Two Parkland Schools Fall Short In Annual Yearly Progress

Parkland students exceeded academic targets in reading and math for the 2010-2011 school year, but Jaindl Elementary and Parkland High schools fell short of meeting Annual Yearly Progress goals, according to information provided at Tuesday's school board meeting.

Officials said the No Child Left Behind reporting structure for subgroups was at the root of Jaindl Elementary receiving a "warning" status and Parkland High School receiving the elevated warning status of "School Improvement I."  

The remaining seven elementary schools and the two middle schools met the Adequate Yearly Progress goals.

"There is nothing to be unhappy or remorseful about," said school board member Roberta Marcus, noting overall proficiencies in math and reading for students in grades 3 to 8 and grade 11. "This is a school district that has been tremendously successful." 

She expressed dismay at the reporting structure for No Child Left Behind, calling it "an unfair act." She said the goals were unrealistic for some of the subgroups, particularly the learning disabled.

Under No Child Left Behind, if a school has 40 or more students in a subgroup (such as the economically disadvantaged or the learning disabled), Annual Year Progress Targets must be applied. If any subgroup fails to meet the target, the entire school is failed. Larger school districts typically have more subgroup categories.

David Grim, outgoing director of curriculum instruction and professional development, said Jaindl Elementary was given a warning based on the reading performance of the Individual Education Plan subgroup, which includes students with learning abilities who receive special education instruction. Of the 53 special education students, 24 had scores of advanced or proficient, but the number was not high enough to meet the target, he said.

In the 2009-2010 school year, Parkland High was given a warning because of the math performance of the Individual Education Plan subgroup, Grim said. That warning was elevated for the 2010-2011 school year because of the math performance of the economically disadvantaged subgroup, he said. Of the 89 students in that subgroup, 50 had scores of advanced or proficient, but it again was not high enough, affecting the entire school, he said.

While students at risk are provided support, Grim told the school board, "We'll need to increase the intensity of that support."

The district is now required to submit a school improvement plan for Jaindl Elementary and Parkland High to the Pennsylvania Department of Education, he said. 

Superintendent Richard Sniscak said No Child Left Behind was designed to allow for accountability. He told the board that the district would not make excuses and would step up support for at-risk students.

"We'll reach out to them personally," he said, adding, for example, that laptops are available for students to sign-out of the library if they need access.

The district provided a summary report of the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment's (PSSA) preliminary results, which is used to measure Annual Yearly Progress.

Here are the preliminary PSSA scores for students who performed at advanced or proficient levels in reading and writing. All grades exceeded the 2011 AYP targets of 72 percent for reading and 67 percent for math.

* Reading

Grade 3 -- 83 percent in 2011 (81 percent in 2010)

Grade 4 -- 83 percent (81 percent in 2010)

Grade 5 -- 75 percent (73 percent in 2010)

Grade 6 -- 82 percent (85 percent in 2010)

Grade 7 -- 90 Percent (87 percent in 2010)

Grade 8 -- 93 percent (92 percent in 2010)

Grade 11 -- 82 percent (same in 2010)

* Math

Grade 3 -- 89 percent (90 percent in 2010)

Grade 4 -- 89 percent (same in 2010)

Grade 5 -- 82 percent (80 percent in 2010)

Grade 6 -- 90 percent (92 percent in 2010)

Grade 7 -- 93 percent (92 percent in 2010)

Grade 8 -- 94 percent (92 percent in 2010)

Grade 11 -- 78 percent (77 percent in 2010)