Riverside County African-American Performance

Shannon Wells, PhD

1

Cost of Dropout: AcademicEach day, 7 busses full of kids dropout in CA

• CA, estimated 1 out of 8 drop out before HS

• Benefit of effective dropout intervention– $392,000 for every HS

graduate

Riverside County, 3 busses each week

2

IMPORTANCE OF AFRICAN AMERICAN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

• Education is the civil rights issue of this time.

• Ongoing educational underachievement negatively impacts academic accountability and larger societal issues.

• The rigor of the CCCSS will result in a widening of the achievement gap if this issue is not addressed.

• To truly increase college and career readiness rates, we must address the performance of all underperforming students.

• It is a disadvantage to all if a significant group of Americans remains consistently under-educated.

3

4

“I am particularly concerned that our African-American students fall below national norms of student achievement and performance

measures….To support our belief that students are our future leaders, teachers, inventors, soldiers, doctors and so much more,

we need to readily address specific needs and provide appropriate support where needed. Changing California’s future for the better

begins with our students.”

-Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

Riverside County DemographicsRiverside County Enrollment Demographics

Hispanic or Latino

of Any Race

American Indian or

Alaska Native

Asian Pacific Islander Filipino African

American WhiteTwo or More Races

Not Reported Total

255,337 2,390 12,061 1,793 8,145 28,698 106,164 8,588 2,531 425,70760.0% 0.6% 2.8% 0.4% 1.9% 6.7% 24.9% 2.0% 0.6%

• “Testing” Subgroups:– 62.6% SED– 30.5% EL– 11.9% SWD

5

Riverside County AA Subgroup Makeup

• 17317 AA Students Tested in 2012– 63.7% SED– 0.9% EL– 16.4% SWD

6

WHAT PERCENTAGE OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS DOES EACH DISTRICT CONTRIBUTE TO THE COUNTY?

7

District African American %Moreno Valley Unified 6251 21.8%Riverside Unified 3372 11.7%Corona-Norco Unified 3336 11.6%Val Verde Unified 2754 9.6%Hemet Unified 1621 5.6%Palm Springs Unified 1288 4.5%Murrieta Valley Unified 1203 4.2%Temecula Valley Unified 1187 4.1%Lake Elsinore Unified 1078 3.8%Perris Union High 853 3.0%Alvord Unified 818 2.9%San Jacinto Unified 760 2.6%Desert Sands Unified 582 2.0%Menifee Union Elementary 558 1.9%Beaumont Unified 507 1.8%Jurupa Unified 501 1.7%RCOE 482 1.7%Perris Elementary 479 1.7%Banning Unified 423 1.5%Palo Verde Unified 270 0.9%Nuview Union 171 0.6%Romoland Elementary 130 0.5%California School For The Deaf 40 0.1%Coachella Valley Unified 34 0.1%Desert Center Unified 0 0.0%

828698 Total

WHAT PERCENT OF THE STUDENT POPULATION IS THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN SUBGROUP IN EACH DISTRICT?

9

10

District Total African American % of District

Moreno Valley Unified 35692 6251 17.5%Val Verde Unified 19615 2754 14.0%California School For The Deaf 385 40 10.4%Banning Unified 4503 423 9.4%Perris Elementary 5816 479 8.2%Perris Union High 10645 853 8.0%Riverside Unified 42406 3372 8.0%Palo Verde Unified 3486 270 7.7%San Jacinto Unified 9851 760 7.7%Hemet Unified 21977 1621 7.4%Nuview Union 2535 171 6.7%Corona-Norco Unified 53467 3336 6.2%RCOE 7796 482 6.2%Beaumont Unified 8660 507 5.9%Menifee Union Elementary 9784 558 5.7%Palm Springs Unified 23676 1288 5.4%Murrieta Valley Unified 22693 1203 5.3%Lake Elsinore Unified 22171 1078 4.9%Romoland Elementary 3032 130 4.3%Alvord Unified 19741 818 4.1%Temecula Valley Unified 30267 1187 3.9%Jurupa Unified 19884 501 2.5%Desert Sands Unified 29199 582 2.0%Coachella Valley Unified 18406 34 0.2%Desert Center Unified 20 0 0.0%

COMPARISON SUBGROUPS

11

12

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012500

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

950

1000

702724 732

746 748

668689

702715 718

Riverside County Comparison Subgroups for APIAP

I

13

Year 2008 Year 2009 Year 2010 Year 2011 Year 20120.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

41.6%

46.3%48.5%

51.4% 51.9%

29.2%

34.5%36.4%

39.2% 40.2%

Riverside County ELA AYP Comparison Subgroups%

Pro

f/Ad

v

14

Year 2008 Year 2009 Year 2010 Year 2011 Year 20120.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

39.9%

43.8% 44.6%47.8% 48.2%

38.8%

43.5%45.1%

48.5% 48.4%

Riverside County Math AYP Comparison Subgroups

RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICTS: ACHIEVEMENT GAP DATA

15

16

Menife

e Union El

emen

tary (

7%)

Lake E

lsinore

Unified (6

%)

Alvord Unified

(4%)

Banning U

nified (1

0%)

Corona-Norco

Unified (6

%)

Perris E

lemen

tary (

9%)

Beaumont U

nified (7

%)

Val Verd

e Unified

(14%)

Jurupa U

nified (3

%)

Temecu

la Vall

ey Unified

(4%)

Murrieta

Valley U

nified (5

%)

San Ja

cinto Unified

(8%)

Desert

Sands U

nified (2

%)

Riversi

de Unified

(8%)

Moreno Valle

y Unified

(18%)

Hemet

Unified (8

%)

Palm Sp

rings

Unified (6

%)

Perris U

nion High (8

%)

Palo Verd

e Unified

(8%)

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

828785 781

703

811722

768 774730

806 791706

789 761697 683 701 690

592

4648 52

53

53

55

68 7581

82 83

86

8894

102 116 118 119

146

874833 833

756

864

777

836 849811

888 874

792

877855

799 799 819 809

738

2012 Growth API Achievement Gap for the African American Subgroup

GapDistrict Subgroup ApiWhite Subgroup APIState Subgroup API

Note* Only districts with a numerically significant number of students within the listed subgroup are included. Chart is sorted from lowest achievement gap, to largest, with the White subgroup's API at the top.

API

17

Alvord Unified

(4%)

Banning U

nified (1

0%)

Lake E

lsinore

Unified (6

%)

Corona-Norco

Unified (6

%)

Menife

e Union El

emen

tary (

7%)

Jurupa U

nified (3

%)

Perris E

lemen

tary (

9%)

Beaumont U

nified (7

%)

Val Verd

e Unified

(14%)

Desert

Sands U

nified (2

%)

Murrieta

Valley U

nified (5

%)

Temecu

la Vall

ey Unified

(4%)

San Ja

cinto Unified

(8%)

Riversi

de Unified

(8%)

Moreno Valle

y Unified

(18%)

Palm Sp

rings

Unified (6

%)

Hemet

Unified (8

%)

Perris U

nion High (8

%)

Palo Verd

e Unified

(8%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

56.345.8

60.3 65.6 62.250

37.8

57.4 55.9 58.7 59.365.2

40

55.542.2 42.5 38.6 39

17.3

8.7

9.8

9.9000000000000110.3

10.9

12.9

12.9

13 16.117.2 17.4

17.6

18.3

18.5

20 21.923

28.3

33.9

65

55.6

70.275.9

73.1

62.9

50.7

70.4 7275.9 76.7

82.8

58.3

74

62.2 64.461.6

67.3

51.2

AYP ELA Achievement Gap for the African American Subgroup as Compared to the White Subgroup 2012

GapDistrict Subgroup RateWhite SubgroupState Subgroup Rate

*Note: Only districts with a numerically significant number of students within the listed subgroup are included. Chart is sorted from lowest achievement gap to greatest, with the white subgroup's % prof/adv at the top of each column.

AYP

% P

rof/

Adv

18

Perris E

lemen

tary (

9%)

Lake E

lsinore

Unified (6

%)

Banning U

nified (1

0%)

Corona-Norco

Unified (6

%)

Menife

e Union El

emen

tary (

7%)

Beaumont U

nified (7

%)

Alvord Unified

(4%)

Desert

Sands U

nified (2

%)

Temecu

la Vall

ey Unified

(4%)

San Ja

cinto Unified

(8%)

Val Verd

e Unified

(14%)

Riversi

de Unified

(8%)

Murrieta

Valley U

nified (5

%)

Palm Sp

rings

Unified (6

%)

Jurupa U

nified (3

%)

Moreno Valle

y Unified

(18%)

Hemet

Unified (8

%)

Perris U

nion High (8

%)

Palo Verd

e Unified

(8%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4757.4

47.559.6 57.8 53.3 52

61.2 59.9

43.355.7 52.8 54.5

43.9 45.235.9 33.8 32.7

24.7

9.6

10.8

11.7

12.2 13.716 16.4

16.9 17.2

17.9

18.3 19.4 20.1

20.2 20.7

23.4 26 29.4

31.3

56.668.2

59.2

71.8 71.5 69.3 68.4

78.1 77.1

61.2

74 72.2 74.6

64.1 65.959.3 59.8 62.1

56

AYP Math Achievement Gap for the African American Subgroup as Compared to the White Subgroup 2012

GapDistrict Subgroup RateWhite SubgroupState Subgroup Rate

*Note: Only districts with a numerically significant number of students within the listed subgroup are included. Chart is sorted from lowest achievement gap to greatest, with the white subgroup's % prof/adv at the top of each column.

AYP

% P

rof/

Adv

DISSECTING AA PERFORMANCE

19

20

White Ove

rall

AA Female

non-SED

AA Non-SED

AA Male

Non-SED

AA Female

AA Over

all

AA Female

SED

AA Male

AA SED

AA Male

SED

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

850828

802777 775

748 743722 716

691

Riverside County AA Performance on API on 2012 Growth API

21

White Ove

rall

AA Female

non-SED

AA Non-SED

AA Female

AA Male

Non-SED

AA Over

all

AA Female

SED

AA Male

AA SED

AA Male

SED

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

72.8% 72.2%

63.8%

58.5%55.6%

51.1% 50.7%

44.3% 44.1%

38.2%

Riverside County AA Performance AYP ELA

22

White Ove

rall

AA Female

non-SED

AA Non-SED

AA Male

Non-SED

AA Female

AA Over

all

AA Male

AA Female

SED

AA SED

AA Male

SED

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

70.0%

62.2%

58.2%54.4%

50.7%47.4%

44.3% 44.3%41.5%

38.8%

Riverside County AA Performance AYP Math

IT’S BEING DONE: A LOOK AT SUCCESSFUL MODELS

24

HOW MANY EXAMPLES DO WE HAVE TO SEE OF HIGH POVERTY, HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS BEFORE WE

BELIEVE THAT ALL STUDENTS CAN ACHIEVE?

25

“We can, whenever, and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of

interest to us. We already know more than we need to do that. Whether or not we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we

haven’t so far.”

-Ronald EdmondsHarvard University

DEMOGRAPHICS DATA (2012 Growth)•20% African American•79% Hispanic or Latino•1% Pacific Islander•92% SED

•API • Overall- 919• African American- 913

•AYP (ELA)• Overall- 77.5%• African American- 78.6%

•AYP (Math)• Overall- 89.9%• African American- 82.1%

26

LAUREL STREET ELEMENTARYCOMPTON, CALIFORNIA

KEY STRATEGIES FOR AFRICAN AMERICAN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

NEXT STEPS

WHAT NEXT STEPS SHOULD BE TAKEN AT THE DISTRICT AND COUNTY LEVELS TO INCREASE THE ACHIEVEMENT OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS?

Be prepared to share one item from your table discussion.

Questions?Shannon@KeyDataSys.com

29