Sage Consultants' report on SOMSD's racial disparity
The report just confirmed what was already known. The data was probably in more detail than before but still there were no new revelations. The difficulty the consultant had compiling the data from the district should be a significant red flag. How can we improve things if we are barely capable of measuring them?
The recommendations did not contain anything new either. I think her point with PowerSchool and other technologies is that their capabilities are underutilized and they can be used to better compile and track necessary data.
Some members of the BOE asked what do we do next but the report didn't really have any concrete answers for that.
The lack of available detail for the disciplinary data was disturbing.
At a glance, I have to agree this seems to mostly consist of stuff everyone already knows. Overall, the report seems..............lightweight.
What I would like to know is, Will the Board hold anyone accountable for the middle schools' failure to provide any disciplinary data to the consultant? No doubt the administrators are passing the buck around. But does the Board have enough backbone to address this failure concretely? Or will they also limit themselves to public grandstanding and just pass the buck to the new super?
This was strange because the Principal at MMS provided some basic disciplinary data to the public at the open meeting in June after the gun incident. I don't understand why he wouldn't have provided it to the consultant as well.
xavier67 said:
What I would like to know is, Will the Board hold anyone accountable for the middle schools' failure to provide any disciplinary data to the consultant? No doubt administrators are passing the buck around. But does the Board have enough backbone to address this failure concretely? Or will they also pass the buck?
xavier67 said:
What I would like to know is, Will the Board hold anyone accountable for the middle schools' failure to provide any disciplinary data to the consultant? No doubt administrators are passing the buck around. But does the Board have enough backbone to address this failure concretely? Or will they also pass the buck?
It is not just middle school disciplinary data that is not being captured. HS data is manual and then put in an excel file and details seem lacking.
The presentation stated the obvious but when pressed for more information, more detailed analysis by Ms. Pai, I was perturbed by Ms. Ramsey responding with an assumption not born out by any data. She stated that more whites were in higher level classes because their parents could afford tutors. Had she uncovered this datapoint?
Here is Village Green article:
http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/consultant-documents-racial-disparities-somsd-board-ed-asks-whats-next/
I had thought that Ms. Ramsey had been hired to take things to the next level...can I assume that this is a preliminary report with more to come?
And does she really make assumptions about tutors with no data? That seems a serious mistake, especially if she is driving toward a recommendation that we need one-on-one tutors to be provided to students of color. (I'd also like to not see her using the term "white parents" when she means "upper middle class parents" -- not every parent who can afford to hire a tutor is white. )
Of course there are some students who get tutors, but I've never seen any data-driven or even observational evidence to suggest that tutors have a major part in creating level differences.
If we provide one-on-one tutors at district expense, the criteria for access should not simply be skin color -- open it to all, link it to reduced price-lunches, or something similar.
This was a preliminary report, however I'm not hopeful about new information in the final report.
She made a number of statements that were clearly assumptions during her discussion of the data.
mod said:
xavier67 said:It is not just middle school disciplinary data that is not being captured. HS data is manual and then put in an excel file and details seem lacking.
What I would like to know is, Will the Board hold anyone accountable for the middle schools' failure to provide any disciplinary data to the consultant? No doubt administrators are passing the buck around. But does the Board have enough backbone to address this failure concretely? Or will they also pass the buck?
The presentation stated the obvious but when pressed for more information, more detailed analysis by Ms. Pai, I was perturbed by Ms. Ramsey responding with an assumption not born out by any data. She stated that more whites were in higher level classes because their parents could afford tutors. Had she uncovered this datapoint?
Here is Village Green article:
http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/consultant-documents-racial-disparities-somsd-board-ed-asks-whats-next/
Yes, I understand the problem at the HS level but it seems that's a procedural problem that results in not very useful data. Whereas in the MS, how can anyone fail to provide ANY data -- faulty or detailed -- to the consultants? If data wasn't routinely collected, no one was instructed to compile them for the consultants? Who thought it was OK for the district to hire a consultant for $78K then not give them the info they need to do what we asked them to do?
I agree with you that Ms. Ramsey's response as reported by the VG was disappointing in multiple levels. (I didn't want to point that out until I had a chance to watch the meeting to get the full context of that exchange.) But if the article accurately captured the her point, then it really highlights the severe limitation of assessing the district only through the lens of race.
The district needed to hire a consultant and explore some issues of racial disparity. They did. Whether they did the bare minimum intentionally or not I can't confess to know, but it's clear the output reflected that. Really a terrible, terrible job, not that I expected much more given the findings were somewhat predetermined (ie no new news there) and the recommendations inevitably plain vanilla.
As to the lack of disciplinary info at the MS level, I suppose if they didn't have it there wasn't anything to give (unless a one-off backward-looking recreation of what it might have been would have been acceptable, which it wouldn't have been of course).
I still need to watch the presentation -- but I'm getting the sense from the VG and these comments that it was lacking in substantive recommendations.
This is unfortunate, and surprises me. I attended one of Ms. Ramsey's community meetings where she gathered input from the parents in attendance in a way that seemed very productive, and the suggestions provided seemed well thought out, doable, and could have been supported by data or theory.
I was hoping some of those suggestions would have become part of the recommendations to provide the district with some direction. Now that I think about it, it's possible that increasing availability of tutoring may have been a suggestion... but this doesn't sound the way I expected it to be pitched.
I do need to watch the presentation either tomorrow, or when it gets put online.
xavier67 said:
3. No one proofread the presentation before its release?
Xavier67,
What needed proofreading? (Is the presentation available somewhere, or did you see it live?)
Thank you!
I actually read the article, then looked again to see if the presentation was linked, and totally skipped over the bolded line that said "Read Ramsay’s full presentation here. ", because my brain is trained to think that's the advertisement in the middle of the article.
sprout said:
Thank you!
I actually read the article, then looked again to see if the presentation was linked, and totally skipped over the bolded line that said "Read Ramsay’s full presentation here. ", because my brain is trained to think that's the advertisement in the middle of the article.
Same here, but I found it when I went in a second time to check something!
Here's the list of recommendations from that presentation:
- Establish a data team (at a minimum ) at the Middle & High Schools.
- Develop School Manuals/handbooks that clearly delineate how to access higher level courses.
- Increase the Recruitment and Retention Efforts for Instructional Staff Members of Color.
- Establish informational workshops for parents about Honors and AP - multiple times a year in different community location i.e.- Dehart Center, Churches, Baird Center, YMCA.
- Timely communication with parents and the community regarding program changes/ opportunities to access advanced placement.
- Offer students the opportunity to sample Honor and AP classes (summer pre-ap academy, course sampling during the school year)
- Transition programs for rising 5th graders/rising 8th graders.
- Train Instructional Staff (professional development)in the Following Areas:
- Culturally Responsive Teaching
- Differentiated Instruction
- Infusing Technology into Instruction
- Data driven instruction /Overall use of data to support instructional and programmatic decisions/extend training in Powerschool, Naviance, and Teachscape.
- Development of a district wide action plan for schools at elementary, middle and high school level to address instructional practices that will address all students at all levels.
- Administrative walkthrough schedule to establish trends and areas that need to be addressed in professional development .
- Regular data meetings and reports to staff.
Sprout's Commentary:
- It would be helpful to have the purpose/goals of the recommendations included:
- e.g., Data team -- What is their purpose: Data entry? Monitoring? Data-informed decision-making?
- What is the data team's power: Guidance/recommendations? Oversight?).
- My interpretation of the 'main idea' of the presentation:
- The district's poor implementation in multiple areas (from academic content delivery to communication to parents) are significant contributors to the racial disparities seen in the data.
- These recommendations focus on improving several areas of the implementation, and also recommend that a team monitor the data and assist with data-driven decisions based on which changes are effective in improving outcomes, and which are not.
- What surprised me: There are NO recommendations listed that directly address the course access piece. I expected there would be one or more of these:
- How to allow more open enrollment to higher level courses,
- and/or how to remove some barriers to accessing these courses in the leveling policies,
- and/or which courses could be deleveled/have a reduced number of levels.
Dr. Ramos' remarks to Ms. Ramsey focused on the need for policy recommendations not just cataloging practices to be amended.
I have many questions about how our district identifies student race. I am the parent of 2 "other" children yet I don't recall having filled out any papers to this identification.
With respect to the discipline piece it should not be lost that our overall suspension rates are quite low. Our issues then do not seem to stem from overusing suspension . In order to generate policy to have an effect on suspension rate disparities by race we need to drill down for reasons.
mod said:
Dr. Ramos' remarks to Ms. Ramsey focused on the need for policy recommendations not just cataloging practices to be amended.
I have many questions about how our district identifies student race. I am the parent of 2 "other" children yet I don't recall having filled out any papers to this identification.
With respect to the discipline piece it should not be lost that our overall suspension rates are quite low. Our issues then do not seem to stem from overusing suspension . In order to generate policy to have an effect on suspension rate disparities by race we need to drill down for reasons.
I agree with all your points. I think disciplinary issue is one area where the district can make a substantial difference by embracing a restorative approach and providing more sustained guidance and support to the disciplined students.
xavier67 said:
mod said:I agree with all your points. I think disciplinary issue is one area where the district can make a substantial difference by embracing a restorative approach and providing more sustained guidance and support to the disciplined students.
Dr. Ramos' remarks to Ms. Ramsey focused on the need for policy recommendations not just cataloging practices to be amended.
I have many questions about how our district identifies student race. I am the parent of 2 "other" children yet I don't recall having filled out any papers to this identification.
With respect to the discipline piece it should not be lost that our overall suspension rates are quite low. Our issues then do not seem to stem from overusing suspension . In order to generate policy to have an effect on suspension rate disparities by race we need to drill down for reasons.
Another missing piece to the picture in the data presented by Ms. Ramsay was looking at Special Ed identification and how it interplay a with the statistics. I would also like to see a gender breakdown. Of course it was only a preliminary report but it would be good to know whether the scope of her inquiry will be expanded to get to answers
She stated she had the data set up so she could break it down by different categories (sex, race, special ed, etc). Hopefully that information will be more apparent in the final report.
xavier67 said:
mod said:I agree with all your points. I think disciplinary issue is one area where the district can make a substantial difference by embracing a restorative approach and providing more sustained guidance and support to the disciplined students.
Dr. Ramos' remarks to Ms. Ramsey focused on the need for policy recommendations not just cataloging practices to be amended.
I have many questions about how our district identifies student race. I am the parent of 2 "other" children yet I don't recall having filled out any papers to this identification.
With respect to the discipline piece it should not be lost that our overall suspension rates are quite low. Our issues then do not seem to stem from overusing suspension . In order to generate policy to have an effect on suspension rate disparities by race we need to drill down for reasons.
A related need is to find ways to deal with discipline that are also appropriate to the needs and challenges of Special Needs children and youth.
Restorative justice is a part of it. But we also need ALL school personnel (including security guards!) educated to understand the difference between (for example) a neurotypical angry outburst and an Autistic Spectrum child's struggle to maintain appropriate tone and emotional control. Once educated, they need to have the tools/support to deal with Special Need discipline problems appropriately.
We need to understand when/whether a suspension or series of Saturday detentions is the right way to deal with the individual child's issues.
If we got this right, we might well save money by eliminating the need for some expensive out of district placements.
mod said:
I have many questions about how our district identifies student race. I am the parent of 2 "other" children yet I don't recall having filled out any papers to this identification.
With respect to the discipline piece it should not be lost that our overall suspension rates are quite low. Our issues then do not seem to stem from overusing suspension . In order to generate policy to have an effect on suspension rate disparities by race we need to drill down for reasons.
I believe (and someone who has recently registered a child, please correct me if I'm off base) that the parent selects the child's race upon filling out the registration form. However, way back when , there was no option for multiracial children (maybe there was an "other" option?), so parents had to select one race. However, for at least the past five years (based on my experience) , there has been the option to identify the student as multiracial.
susan1014 said:A related need is to find ways to deal with discipline that are also appropriate to the needs and challenges of Special Needs children and youth.
I believe this also relates to a legal requirement of school districts, and plans that are required to be followed for these students.
That said, I believe the contract with Sage Consultants is primarily focused on academic (as that was the focus of the OCR agreement), and only a very very small piece of the requested work is related to discipline.
Is the report itself available anywhere? Seeing the slides themselves without the narrative and data makes it seem like a lot of conclusions without any support.
I'm reading Thelma Ramsey's LinkedIn page...
Owner, Lead Consultant
Lead Consultant, Sage Educational Associates, LLC
Feb 2015- Present (7 months)
"Currently I have been hired by the South Orange Maplewood School District as a consultant to address the under-representation of Minority students in Advanced Placement programs. I will also be addressing the over-representation of minority students with disciplinary infractions."
So this report was apparently NOT generated to address whether or not the above issues existed but rather started with those conclusions stipulated as fact and move on from there? And did this organization exist in any form prior to this job (it's the first time it's mentioned in the profile). I would like to get a sense of methodology the firm normally applies to their work and seeing prior reports or discussion of methodology would be very helpful in contextualizing the conclusions
Why is this important? Because the presentation states that it is "preliminary findings" and talks about "data collection", but by the description on the presenter's page it sounds like the the goal was to address, not confirm, the disparities.
So what was the goal? And where is the supporting data for the conclusions
Jackson_Fusion,
FWIW, if you look up the three bidders on the contract, it seems like all of them are new to the field.
One was Sage, which seems to have come into existence with this project. One was a woman from South Orange who is employed as a lawyer with related experience (formerly a legal counsel defending NYC Schools). The third (and most expensive) had a professional sounding firm name that shows up nowhere in online searches, so is probably also a new entrant.
I don't know if there are established and experienced consultants who chose not to bid on our RFP, but we don't seem to have rejected proposals from anyone with a track record doing this sort of work as a consultant to districts.
It was a substantial contract for a sole proprietor who has a full-time job already in the East Orange District.
susan1014 said:
I don't know if there are established and experienced consultants who chose not to bid on our RFP, but we don't seem to have rejected proposals from anyone with a track record doing this sort of work as a consultant to districts.
I reviewed the RFP, and if I remember correctly, it contained a boatload of requirements. It seemed close to a full-time position that either needed someone who was likely to already be in high demand in the field, or else a team of consultants, to get coverage of all the different skill sets needed (e.g., qualitative, quantitative, education policy and practice, and I think there was something else). In addition, it required a level of insurance that cost about $8,000 annually. The work needed to start immediately, and the time between the start of the project and the first report was very short for all the work required.
In other words, this substantial request was unlikely to be financially worth it for a larger consulting group, but needed too many areas of expertise for most single consultants to have all of them.
yahooyahoo said:
It was a substantial contract for a sole proprietor who has a full-time job already in the East Orange District.
If I'm remembering correctly, the district is paying ~$27K annually (and the consultant is likely paying ~$8K annually for insurance). For this rate, the district got someone who seems new to the field, but is committed to the district as a local parent (and hopefully can handle a lot of criticism in the spotlight).
I believe two more reports will be coming (at least one each year... maybe there were additional ones I'm forgetting). I'm hopeful that the input from the BOE and administration will assist Ms. Ramsey in providing the types of insights that the district seeks.
yahooyahoo said:
The total contract is $78.5k over three years (three phases).
I think you're agreeing with me? (That's about $26K and change, annually - correct?)
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
Rentals
-
Huge Brand New construction Apartment in 2 family home with 4 bedrooms 3 bathrooms
4 Bd | 3Full Ba
$4,500
Advertisement
http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/consultant-documents-racial-disparities-somsd-board-ed-asks-whats-next/
My initial reactions:
1. The consultant's report merely confirms what EVERYONE ALREADY knows about:
- the deep academic and disciplinary disparity along racial lines at the MS and HS
- the district's ongoing deficiencies in district communication/outreach, in-district data collection and usage, online communication/information systems (Powerschool, etc.), etc, etc, etc
2. Most of its recommendations are familiar and tame; and the remainder are confounding. Yes, we should recruit and retain more staff of color--but I'm not seeing a connection between Powerschool and racial disparity. Overall, I don't see how implementing these recommendations would lead to any significant reduction in disparity.
3. No one proofread the presentation before its release?