The Lakota 2013 Report Card: More excuses from Superintendent Mantia
After reading the recent report card with explanations from the Lakota school district it instantly reminded me of a kid who had been goofing off that was expected to get straight “A’s” who needed to pad the results with explanations to justify too many “B’s” and a “C” in the outcome. Like the unwitting teenagers they instruct, Lakota blamed their bad grades on the conditions the grades were formulated. A teenage student might declare that their grades would have been better if only they had more time to study, or had better tools to study with. Lakota, as a district declared that they could have done better, especially in performance if voters would have just passed their last levy. Superintendent Mantia in a report seen below did exactly that blaming the poor grade in “performance” on having to make budget reductions. Here’s what she said, “Our performance index went down after years of increases. The performance index measures the achievement of all students regardless of their level of proficiency. That’s one sign that the budget reductions we’ve had to make are affecting all students.”
No wonder with that attitude the report card came in with much lower grades than was expected. Lakota plans to get “A’s” by throwing money at the teachers so that they can have more “resources” to teach children. If Lakota dosen’t have the money they plan to do just as they’ve shown here, let their letter grade drop so to motivate their parents into buying them “better books,” a new computer, and other resources so that the student can get an “A.” Rather than attack the cultural aspects of the letter grade as a student might buckle down to improve, Mantia immediately relegates her terminology toward the unsaid implications of the 2013 levy attempt which intends to raise taxes to throw money at their teacher base with an upcoming contract in 2014. Mantia said a lot of things in her released statement on the report card for Lakota. Her full report can be seen below:
A Letter from Superintendent Dr. Karen Mantia
Ohio’s New School District Report Cards
Report cards on the first day of school. It was just coincidence, but the Ohio Department of Education released its new school district report card Thursday, just as we were welcoming students back to school.
The report card is for the 2012-13 school year, the one that ended last spring. It’s completely different than the old report cards, where districts were rated “Excellent, Effective,” etc. Now, we get letter grades, A to F, just like students’ report cards.
In case you haven’t seen it yet, here’s what Lakota’s report card looks like:
Standards met
Performance index
Overall Value-Added
Gifted Value-Added
Disabled Value-Added
Lowest 20% Value-Added
Annual Measurable Objectives
4-year graduate rate 2012
5-year graduate rate 2011
A
B
A
A
B
B
C
A
BWe could write whole chapters, whole books even, explaining all those categories and measurements, but we are still working on going over the data ourselves and preparing information we can share with parents and residents to help explain it all. But here’s some information straight from the Ohio Dept. of Education that offers an overview of the report card categories.
I’m pleased, of course, that our students met 100 percent of the state indicators. That’s what the first line, “Standards met,” refers to. That was the major component of the old report card system, the 24 standardized tests that are specific to a grade level and subject. I’m also pleased at our “A” in overall value-added, a measurement of how much progress all our students are making in a year.
But there are areas of concern, as well, and I’ve been talking about them for some time now. We track trend data internally all the time, so by the time the report card comes out there shouldn’t be any big surprises in it, and there weren’t. Our performance index went down after years of increases. The performance index measures the achievement of all students regardless of their level of proficiency. That’s one sign that the budget reductions we’ve had to make are affecting all students.
The one “C” on our report card is also a concern. That grade is for “annual measurable objectives.” You’ll also hear it called “gap closing.” It’s new with this report card, and measures achievement gaps between all students and student subgroups. We have no problem being accountable for the learning and progress of every student in our schools. So we need to do even more in that area.
It will require focused, increased resources in these high priority learning areas. We must ensure the district can continue to maintain its strengths in programming and instructional approach so that we can serve all students. Certainly no one test, letter grade, or rating captures the learning of thousands of students, but it does offer an overview of where we’re doing well and where we can do better.
Dr. Karen Mantia
Superintendent
Lakota Local School District
Spoken like a true levy addict. When Mantia says, “increased resources in these high priority learning areas” she means that Lakota needs a levy passage so that she can lead her school district to improved grades. It is equivalent to the teenage student who tells their parents that if they received a new computer, they’d have a better time at their studies and their grades would improve. Of course everyone outside the school knows better than that. They know that hard work and determination are what will improve those test scores—and leadership starting with Mantia. But, when students see that the head of their school is blaming the mediocre report card grades on lost resources due to levy failures, then they will use the same excuse on their own report cards. Education starts from the top, and Mantia just taught all of Lakota how to use excuses when the results are not favorable. That is the reason for the poor “performance.” It has nothing to do with money—but everything to do with attitude.
When Lakota had the previous grading system they essentially gained their Excellent with Distinction rating the way a mediocre student typically got an “A” in their class, by sucking up and becoming a teacher’s pet. Excellent with Distinction rankings were mostly issued on the bases of political ass kissing, more than actual measured results. This new system driven by public demanding actual measurements makes that ass kissing much more difficult—which it should be. It will take more than money to improve the grades at Lakota. It takes leadership from the top, and based on Mantia’s comments, that leadership is not there. She intends to fail if the levy doesn’t pass in 2013. If Lakota gets the money, she will pull whatever political strings she needs to in order to improve those grades in the future. But if Lakota does not pass her levy, she has already planted the seeds that failure will continue. They will continue because as a former teacher, she is aligned with her labor, and has their interests first, and she is making excuses for them which sends the message that the criteria for success is less about hard work, and more about getting what you want out of the deal. Students are watching, and they know what everyone else knows, that the carefully worded statement from Lakota’s superintendent is simply a fancy way to demand more financial resources. And that is not the way to lead an institution of any kind to improvements. It becomes clear quickly why Lakota is dropping in their rating, and it has nothing to do with money—but everything to do with the leadership. If Mantia wants to know why she received four “B’s” and one “C” on the Lakota report card she only has to look to one place—the mirror.
Rich Hoffman
Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!
