, random count of home room pix - high school in the
> lower 30s;
> intermediate school in the higher 30s]
Lawrence,
there's no contradiction between the one and the other. Your home room
can easily
have 42 students and the teacher/student ratio be way lower if there
are enough
teachers without home rooms. Count the special ed teachers, music,
art, PE, shop,
home ec., etc., and you get completely different numbers from what you
counted
in your home room.
Aloha,
Maren
Lawrence Akutagawa
"Maren at google" <m.pu...@jach.hawaii.edu> wrote in message
news:1217641...@news.lava.net...
argh...hit the send key too soon again.. Apologies for that.
hmmm...I see. Good point.
al Guacamole
But it is a goal. Especially for K6, a lot of supervision is needed.
Where individual differences are not so great, a lot lower teacher to
student ratio can be tolerated. I noticed here that there are lower
ratios in high schools because of more specialists but in the lower
grades there are lower ratios simply because of smaller class sizes.
Thomas Beck
"al Guacamole" <a...@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1216835...@news.lava.net...
> In my
> opinion, charter schools will grow a lot in the coming >years when it
> will become obvious to the general public that that is the
> way to improve the schools.
The problem, at least in my home state of Minnesota is
that unchecked, the "magnet schools" proliferate to such
an extent that they draw off all the best students, leaving
the less talented ones to be dealt with by the regular schools. It got so
extreme a few years ago that the
number of charter schools had to be limited. I assume
it works the same way for teachers, the better ones aim for the "magnet
schools" leaving the less talented/
motivated ones to put in their time until retirement at the
less demanding classrooms.
Tom
--
"Ain't it just like the night"
Jerry Okamura
"Thomas Beck" <trb...@pclink.com> wrote in message
news:1220374...@news.lava.net...
The question is "why" do they leave?
al Guacamole
On Sep 2, 6:50 am, "Thomas Beck" <trb...@pclink.com> wrote:
> The problem, at least in my home state of Minnesota is
> that unchecked, the "magnet schools" proliferate to such
> an extent that they draw off all the best students, leaving
> the less talented ones to be dealt with by the regular schools. It got so
> extreme a few years ago that the
> number of charter schools had to be limited. I assume
> it works the same way for teachers, the better ones aim for the "magnet
> schools" leaving the less talented/
> motivated ones to put in their time until retirement at the
> less demanding classrooms.
>
> Tom
Hawaii's charter schools may operate a little differently from magnet
schools in the mainland. By the term "best", they may also be doing
remedial instruction for students who apply from schools with weaker
preparation. IIRC there is not supposed to be any "entrance"
requirement for these schools other than they may not be able to
accommodate special education students. And students who continue to
violate school rules of acceptable behavior, will be expelled. I would
expect that students who have difficulty with tough science and math
classes, would still be able to take other classes that would qualify
them for skilled jobs or technician jobs. These students will the
"best" in that they would present minimal behavioral problems and
would be very motivated in their school classes-- basically students
who will open a text book and who do want to learn something.
It used to be that Roosevelt High School was one of those "english
standard" schools about 50 years ago where an applicant had to pass
and entrance exam to test their ability in using the English language.
Hawaii had a large number of poor english speaking immigrant children.
It was a kind of racism. The quality of students it accepted were so
high that their students performance rivaled nearby Punahou's
students. This practice ended when Hawaiian students from the nearby
Papakolea neighborhood could not gain admission. The charge of elitism
arose from the general public. Charter schools will not be repeating
this mistake. The court has already declared it to be illegal about 40
years ago.
I don't think that the "normal" schools will suffer too much. Student
teacher ratios will go down if the "charter" schools draw off a lot of
students. But the normal schools have extra funds such as athletics
which the charter schools do not have-- nor are charter schools
expected to maintain an athletic program. Their students can
participate at a nearby normal school. Normal schools'll probably also
continue to have supporting programs for athletics such as band, and
programs which few charter schools might want to undertake such as
food service, auto mechanics and agriculture, etc. IIRC for example,
athletics are great programs which teach tolerance for others in the
diversity of participating students and which also teach scholarship
in the grades which they must maintain to continue to participate on
athletic teams. These costs are impossible to cut in a public school.
They'll cut elsewhere first. Recently, for example, schools had to cut
their budget, but retreated from cutting JV athletic programs when the
public was outraged.