Sage Consultants' report on SOMSD's racial disparity

If the consultant is a local parent with a child or children in the Maplewood/South Orange district, then there is clear conflict of interest. Can anyone confirm this?

yahooyahoo said:
If the consultant is a local parent with a child or children in the Maplewood/South Orange district, then there is clear conflict of interest. Can anyone confirm this?

IIRC: The RFP stated that the consultant could have been a current employee of the district (e.g, a current teacher or administrator). I don't think the consultant's relationship with the district was a qualifying or disqualifying criteria.

So, is the purpose of this consultant to allow us to admire the problem for three years or is there some interest in taking action.

There is no magic overarching solution that will solve the problem in a year or ten years. On the other hand, I am sure that if we asked Sprout, to name one person, to come up with a series of things to try, we could start to make progress now. There are certainly plenty of low-risk, low-cost things that can be tried. And I will go out on a small limb and suggest that we have thought of most of this stuff on our own.

tjohn said:
And I will go out on a small limb and suggest that we have thought of most of this stuff on our own.

Agreed...if by "we" you meant MOLers and not the district.

tjohn said:
So, is the purpose of this consultant to allow us to admire the problem for three years or is there some interest in taking action.
There is no magic overarching solution that will solve the problem in a year or ten years. On the other hand, I am sure that if we asked Sprout, to name one person, to come up with a series of things to try, we could start to make progress now. There are certainly plenty of low-risk, low-cost things that can be tried. And I will go out on a small limb and suggest that we have thought of most of this stuff on our own.

Yes.

I'd put Sprout in charge.

xavier67 said:

tjohn said:
And I will go out on a small limb and suggest that we have thought of most of this stuff on our own.

Agreed...if by "we" you meant MOLers and not the district.

There are certainly a lot of good ideas offered by MOLers and many by people who are actually informed and trying to make a difference.

tjohn said:

There is no magic overarching solution that will solve the problem in a year or ten years. On the other hand, I am sure that if we asked Sprout, to name one person, to come up with a series of things to try, we could start to make progress now.

I'm flattered to be used as your example. I think there are many ideas already floating around the district, but the budget (usually translated into personnel time) is a significant choke point. To that end, I have started working with the district, PTA groups, etc., to locate some external funding sources to apply to get funding for their ideas. Unfortunately, external funds seem to be getting more and more difficult to get... so fingers crossed.

My interpretation is that the consultant's recommendations are to assist the district in prioritizing what they will fund with their internal budget.

Ultimately it's critical to see the report data and look at the information supporting the conclusion. The money spent on it is much less of a concern (though it's a concern) than just supporting the conclusions because they "sound good" or "right".

Decisions, especially decisions that have a major impact on the school district have to be based on more than "sounding right". Starting with data that supports the conclusions being drawn.

If the report starts with conclusions and then goes looking for data that supports the conclusion, or just uncritically accepts the assertions and goes right to solutions, that is the opposite of how studies are supposed to work. And if the assertions are uncritically accurate, data is still needed to support a course of action. Simply saying "more hires and tutors" is a solution is utterly unsupported by the deck. If there is data and research to support it, great- but let's see it.

Edit to add: the comments suggesting that we used the current consultant because that's who we got out of a limited pool- geez. Forget about the cost of the report- just setting a course based on who we could get is..... Not a great way forward.

Again- the report and supporting data could be spectacular, but let's see it.

Jackson_Fusion said:
Ultimately it's critical to see the report data and look at the information supporting the conclusion...

Starting with data that supports the conclusions being drawn...

Again- the report and supporting data could be spectacular, but let's see it.

The consultant's key findings are:

1. The instructional staff does not mirror the racial makeup of the schools.

2. There is a clear disparity of placement by race in higher level classes in Math and Language Arts beginning at the Middle School.

3. The discipline data supports the ACLU findings that black students are suspended at a higher rate then white students at the High School.

4. The limited use of data and the accessibility of the data makes it difficult to make programmatic or instructional decisions. This includes academic and discipline data.

I don't see how her data doesn't support these conclusions.

Her data does indeed support these four findings, all of which we already knew, and have seen in previous presentations. She has done an outside-in analysis of the same data and found the same results. No surprise, and perhaps helpful in dealing with government authorities, but not in providing new ideas on the roots of the problems or how to solve them.

Waiting to see next steps. Side comments suggesting (without data) that the problem is that white parents hire tutors are not particularly helpful from a policy perspective.

The District knew all of these "key findings" before the report. What value did the report provide besides confirming previously known information?

xavier67 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:
Ultimately it's critical to see the report data and look at the information supporting the conclusion...

Starting with data that supports the conclusions being drawn...

Again- the report and supporting data could be spectacular, but let's see it.

The consultant's key findings are:
1. The instructional staff does not mirror the racial makeup of the schools.
2. There is a clear disparity of placement by race in higher level classes in Math and Language Arts beginning at the Middle School.
3. The discipline data supports the ACLU findings that black students are suspended at a higher rate then white students at the High School.
4. The limited use of data and the accessibility of the data makes it difficult to make programmatic or instructional decisions. This includes academic and discipline data.
I don't see how her data doesn't support these conclusions.

xavier67 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:
Ultimately it's critical to see the report data and look at the information supporting the conclusion...

Starting with data that supports the conclusions being drawn...

Again- the report and supporting data could be spectacular, but let's see it.

The consultant's key findings are:
1. The instructional staff does not mirror the racial makeup of the schools.
2. There is a clear disparity of placement by race in higher level classes in Math and Language Arts beginning at the Middle School.
3. The discipline data supports the ACLU findings that black students are suspended at a higher rate then white students at the High School.
4. The limited use of data and the accessibility of the data makes it difficult to make programmatic or instructional decisions. This includes academic and discipline data.
I don't see how her data doesn't support these conclusions.

There is no consultant needed to count how many members of faculty are of one race or another, nor to count how many kids got suspended.

Simply taking a headcount and leaping to "and if we change that it'll improve things" is illogical and unsupported. We KNOW that the racial makeup of the teaching staff is driving the achievement gap? How do we KNOW this, or, studies being by their nature seldom conclusive, know this within a measurable level of certainty?

Did she run an analysis versus other schools with different variables to confirm the impact of the variables identified? If not simply counting and making pronouncements is worse than guessing- it's trying to put a sheen of some sort of academic rigor on one's proposed solution. That's the issue.

That's why the data, methodology and output matters. There may be reams of data. The district should see something other than the PowerPoint before acting.

Jackson_Fusion: You point out one critical fact, there was no comparison of our data to other districts.

yahooyahoo said:
Jackson_Fusion: You point out one critical fact, there was no comparison of our data to other districts.

Respectfully, going by the presentation alone, as it stands there is no study. There is a recitation of readily available information and a handful of conclusions. The bridge before the former and the latter would be the study.

In any case- maybe it exists in great methodical detail! But nothing in the presentation qualifies.

I imagine the Board will make it public in its entirety in due course

xavier67 said:
3. The discipline data supports the ACLU findings that black students are suspended at a higher rate then white students at the High School.

The problem is that that is an easy conclusion to reach. But facile. A simple equation. A harder but more important question is why and how. Disparate punishment? Disparate charges for similar issues? Disparate punishment for equivalent offenses? (as in the criminal justice system crack and powder cocaine is treated different).

If you hire a consultant for that consultant to have value you want that consultant to analyze below the surface. Because only with that deeper understanding is actionable changes possible.

MGonz said:

xavier67 said:
3. The discipline data supports the ACLU findings that black students are suspended at a higher rate then white students at the High School.

The problem is that that is an easy conclusion to reach. But facile. A simple equation. A harder but more important question is why and how. Disparate punishment? Disparate charges for similar issues? Disparate punishment for equivalent offenses? (as in the criminal justice system crack and powder cocaine is treated different).
If you hire a consultant for that consultant to have value you want that consultant to analyze below the surface. Because only with that deeper understanding is actionable changes possible.

Bingo

Going through the presentation yet again (and geez, for $78k couldn't they/she get a site to host the reports so nobody had to sit through commercials every time they want to view it?) and I note the accusation that "segregation" appears to be happening in the schools- no supporting evidence cited. Just a very serious accusation. That's not exactly an unbiased look from a consultant coming in with an open mind.

Next, "the ACLU was right". Again, nothing. Just an assertion, which frankly sounds like an opinion. Minority students are suspended at a higher "rate". What rate? Per kid? Per incident?

If someone ends up not getting a job because the recommendations regarding hiring are followed it could be lawsuit city.

Would love to see the data that fed the presentation, and am surprised it wasn't made available somehow by Sage. Maybe it's in the BOE's possession, but it should be available to all. They have no internet presence and I see no contact number to request it.

Just to be fair , it is a preliminary report or really presentation. Hopefully there will be some more to it eventually. Am concerned by the unproven assertions and suppositions apparent in the presentation. That really must be challenged

mod said:
Just to be fair , it is a preliminary report or really presentation. Hopefully there will be some more to it eventually. Am concerned by the unproven assertions and suppositions apparent in the presentation. That really must be challenged

Mod, I understand your point, but is it preliminary? If it were, there would be no conclusions drawn..... You can't make recommendations based on preliminary data, especially not radical recommendations that will have a real impact on the district, not to mention people's lives.

I await a look at the underlying data and must admit my puzzlement grows as to why it's not available

Which of her recommendations do you consider "radical"?

xavier67 said:
Which of her recommendations do you consider "radical"?

Any suggestion of reworking of hiring criteria or curriculum without empirical data supporting it. I presume by your support you have access to it? I am very willing to be convinced. Please share whatever you have.

No, I don't have any more data than anyone else. Thanks for clarifying your position.

Jackson_Fusion said:

xavier67 said:
Which of her recommendations do you consider "radical"?

Any suggestion of reworking of hiring criteria or curriculum without empirical data supporting it. I presume by your support you have access to it? I am very willing to be convinced. Please share whatever you have.

What do you find convincing about the empirical data supporting current hiring criteria and curriculum?

DaveSchmidt said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

xavier67 said:
Which of her recommendations do you consider "radical"?

Any suggestion of reworking of hiring criteria or curriculum without empirical data supporting it. I presume by your support you have access to it? I am very willing to be convinced. Please share whatever you have.

What do you find convincing about the empirical data supporting current hiring criteria and curriculum?

I don't care about the data supporting the current hiring criteria and curriculum, Dave. You're conflating my support of action that is well supported and likely to be successful for defending the status quo. I never said I supported it, and the onus isn't on me to defend it.

The onus is on those supporting a certain course of action to support their assertions with fact. I know it feels right to grab onto any thin reed that supports one's beliefs but simply latching on to a "study" in hopes to give a sheen of fact to what is a gut opinion isn't good enough. Anyone who really cares about an issue would demand more than just something that seems to validate their feeling.

And so I'd ask you the same thing I asked Xavier.

Jackson_Fusion said:

DaveSchmidt said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

xavier67 said:
Which of her recommendations do you consider "radical"?

Any suggestion of reworking of hiring criteria or curriculum without empirical data supporting it. I presume by your support you have access to it? I am very willing to be convinced. Please share whatever you have.

What do you find convincing about the empirical data supporting current hiring criteria and curriculum?

I don't care about the data supporting the current hiring criteria and curriculum, Dave. You're conflating my support of action that is well supported and likely to be successful for defending the status quo. I never said I supported it, and the onus isn't on me to defend it.
The onus is on those supporting a certain course of action to support their assertions with fact. I know it feels right to grab onto any thin reed that supports one's beliefs but simply latching on to a "study" in hopes to give a sheen of fact to what is a gut opinion isn't good enough. Anyone who really cares about an issue would demand more than just something that seems to validate their feeling.
And so I'd ask you the same thing I asked Xavier.

It seems to me that requiring empirical support for change, while not requiring it for current conditions, is in effect supporting the status quo. Neither clears the data bar, so things stay the same. I can understand if people who are dissatisfied with the status quo -- whatever the case, not just this one -- bristle at demands that do-nothings aren't also expected to meet.

I'll add that, yes, ideally there would be data-driven options. But it sounds like such data in this case may be scarce, costly or both. So the question would become what we do without it.

DaveSchmidt said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

DaveSchmidt said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

xavier67 said:
Which of her recommendations do you consider "radical"?

Any suggestion of reworking of hiring criteria or curriculum without empirical data supporting it. I presume by your support you have access to it? I am very willing to be convinced. Please share whatever you have.

What do you find convincing about the empirical data supporting current hiring criteria and curriculum?

I don't care about the data supporting the current hiring criteria and curriculum, Dave. You're conflating my support of action that is well supported and likely to be successful for defending the status quo. I never said I supported it, and the onus isn't on me to defend it.
The onus is on those supporting a certain course of action to support their assertions with fact. I know it feels right to grab onto any thin reed that supports one's beliefs but simply latching on to a "study" in hopes to give a sheen of fact to what is a gut opinion isn't good enough. Anyone who really cares about an issue would demand more than just something that seems to validate their feeling.
And so I'd ask you the same thing I asked Xavier.

It seems to me that requiring empirical support for change, while not requiring it for current conditions, is in effect supporting the status quo. Neither clears the data bar, so things stay the same. I can understand if people who are dissatisfied with the status quo -- whatever the case, not just this one -- bristle at demands that do-nothings aren't also expected to meet.

There is, of course, tons of data regarding the success or failure of the M/SO school district. Pass rates, graduation rates, standardized testing rankings, etc.

Again, I am not the defender of the status quo. However, should one want to take the pulse of the schools, there is plenty with which one could do so.

DaveSchmidt said:
I'll add that, yes, ideally there would be data-driven options. But it sounds like such data in this case may be scarce, costly or both. So the question would become what we do without it.

Not as costly as re-working hiring and curriculum without solid evidence that it will improve matters, and with a clear vision of what the improvements should be.

In any case, I appreciate that you have no more information on this than myself or Xavier. Discussions what the district got for its $78,000 is perhaps for another day, but sufficient to say we could have gotten something. And hope springs eternal, so maybe we have, but it appears to this point we got nothing but a head count and a bag of opinions

For better or worse, there virtually always has to be stronger evidence for the benefit of a change than for keeping the status quo.

This does not in any way mean that I am endorsing the status quo. It's just a fact of life.

It is not just a matter of evidence to support change but what change? What policy changes will have the desired effects? We have had plenty of change without the benefit of strong data (IB). Where has this gotten us?

We can all agree on the numbers but why those numbers are what they are , is what we must answer. These answers are specific to our district and should drive policy changes that will have the desired effect

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."

attributed to Einstein

"The measure of intelligence is the ability to change."

Einstein