Better Education Analysis

I enjoyed the responses to my posting of the data from Tidewater that less spending per student produces better test scores – and, presumably, better educated students.

It was fun to show the data because every election cycle the VEA, Democrats, Too Many Republicans, Liberals, MSM and simple-minded folk make the claim that “More money = Better schools, better education”. Like there is a cause and effect.

A corporation in Florida, FYI Corporation (www.fyicorporation.com) did analysis of Florida schools using a visual presentation called KEGS. The KEG is a box sub-divided into many boxes. The subordinate boxes are (one hopes) independent variables. You score your variables and then color the boxes. The result is striking descriptive analysis.

They looked at schools in Florida and their standardized tests. You can see which factors jump out at you in successful schools and losers. Then, you go down the level of schools and you can see how individual teachers with the same variables get markedly different results. You can see how classes with windows on the playground get different results.

Let’s be clear that this is descriptive, not causal, analysis. It suggests what might matter. Of course, it makes a difference what independent variables you pick and how you measure them – the buzz word ‘metrics’. Yet, it may capture some of the variables that really matter in improving test scores – as one key, standardized measure of educational improvement. That would help educators and policy-makers to try something other than throwing money.

I didn’t post the graphics because they may be proprietary, although I’m sure this corporation would love a call from any school district or the Commonwealth wanting to pay for analysis.

Also, this technique would very interesting in an analysis of roads – mile by mile or whatever distance matters most. Maybe it could be used for environmental analysis of water.

Der Teuful im Detail steckt.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

8 responses to “Better Education Analysis”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Interesting…And did you see that a new study shows that Charter School students have worse test results than public school students?

    Interupted the evolutionary process, I’ll warrant….oops….that’s right, there’s no evolution in Charter Schools.

    Hmmmm….could that be the answer?

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Better schools? Here in Richmond, I am just happy that Wilder is giving schools ATTENTION. It is positively immoral that some Richmond students are still expected to attend crumbling schools that were built over half a century ago on top of landfills.

    This is after Richmond Renaissance has spent over a half a billion on wasteful downtown development.

    Never mind that that the State is supposed to be compensating the CIty for its prohibition on annexation.

    Perspective, James, perspective.

  3. Anonskeptic Avatar
    Anonskeptic

    I know that this is off track, but please show me the law that says “the State is supposed to be compensating the City (of Richmond) for its prohibition on annexation.” Show me the beef! You are simply quoting an urban legend. Get over it! No money, no annexation. You missed your chance when Senator Ed Wiley vetoed mandatory revenue-sharing between Richmond, Chesterfield and Henrico back at the end of the 1970s.

  4. City Slicker Avatar
    City Slicker

    Anonskeptic – Here’s the law. It’s called “599” money after SB599, the enabling legislation passed decades ago. Sen. Tom Michie (D – Charlottesville) was the sponsor. It compensates city police departments more than county sheriff departments as a compromise for denying cities the ability to annex.

    Subsequent general assemblies funded it in varying degrees. You will still see it in the budget identified as “599.”

    PS: Senators don’t have a “veto.”

  5. Anonskeptic Avatar
    Anonskeptic

    So you say slicker, but it was half a loaf; paltry money for what they gave up. And the value has declined significantly from the very beginning.

    The money also goes to counties that have police departments (Chesterfield, Albemarle, etc.). The GA froze the 599 money for several years and only unfroze it upon threat by cities to sue to get their annexation rights back. Even now if you read the law, there is an escape clause passed every biennium that allows the GA the opportunity reduce 599 funds without annexation coming back. Also, the 559 formula is such that the money going to counties has increased over the past 20 years while money to cities is going down.

    Finally, the law that almost made it through the 1978 or 79 GA said that there would be mandatory revenue sharing with the affected cities if counties, like Chesterfield & Henrico, obtained immunity from annexation. Senator Ed Wiley of Richmond and powerful head of Senate Finance refused to let the bill be brought up for a vote. If that is not a veto, I do not know what is.

    Technically, it was a bribe to get the large cities to give up their annexation rights.

  6. Civicus Avatar

    Anonskeptic is right about the sequence…except I’m curious abut Senator Willey’s position. He represented the western portion of the City of Richmond at the time and, as I recall, was most protective of its position.

    Didn’t he make a deal with the delegates and a few senators from the counties and didn’t he have to do so because he didn’t have the votes in the Senate to do otherwise?

    Oh and BTW, Tom Michie was a DELEGATE at the time. House districts, unlike senate districts, in those days did not “split jurisdictions with the exception of Fairfax County.

  7. Anonskeptic Avatar
    Anonskeptic

    civicus is correct about the deal Sen. Willey made with the counties. At that time, counties did not want to share anything with them bad ol’ cities, much less revenue. “We’ve got independent cities in this state, so by God, let them cities stand on their own two feet.” Willey opposed the deal because he did not want Richmond to give up its right to annex even after the 1970s debacle. He had previously sponsored legislation in the 1960s to: make clear the state’s eminent domain powers to acquire monuments of Civil War heros in Richmond should their removal be attempted by the city; unilaterally merge Richmond and Henrico; and create a state commission to study Richmond’s boundary expansion “problems.”

  8. City Slicker Avatar
    City Slicker

    I blog corrected. Michie was a delegate at the time, a senator later. And it must have been a HB599. Mea culpa.

Leave a Reply