ON school boards vs Fraser Institute on school rankings
Posted by Sandy on May 6th, 2008
It came to my attention recently that the Ontario Public School Board Association (OPSBA) was taking on the Fraser Institute’s (FI) school rankings survey results. Now, keep in mind, OPSBA represents ALL public boards in Ontario — which means that, according to their February 19th, 2008 news release, ALL the public boards in Ontario see the school rankings “as a flawed picture.” Which means that the teachers’ unions and the rank and file also likely see the school rankings in that way.
Why, one could ask, is the FI annual school rankings report flawed? Well, according to the OPSBA news release it is because the FI doesn’t take all the factors affecting student achievement and school life into consideration. Rather, they “create a superficial picture of the place of schools in the lives of children and families.”
What exactly does that statement mean? How does annual literacy and numeracy testing create a superficial picture of student achievement — and thus a superficial picture of our schools in the lives of children and their families? If students are actually completing the tests themselves, are parents not finding out just how well their children can read and write and do basic math? What is superficial about that? Why would children and their families not benefit? Or, is it code to mean that parents have no understanding of what makes a good school apart from the rankings? If that is the case, the assumptions would be wrong on both counts.
That said, OPSBA is correct when they say there are a whole number of factors that influence how effective a school is and what low results might suggest. For example, one school may have one or more special education classes which, when added to the overall statistics of the school, can lower the rankings. Yet, that school may be every bit as good a school as one who has a higher ranking but no special education classes. But, that should not suggest that parents are incapable of understanding these issues.
However, what does the Ontario Educational Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) have to say about the purpose of the tests? Under their mandate, it states that taxpayers should have the “ability to analyze student achievement in Ontario in relation to national and international standards.” Now, just how do you analyze Ontario’s school rankings against other provincial standards, let alone those of foreign countries — unless you are comparing one school with another?
So, whether the Fraser Institute comes out with a top ten or twenty list or not, parents WILL still be looking to see where their child’s school is ranked. Why? Because parents want to know that their children are attending a school where they can acquire basic literacy and numeracy skills — the skills they will need throughout their entire lives.
As such, OPSBA is wrong when they suggest the Fraser Institute’s report on school rankings creates a “flawed picture” because: (1) parents are quite capable of figuring out all the other factors that make a school great; and (2) they (the rankings) provide an important measure of accountability that parents can use to make informed decisions about their children’s futures.
[...]
H/T to a regular reader.
May 6th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Great post Sandy. You know what I find really hilarious? It seems that the school system uses ranking and comparison when it suits them…likely when they appear to be favorable. The flip-side would also be true. Who wants to look bad? All we have to do is scroll down your blog a bit and see just how ranking and comparison was spun to an advantage in “Is STAR “Spinning” News About PCAD Test Scores.” I’m sure even the Ministry was in on the ranking and comparing that day.
May 6th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
The problem with the Fraser Institute results is that it includes students who do not write the test because they may have a disability such as being developmentally delayed or autistic. One school may be a feeder school with programs for students with special needs. Another school may have a high percentage of English Language Learners. The next school may have both regular and gifted classes but no lower level special needs classes. That school will score well on the Fraser Institute school rankings. The first two schools will score poorly. I have heard of instances where parents wanted to transfer their children to the neighbouring school that had a higher Fraser Institute ranking. They didn’t realize that their own children were English Language Learners (formerly ESL students). The students at the neighbouring school were less likely to be English Language Learners.
I have seen excellent teachers work with students at schools that rank poorly according to the Fraser Institute. They teach the curriculum as well as teachers in higher ranking schools. If one were to transfer teachers from Upper Canada College to Regent Park, those students at Regent would probably perform poorer because the UCC teachers would not understand how to work with the Regent Park students and their community. Vice versa would also be true.
May 6th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Paula’s Comment:
The C.D. Howe Institute has made a good attempt at ranking schools based on both EQAO results and socio-economic factors. I found my daughter’s elementary school, which is average on the EQAO rankings, was poor on the CD Howe rankings, as it serves a middle class community with few ESL students and few transient students. It’s an interesting ” rel=”nofollow”>C.D. Howe Institute has made a good attempt at ranking schools based on both EQAO results and socio-economic factors. I found my daughter’s elementary school, which is average on the EQAO rankings, was poor on the CD Howe rankings, as it serves a middle class community with few ESL students and few transient students. It’s an interesting C.D. Howe Institute has made a good attempt at ranking schools based on both EQAO results and socio-economic factors I found my daughter’s elementary school, which is average on the EQAO rankings, was poor on the CD Howe rankings, as it serves a middle class community with few ESL students and few transient students. It’s an interesting analysis. The EQAO tests are most useful for assessing how well individual students are learning, but less useful for comparing schools and boards. I’d like to see more standardized provincial tests for students, and have those tests actually impact the students marks. Then the kids would be motivated to answer the questions to the best of their ability, and the problem of variation in marking between schools would be minimized. This year’s MacLean’s Guide to Canadian Universities included a section on university admissions departments that consider which highschool a student attended as there is known variation in marking.
(Editor’s Note: Sorry Paula, but the only way I could save your comment was to delete it — something to do with the C.D. Howe link. It may be a security issue because no matter how many times I added it, it still caused a problem so I had to remove it.)
May 6th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Clarification necessary - What the Fraser Institute produces are not “results” but a ranking based on the EQAO tests already used in Ontario. The EQAO tests allow for special needs students to be exempt from writing the test, so it’s not true that the Fraser’s report card unfairly includes those students because the EQAO results do take in to consideration those kids exempt from testing.
Me - you’re making blanket assumptions re: what a school will or will not do based on scores.
I don’t have a problem with parents taking their children out of a school that over time has constantly scored poorly on curriculum testing. One would think that with years of testing and ranking a poorly performing school and the board its in would do what it can to turn things around….whatever it takes.
There are schools listed in the Fraser Report and on the EQAO tests in poor neighbourhoods that do well. What’s the explanation for that?
That’s not to say that there aren’t good teachers at under-performing schools. Not at all. What the Fraser Institute and C.D. Howe do is make it possible by some form of measuring what a student achieves in a way that allows parents to make a more educated decision for their children.
The analogy of bringing teachers from UCC to Regent Park is a bit of a stretch I think. What if the folks in poorer communities could have the means to move their kids to a school that was seeing better results in terms of literate and numerate graduates?
Me - are you telling us that given a choice those from low socio-economic neighborhoods want under-performing schools for their kids?
Let’s look at the reverse - there are plenty of schools in the Fraser report card that you’d think would score well, being in a rich neighbourhood but are doing really bad. What’s the explanation for that happening year, after year, after year?
It’s a tool for parents.
May 6th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Sorry the link gave you difficulties, Sandy. If anyone is interested they can google cd howe school rankings ontario, which shows the TVO article that shows the rankings and info. sources.
May 6th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Paula,
Let’s try this Toronto Star article on the CD Howe Ontario rankings.
Let’s try a C.D. Howe one again as well.
May 6th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
The EQAO tests allow for special needs students to be exempt from writing the tests. See the EQAO website for an explanation on how that is done. No child that is unable is forced to write the tests. Accommodations can be made.
Also, there are examples in the Fraser Institute rankings of schools in poor neighbourhoods that did well and vise versa.
It’s not acceptable to assume that just because parents live in a poor neighbourhood doesn’t mean they wouldn’t choose a better performing school for their child.
May 6th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
I disagree Sandy. Everything “me” says is not correct re: what the Fraser report card includes and doesn’t, and what the EQAO does or does not do.
The bottom-line is that if schools are in place to help students achieve, there needs to be a clear measurement of how that happens, when it happens and how parents(and public) can tell.
Both the Fraser Institute and C.D.Howe reports to this.
The EQAO testing also over years allows for trends to be established and prompt those in charge to identify areas that need to be improved and then improve them.
(Editor’s Note: Since I made an inadvertent error on the comment referred to, I have deleted it.)