by John Butcher

The U.S. Department of Education requires every state to annually report high school graduation rates. Those data, along with students’ performances on state assessments in subjects such as mathematics, English, and science, along with other measures, are also used to determine annual accreditation ratings.

The VDOE’s website includes the Superintendent’s Annual Report where one can find a wealth of information at the state, division, and school levels.

At first glance, the spreadsheet in Table 5, Diploma Graduates and Completers, looks to be a source of interesting graduation data. The 2022 report gives the diploma counts for 2022 and the fall memberships for 2019. However, calculating the federal diploma rates from those data shows a 203.6% rate for Radford and 151.8% for Hopewell.

(Well, they did warn us: Footnote 1 says “No adjustments have been made to reflect the mobility of the population.”)

In contrast, the Cohort Graduation Rates come in a handy database and those rates deal with movement in and out of the schools. The database again gives us the 2022 graduates as a percentage of the 2019 enrollment.

Note: Economically disadvantaged (ED) students typically score lower on the SOL tests (by ca. 10-15 points, depending on the test) and graduate at lower rates (by ca. 10 percent) than their more affluent peers (Not ED). As with the SOL pass rates, the school and division diploma rates thus are pulled up or pushed down by the percentage of ED students. In short, schools and divisions with larger numbers of ED students are punished by those measures. So, the data below are division averages for each group.

Further Note: VDOE likes to report an “On-Time Graduation Rate” that is “adjusted” (i.e., boosted) to account for limited-English speaking and disabled students. To their credit, the feds want to know the “Federal Graduation Indicator” that counts only the standard, advanced, and IB graduates. Data below are the Federal rates.

Final Note: VDOE suppressed data for Highland, Lunenburg, and Lexington. Those divisions are absent from the data below.

Let’s start with the distribution of Not ED graduation rates.

Richmond is the gold bar. The red bars are the peer cities, from the left, Norfolk, Newport News, and Hampton. The division average is 92.09%.

Next, the ED data.

Richmond again is gold; peer cities, again, are Norfolk, Newport News, and Hampton. The division average is 82.68.

As an attempt to corral this plethora of data, here is a plot of the Division ED v. Not ED rates.

The orange dotted line represents the hypothetical case where the ED and Not ED rates were equal. Divisions below that line report Not ED rates lower than the ED. Divisions above the line report the anomalous situation of ED rates higher than the Not ED.

The green dash-dot line is the least squares fit. The R-squared datum confirms what our eyes tell us: There is a lot of scatter in these data but a clear trend toward larger Not ED/ED difference as the Not ED rate increases.

The gold square is Richmond. The red diamonds are the peer cities, from the left, Norfolk, Newport News, and Hampton. The aqua circle is the division average.

As you can see, Richmond leads the parade of divisions where ED students graduated at higher rates than their more affluent peers.

Beyond the 17-point difference, note again the egregiously low Richmond graduation rates. Otherwise, this list runs to medium-sized and smaller cities and to rural counties.

At the other end of the scale, here are the divisions where the Not ED rate was higher than the ED by more than 15 percent.

With some exceptions (notably Alexandria) the large Not ED/ED differences come in rural counties and smaller cities.

Finally, here is the entire list, sorted by division name.

John Butcher is a retired attorney living in the Richmond area. This column has been reprinted with permission from Cranky’s Blog.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

16 responses to “Graduates. And Not.”

  1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Excellent work, and enlightening, as well. How can it be that less than 60 percent of not economically disadvantaged students in Richmond city schools graduated on time? That is unbelievable. Folks in Richmond tend to look down on Petersburg. Well, almost 80 percent of both ED and Not Ed graduated on time in that school division. If nothing else calls for a wholesale shakeup in Richmond’s school administration, this does.

    Where is the Richmond Times-Dispatch?

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      We have seen the abysmal attendance records of Richmond schools. Now we see the results. Truancy is likely a major contributor to this graduation rate disaster. The remedy will have to wait until the 2024 school board election.
      https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/boardpapers/calendar/CitySB20-24-May-and-November.pdf

    2. Something is surely happening (or not happening) in Richmond City Schools.

      Excellent work, but what’s the future look like for those who don’t graduate on time? Are they dropping out, or graduating a year later?

      Are dropouts getting jobs, getting GED or entering the criminal justice system? It makes a difference.

      Additionally, while graduation rates are important, an emphasis on graduation rates alone could lead to diploma mills where everyone graduates no matter what. We need graduates with the knowledge and skills to succeed.

    3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “How can it be that less than 60 percent of not economically disadvantaged students in Richmond city schools graduated on time?”

      Look at the “English Learners” numbers (mid-30s) and the Hispanic student numbers (mid-40s). They look to be what is dragging down the overall average and appear to not be considered ED. Seems sort of strange.

    4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “How can it be that less than 60 percent of not economically disadvantaged students in Richmond city schools graduated on time?”

      Look at the “English Learners” numbers (mid-30s) and the Hispanic student numbers (mid-40s). They look to be what is dragging down the overall average and appear to not be considered ED. Seems sort of strange.

      Edit: Upon further reflection, it would seem that if you placed the “English Learners” in the non-ED population, it would artificially inflate the ED numbers while simultaneously deflating the non-ED numbers. Don’t know if this was done (either intentionally or not) but it sure looks that way to me. Of course, maybe the “English Learners” are not actually ED…

  2. LarrytheG Avatar

    Mr. Butcher is unparalleled in his abilities to slice and dice data. And he does get to some uncomfortable truths.

    Once again, I point out that govt REQUIRES data be provided on public schools. That IS transparency. What Mr. Butcher demonstrates is there is much more information in the data if one can tease it out as he has done and continues to do.

    Kudos.

    I’ m not at all surprised that ED kids have lower achievement and graduation rates. If a kid fails to achieve basic/practical literacy by the 3-4 grade, the road ahead is not easy and often downhill.

    But schools showing higher achievement rates for ED kids seems counter-intuitive and I wonder what the SOL scores for those schools between Ed and not Ed show.

    Are there some data anomalies going on and if not, do we understand what is really going on?

    “There is a lot of scatter in these data but a clear trend toward larger Not ED/ED difference as the Not ED rate increases.”

    I’d be curious to hear from Matt or Kathleen on this.

    1. Teddy007 Avatar

      Hopefull in the future, any private school at accepts public funds as part of school choice will have to provide the same granularity of data as the public schools are currently required.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        Yes. Should be a hard requirement before the funds are proffered and used, period.

  3. …calculating the federal diploma rates from those data shows a 203.6% rate for Radford and 151.8% for Hopewell.

    …Economically disadvantaged (ED) students typically score lower on the SOL tests (by ca. 10-15 points, depending on the test) and graduate at lower rates (by ca. 10 percent) than their more affluent peers (Not ED).

    Still and all, though, 193.6% and 141.8% are pretty respectable
    rates…

    😉

  4. …calculating the federal diploma rates from those data shows a 203.6% rate for Radford and 151.8% for Hopewell.

    …Economically disadvantaged (ED) students typically score lower on the SOL tests (by ca. 10-15 points, depending on the test) and graduate at lower rates (by ca. 10 percent) than their more affluent peers (Not ED).

    Still and all, though, 193.6% and 141.8% are pretty respectable
    rates…

    😉

    1. I think that reflects teachers and staff giving 110% effort.

  5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Can you be more explicit about which data you are using in your table and graphs? For instance, you are reporting Richmond City ED graduation rates at sub-75% while the spreadsheet you cite has them above 80%. See attached snapshot. It does look like the issue in Richmond City Schools may involve the number of ESL students based on this snapshot.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9beedc5a056b2f92e4f35209ab17e48c30bacfbf99cbeeaf4210154ce9c56f06.jpg

  6. Teddy007 Avatar

    Bath County High School is a school of 193 students that is 90% white, and 44% free lunch. Yet, 100% of its ED students graduated.

    Remember, graduation rates are a trade off for academic vigor. One would have to compare NAEP scores for each county or maybe SAT/ACT scores to see which path schools have taken.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      Yep.

      Of course NAEP does not test every school just a representative sample at the state level.

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Can you be more explicit about which data you are using in your table and graphs? For instance, you are reporting Richmond City ED graduation rates at sub-75% while the spreadsheet you cite has them above 80%. See attached snapshot. It does look like the issue in Richmond City Schools may involve the number of ESL students based on this snapshot.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9beedc5a056b2f92e4f35209ab17e48c30bacfbf99cbeeaf4210154ce9c56f06.jpg

    Edit: I tried to duplicate your figures using the “Federal Graduation Data” link and while the graduation rates for Richmond are (as noted above) all significantly higher than what you calculated (I assume you are using some other dataset) there is still a 14-17% differential between ED and Non-ED graduation rates. Assuming this was the point of your piece, it is pretty clear from the data offered that the ESL population is considered Non-ED and is what is dragging the Non-ED numbers down (by my calculations Non-ED is about 64-65% vs 78-81% for ED).

  8. James C. Sherlock Avatar
    James C. Sherlock

    Excellent work. We now, as always, know nothing about RPS other than results, like SOLs, that are externally tabulated. I have been reporting similar nonsense reported by RPS for years. Their reporting is useless for anything but pointing out that that system is utterly incompetent.

Leave a Reply