Proficient as a Grade Level

See this little thing of beauty?  These are the results of our last English Language Arts (ELA) Assessment for my grade level.  It shows that the average score for all of the kiddos in our grade level is proficient!  In fact, 68% of our students scored Proficient or Advanced on this assessment.  Yipeee!  

This means that our kiddos are learning and our instruction is improving.  In the eyes of the State of California, we are doing fine.  We are making our required growth each year in each subgroup and overall.  However, the Feds see it differently.  Because we haven't had the required percentage of students score Proficient or Advanced on one test on one day once a year, we are failing.  Scores like these give us hope that we can climb out of the pit that is Program Improvement (PI).  

That's the good news.

The bad news is...well, just look at that 69%.  That means that the average score on the test was 69%.  Did you know that a D+ on a test means you are Proficient?  Did you know that a B on this same test would mean you are Advanced? 

While I am over the moon that all of the hard work my kiddos have done this year seems to be paying off, and we may be on our way out of PI, I am conflicted over the idea that we are telling kids that they can score lower than 80% (which has been the generally accepted bottom score denoting mastery of a concept) and be called Proficient.  The actual bottom line of Proficiency in ELA is 66% while for math it is 63%.

Maybe this is the State's way for making up for the fact that they are asking way too much of kids and schools today.  Wait, before you accuse me of whining, hear me out.  I am ALL for accountability.  I think public schools are doing a better job now than they have in the past.  I do believe we must do better; however, I don't believe the way we are going about it is good for kids.  

Allow me to explain.  First, I believe that the California State Content Standards are developmentally inappropriate.  For my 5th grade students that means that their brains have not matured to the point that they can handle the abstract and higher level thinking that is required in many of the standards.  Some of the students do fine, but many struggle.  Second, in urban school districts like mine, the students come to school ill prepared to learn, especially the amount of information and type of skills we ask them to master.  This is true for many reasons:  lack of mastery of the English language, lack of "home preparation", lack of adequate support from home.  These are not excuses, but they are legitimate reasons.  Lastly, we are not comparing apples to apples.  The students I have this year will take a form of the same test as the students from last year.  This year's students' scores will then be compared to the scores of the students from last year.  This flies directly in the face of scientific research principles.  If the State and Feds are going to hold schools and teachers accountable, then instruction should be the ONLY variable.  Indeed it is not.  If we truly want to know if kids are learning and adequate instruction is being rendered, we must compare students to themselves.  Only then will we get a true picture of how much and how well kiddos are learning.

I know many of you have thoughts on this issue.  What do you think?  Do you agree with me or disagree vehemently?  I'm itching to hear from different perspectives!