SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 46
City Study
2021:
FORT WORTH
Table of Contents
0 1 R E PORT OVE R VIE W
• About The City Studies Project
• Sectors of Schools
• Research Question and Analyses
• Measure of Academic Performance
Student Subgroup Analysis
Summary of Findings
0 3 APPE N DIX E S
• Acknowledgments
• Types of Charter Schools
• Methods
• Days of Learning
• Full Set of Findings
0 2 R E SE AR CH
F IN DIN G S
• Reading & Math
Overall Fort Worth Results
Sector Analysis
• vs. state & comparison
within Fort Worth
Charter Subsector Analysis
• Reading
• Math
School-Level Performance by Sector
Research Findings Cont’d.
Black Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
Hispanic Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
Students in Poverty
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
ELL Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
Special Ed Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
Male Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
Female Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Fort Worth
• Reading
• Math
REPORT OVERVIEW
01
About The City Studies Project
Cohort 1 Cohort 2
The City Studies project examines the performance of schools in select U.S. cities,
including Fort Worth. We study the academic progress of students as the measure of
school performance.
O
O
C
C
C
CHARTER SCHOOLS
Public schools operated independently from the
traditional school district, with autonomy in adapting
school designs and held accountable for education
results.
Charter Management Organizations (CMOs)
Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of at least three charter schools.
Independent Charter Schools
Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of a single or two charter schools.
There are only two independent charter schools with student
growth scores in Fort Worth during the span of this study; we
redact the results for this type due to the small number of the
schools.
SELECTIVE MAGNET SCHOOLS
District-run schools with focused themes and
academically selective admission.
There are no selective magnet schools in Fort Worth
during the span of this study.
OTHER DISTRICT-RUN SCHOOLS
Public schools not belonging to any of above two types.
C
Sectors of Schools
COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE UP TO THREE SECTORS OF SCHOOLS
Research Question and Analyses
IN THIS REPORT WE EXAMINE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN Fort
Worth USING DATA FROM THE SCHOOL YEARS 2014-15
THROUGH 2017-18. THERE ARE THREE LEVELS OF ANALYSIS.
Overall performance in
Fort Worth schools over
three years.
• The performance of Fort Worth
students is benchmarked against the
state average performance,
accounting for student
characteristics.
• The performance of charter school
students within Fort Worth are then
compared to that of similar
traditional public school (district
school) students within Fort Worth.
Performance for Fort
Worth charter schools
and the other Public
schools in Fort Worth
over three years.
Performance in the 2017-
2018 school year by
school type, race,
poverty status, English
language learner (ELL)
status, special
education status and
gender.
WE MAKE TWO SETS
OF COMPARISONS.
01 02 03
Achievement scores capture what a student knows at a point
in time. They are influenced by students’ prior conditions in
addition to schools’ contributions.
Growth scores indicate how much progress a student makes
from one year to the next. Growth scores allow us to zero in
on the contributions of schools separately from other factors
that affect point-in-time scores.
ACHIEVEMENT VS. GROWTH
We analyze student growth in standard deviation units so
that the results can be assessed for statistical differences.
The full set of findings appear in the Appendix.
In the following graphs of findings, we transform growth
from standard deviation units into days of learning based on
a typical 180-day school year.
IN THIS STUDY WE MEASURE
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AS HOW
MUCH GROWTH STUDENTS MAKE FROM
ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT
Measure of Academic Performance
RESEARCH FINDINGS
02
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Overall Fort Worth Results
> Reading & Math
Average One-Year Learning Gains for All Fort Worth
Students Compared to the State Average Learning
Gains, by Year and Subject
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains in Reading for Students in Fort Worth
Charter Schools and Fort Worth District Schools
Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year
significantly different at p< 0.05
charter
Research Findings > Sector Analysis
> Reading
VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
charter district
Reading
Charter vs. District
'15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18
Tests of Differences
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains in Math for Students in Fort Worth
Charter Schools and Fort Worth District Schools
Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year
significantly different at p< 0.05
charter district
Research Findings > Sector Analysis
> Math
VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Math
Charter vs. District
Tests of Differences
'15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
CMO Charter Schools Independent Charter Schools
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Relative Learning Gains for Students in Fort Worth
CMO-Affiliated Charter Schools and Independent Fort
Worth Charter Schools Compared to the State Average
Learning Gains, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Charter Subsector Analysis
> vs. state & comparison within Fort Worth
§ Redacted because of a very small number of independent charter schools
involved in the analysis.
Tests of Differences
Reading sig
CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools §
Math
CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools §
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
Growth (in Days of Learning)
Charter
District
Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector
> Reading
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
Growth (in Days of Learning)
Charter
District
Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector
>Math
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Black Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Black Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Black Students
ALL VS. STATE
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Charter
Black Students
Fort Worth District
Black Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Black Students in Fort Worth Charter
Schools and Black Students in Fort Worth District
Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Black Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Black Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter Black vs. District Black
Math
Charter Black vs. District Black
Tests of Differences
sig
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Hispanic Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Hispanic Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Hispanic Students
ALL VS. STATE
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Charter
Hispanic Students
Fort Worth District
Hispanic Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Hispanic Students in Fort Worth Charter
Schools and Hispanic Students in Fort Worth District
Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Hispanic Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Hispanic Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Math
Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Tests of Differences
sig
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Students in Poverty
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Students in Poverty
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students
in Poverty Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Students in Poverty
ALL VS. STATE
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Charter
Students in Poverty
Fort Worth District
Students in Poverty
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Fort Worth Charter School Students
in Poverty and Fort Worth District School Students in
Poverty Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Students in Poverty Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Students in Poverty
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty
Math
Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty
Tests of Differences
sig
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth ELL Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All ELL Students in Fort Worth
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> ELL Students
ALL VS. STATE
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Charter
ELL Students
Fort Worth District
ELL Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for ELL Students in Fort Worth
Charter Schools and ELL Students in Fort Worth
District Schools Compared to the Average Learning
Gains of ELL Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> ELL Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter ELL vs. District ELL
Math
Charter ELL vs. District ELL
Tests of Differences
sig
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
Fort Worth Special Ed Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Students in Special
Education Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Students in Special Education Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Special Ed Students
ALL VS. STATE
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
Fort Worth Charter
Students in Special Ed.
Fort Worth District
Students in Special Ed.
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Fort Worth Charter School
Students in Special Ed. and Fort Worth District School
Students in Special Ed. Compared to the Average
Learning Gains of Students in Special Ed. Statewide,
by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Special Ed Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter Sped vs. District Sped
Math
Charter Sped vs. District Sped
Tests of Differences
sig
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Male Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Male Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Male Students
ALL VS. STATE
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Charter
Male Students
Fort Worth District
Male Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Male Students in Fort Worth
Charter Schools and Male Students in Fort Worth
District Schools Compared to the Average Learning
Gains of Male Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Male Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter Male vs. District Male
Math
Charter Male vs. District Male
Tests of Differences
sig
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Female Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Female Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Female Students
ALL VS. STATE
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
Fort Worth Charter
Female Students
Fort Worth District
Female Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Female Students in Fort Worth Charter
Schools and Female Students in Fort Worth District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Female Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH
Reading
Charter Female vs. District Female
Math
Charter Female vs. District Female
Tests of Differences
sig
Summary of Findings
The summary of the findings from the analysis of Fort Worth schools is presented here.
APPENDIXES
03
Acknowledgments
Texas Education Agency,
Texas Schools Project, and
Texas Higher Education
Advisory Board provided
supports in the acquisition of
student-level data.
Fort Worth Education Partnership
assisted CREDO with verifying the list
of public schools in Fort Worth.
Disclaimer: The conclusions of this research do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official position of the Texas
Education Agency, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, the Texas Workforce Commission or the State of
Texas.
Types of Charter Schools
• With more schools and students than a single charter
school, CMOs have some operational advantages in their
ability to spread administrative fixed costs, thus
providing the possibility of greater efficiency. In
addition, CMOs may be able to support additional
programs and more robust staffing.
• Whether CMOs lead to better student outcomes is a
matter of interest across the country.
• There are only two independent charter schools with
student growth scores in Fort Worth during the span of
this study; we redact the results for this type due to the
small number of the schools.
OUR ANALYSES OF FORT WORTH
CHARTER SCHOOLS INCLUDE A
BREAKOUT OF CMOS AND
INDEPENDENT CHARTERS.
There are two types
of charter schools.
CHARTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS (CMOS)
Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of at least three charter schools.
INDEPENDENT CHARTER SCHOOLS
Organization holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of a single charter school. It may run the school
directly or contract with an organization which provides
services to one or two charter schools.
Methods
The annual academic growth of students in Fort Worth from
2014-15 to 2017-18, overall and by sector, is benchmarked to
the state average growth, accounting for student
characteristics.
We also explore how one-year growth of Fort Worth students
for the period ending in Spring 2018 differs by school type,
race, poverty status, English language learner status, special
education status, and gender.
Days of Learning
While these tools create precise and reliable answers,
they are presented in technical terms that are not
user-friendly to a general audience. To translate the
technical results into terms that are accessible to non-
technical audiences, CREDO developed Days of
Learning.
CREDO USES ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY AND
SOPHISTICATED STATISTICAL
TOOLS TO MEASURE STUDENTS,
SCHOOLS AND THE EDUCATION
LANDSCAPE.
Think about the students in your state’s public schools. For many of their years
of schooling, they take achievement tests to measure what they know at the end of
the school year. We can identify the average score for each test each year.
Imagine a student who scores exactly at the average in one year, say 4th
grade, and then in the following year, scores exactly at the average again on the 5th-
grade test. The amount of year-to-year learning for that student show us what the
average learning is for all the students who took both tests.
We do that calculation for every grade the state tests: 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th,
and so on.
CREDO uses those annual measures of average learning to represent a typical
year of learning, and equates that to a typical 180-day school year. We say that the
student in our example has gained 180 days of learning.
If a student makes more progress than the average student, we take the
amount of extra achievement and translate it into 180-days of learning plus “X” extra
days. We are creating a measure of student learning as if the student went to school
for 180 days plus X days. The size of “X” depends on how much more the student
learns than the average student — if it’s a lot more, then “X” will be a large number,
and if it’s a small amount more, “X” will be a small number.
The same is true for students who do not learn as much as the average
student. Instead of adding to the 180-days-of-learning average, we subtract from
that base to reflect the smaller-than-average advances that those students realize. In
these cases, the difference leads to numbers such a “165 days of learning” or “152
days of learning”. Against the average standard of 180 days, these smaller days show
that students learned as if they had only attended school for 180 days minus X days
during the school year.
01
02
03
04
05
06
3rd
Grade
4th
Grade
= 180
days
More than 180
days
Less than 180
days
Student
A
Student
A
Overall Fort Worth Results
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
F o r t W o r t h O v e r a l l 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 -0.04** -25** -0.06** -36**
F o r t W o r t h O v e r a l l 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.05** 27** 0.04* 21*
F o r t W o r t h O v e r a l l 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 -0.01 -4 -0.01 -7
Fort Worth School Sectors Compared
to State Average
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.04 24 0.01 7
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.06* 36* 0.05 26
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.01 3 -0.05 -27
D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 -0.05** -27** -0.06** -38**
D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.05** 26** 0.04* 21*
D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 -0.01 -5 -0.01 -6
Comparison of School Sectors within Fort Worth
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.09** 51** 0.08 44
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.02 10 0.01 5
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.01 7 -0.04 -22
Charter Subsector Analysis
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
F o r t W o r t h C M O s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.00 0 -0.05 -32
F o r t W o r t h I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e § - - - -
F o r t W o r t h C M O s v s . F o r t W o r t h I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s § - - - -
§ R e d a c t e d b e c a u s e t o o s m a l l n u m b e r o f F o r t W o r t h i n d e p e n d e n t c h a r t e r s c h o o l s a r e i n v o l v e d i n t h e e s t i m a t i o n .
Student Subgroup Analysis> Black Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Black Students
F o r t W o r t h B l a c k S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.03* -20* -0.01 -6
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s -0.03 -16 -0.07 -44
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s -0.03* -20* 0.00 -3
Compared with Black Students in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.01 3 -0.07 -42
Student Subgroup Analysis> Hispanic Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Hispanic Students
F o r t W o r t h H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.01 2 -0.01 -5
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.01 5 -0.07 -44
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.01 2 0.00 -2
Compared with Hispanic Students in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.00 2 -0.07 -42
Student Subgroup Analysis> Students in Poverty
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Students in Poverty
F o r t W o r t h S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y O v e r a l l 0.00 1 0.00 -2
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.01 5 -0.06 -36
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.00 0 0.00 1
Compared with Students in Poverty in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.01 5 -0.06 -37
Student Subgroup Analysis> ELL Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of ELL Students
F o r t W o r t h E L L S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.04** 21** 0.00 1
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.01 2 -0.09 -56
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.04** 21** 0.01 4
Compared with ELL Students in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s -0.03 -19 -0.10 -60
Student Subgroup Analysis> Special Ed Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Special Ed Students
F o r t W o r t h S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.01 -3 0.01 6
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.11 66 0.09 52
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s -0.01 -6 0.01 4
Compared with Special Ed Students in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.12 71 0.08 47
Student Subgroup Analysis> Male Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Male Students
F o r t W o r t h M a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.00 -3 -0.01 -7
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.01 8 -0.03 -18
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s -0.01 -3 -0.01 -6
Compared with Male Students in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.02 11 -0.02 -13
Student Subgroup Analysis> Female Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Female Students
F o r t W o r t h F e m a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.01 -5 -0.01 -8
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.00 -1 -0.06 -35
F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s -0.01 -5 -0.01 -6
Compared with Female Students in District Schools in
Fort Worth
F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.01 4 -0.05 -29
THANK YOU

More Related Content

What's hot

Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010WSU Cougars
 
State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015txprincipalorg
 
Misleadinggraphs
MisleadinggraphsMisleadinggraphs
Misleadinggraphscaliprando
 
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MAFranklin Matters
 
Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16Young Lives Oxford
 
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test PerformancePredicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test PerformanceNWEA
 
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumsptonEd6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumsptonAlana Cumpston
 
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...NWEA
 
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)justthefactswinnetka
 

What's hot (20)

St. Louis, MO 2019 - City Study
St. Louis, MO 2019 - City StudySt. Louis, MO 2019 - City Study
St. Louis, MO 2019 - City Study
 
Camden NJ 2019 - City Study
Camden NJ 2019 - City StudyCamden NJ 2019 - City Study
Camden NJ 2019 - City Study
 
New Orleans, LA 2019 - City Study
New Orleans, LA 2019 - City StudyNew Orleans, LA 2019 - City Study
New Orleans, LA 2019 - City Study
 
Memphis, TN 2019 - City Study
Memphis, TN 2019 - City StudyMemphis, TN 2019 - City Study
Memphis, TN 2019 - City Study
 
Washington DC 2019 - City Study
Washington DC 2019 - City StudyWashington DC 2019 - City Study
Washington DC 2019 - City Study
 
Baton Rouge LA 2019 - City Study
Baton Rouge LA 2019 - City StudyBaton Rouge LA 2019 - City Study
Baton Rouge LA 2019 - City Study
 
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
 
School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125
School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125
School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125
 
State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015
 
Misleadinggraphs
MisleadinggraphsMisleadinggraphs
Misleadinggraphs
 
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
 
Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16
 
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test PerformancePredicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
 
Rfw ppt 4.12.18 comp
Rfw ppt 4.12.18 compRfw ppt 4.12.18 comp
Rfw ppt 4.12.18 comp
 
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumsptonEd6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
 
Student Debt: Myths and Facts
Student Debt: Myths and FactsStudent Debt: Myths and Facts
Student Debt: Myths and Facts
 
Private Colleges and STEM: Myths and Facts
Private Colleges and STEM: Myths and FactsPrivate Colleges and STEM: Myths and Facts
Private Colleges and STEM: Myths and Facts
 
10 20-2014 tamsa-overview
10 20-2014 tamsa-overview10 20-2014 tamsa-overview
10 20-2014 tamsa-overview
 
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
 
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
 

Similar to Fort Worth, TX 2021

Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 PresentationWyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 PresentationJay Harnack
 
A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance Post...
A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance  Post...A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance  Post...
A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance Post...The Opportunity Trust
 

Similar to Fort Worth, TX 2021 (20)

2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study
2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study
2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study
 
New Orleans
New OrleansNew Orleans
New Orleans
 
St_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
St_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdfSt_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
St_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
 
2022 Houston Chart School City Study
2022 Houston Chart School City Study2022 Houston Chart School City Study
2022 Houston Chart School City Study
 
batonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
batonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdfbatonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
batonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
 
San Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDO
San Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDOSan Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDO
San Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDO
 
2022 Austin Chart School City Study
2022 Austin Chart School City Study2022 Austin Chart School City Study
2022 Austin Chart School City Study
 
Camden, NJ
Camden, NJCamden, NJ
Camden, NJ
 
memphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
memphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdfmemphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
memphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
 
Denver, CO 2022 - City Study
Denver, CO 2022 - City StudyDenver, CO 2022 - City Study
Denver, CO 2022 - City Study
 
2022 Newark Chart School City Study
2022 Newark Chart School City Study2022 Newark Chart School City Study
2022 Newark Chart School City Study
 
Indianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdf
Indianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdfIndianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdf
Indianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdf
 
Kansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
Kansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdfKansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
Kansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
 
Washington DC. City Study 2022
Washington DC. City Study 2022Washington DC. City Study 2022
Washington DC. City Study 2022
 
DC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdf
DC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdfDC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdf
DC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdf
 
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 PresentationWyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
 
Sat application trends for ivy league schools
Sat application trends for ivy league schoolsSat application trends for ivy league schools
Sat application trends for ivy league schools
 
School Grades Webinar
School Grades Webinar School Grades Webinar
School Grades Webinar
 
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
 
A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance Post...
A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance  Post...A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance  Post...
A First Look at Trends and Bright Spots in St. Louis School Performance Post...
 

Recently uploaded

Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptxOrganic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptxVS Mahajan Coaching Centre
 
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory InspectionMastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory InspectionSafetyChain Software
 
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdfEnzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdfSumit Tiwari
 
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...EduSkills OECD
 
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Science 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its Characteristics
Science 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its CharacteristicsScience 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its Characteristics
Science 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its CharacteristicsKarinaGenton
 
microwave assisted reaction. General introduction
microwave assisted reaction. General introductionmicrowave assisted reaction. General introduction
microwave assisted reaction. General introductionMaksud Ahmed
 
Class 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdf
Class 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdfClass 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdf
Class 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdfakmcokerachita
 
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher EducationIntroduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Educationpboyjonauth
 
Alper Gobel In Media Res Media Component
Alper Gobel In Media Res Media ComponentAlper Gobel In Media Res Media Component
Alper Gobel In Media Res Media ComponentInMediaRes1
 
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesSeparation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesFatimaKhan178732
 
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application )
Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  ) Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  )
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application ) Sakshi Ghasle
 
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxThe basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxheathfieldcps1
 
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxHow to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxmanuelaromero2013
 
CARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptx
CARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptxCARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptx
CARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptxGaneshChakor2
 
URLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website App
URLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website AppURLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website App
URLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website AppCeline George
 
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy ReformA Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy ReformChameera Dedduwage
 
Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)
Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)
Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)eniolaolutunde
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptxOrganic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
 
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory InspectionMastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
 
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdfEnzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
 
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
 
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
 
Science 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its Characteristics
Science 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its CharacteristicsScience 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its Characteristics
Science 7 - LAND and SEA BREEZE and its Characteristics
 
Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1
Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1
Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1
 
microwave assisted reaction. General introduction
microwave assisted reaction. General introductionmicrowave assisted reaction. General introduction
microwave assisted reaction. General introduction
 
Class 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdf
Class 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdfClass 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdf
Class 11 Legal Studies Ch-1 Concept of State .pdf
 
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher EducationIntroduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
 
Alper Gobel In Media Res Media Component
Alper Gobel In Media Res Media ComponentAlper Gobel In Media Res Media Component
Alper Gobel In Media Res Media Component
 
TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdfTataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
 
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesSeparation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
 
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application )
Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  ) Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  )
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application )
 
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxThe basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
 
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxHow to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
 
CARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptx
CARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptxCARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptx
CARE OF CHILD IN INCUBATOR..........pptx
 
URLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website App
URLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website AppURLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website App
URLs and Routing in the Odoo 17 Website App
 
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy ReformA Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
 
Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)
Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)
Software Engineering Methodologies (overview)
 

Fort Worth, TX 2021

  • 2. Table of Contents 0 1 R E PORT OVE R VIE W • About The City Studies Project • Sectors of Schools • Research Question and Analyses • Measure of Academic Performance Student Subgroup Analysis Summary of Findings 0 3 APPE N DIX E S • Acknowledgments • Types of Charter Schools • Methods • Days of Learning • Full Set of Findings 0 2 R E SE AR CH F IN DIN G S • Reading & Math Overall Fort Worth Results Sector Analysis • vs. state & comparison within Fort Worth Charter Subsector Analysis • Reading • Math School-Level Performance by Sector Research Findings Cont’d. Black Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth Hispanic Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth Students in Poverty • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth ELL Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth Special Ed Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth Male Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth Female Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Fort Worth • Reading • Math
  • 4. About The City Studies Project Cohort 1 Cohort 2 The City Studies project examines the performance of schools in select U.S. cities, including Fort Worth. We study the academic progress of students as the measure of school performance.
  • 5. O O C C C CHARTER SCHOOLS Public schools operated independently from the traditional school district, with autonomy in adapting school designs and held accountable for education results. Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the operation of at least three charter schools. Independent Charter Schools Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the operation of a single or two charter schools. There are only two independent charter schools with student growth scores in Fort Worth during the span of this study; we redact the results for this type due to the small number of the schools. SELECTIVE MAGNET SCHOOLS District-run schools with focused themes and academically selective admission. There are no selective magnet schools in Fort Worth during the span of this study. OTHER DISTRICT-RUN SCHOOLS Public schools not belonging to any of above two types. C Sectors of Schools COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE UP TO THREE SECTORS OF SCHOOLS
  • 6. Research Question and Analyses IN THIS REPORT WE EXAMINE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN Fort Worth USING DATA FROM THE SCHOOL YEARS 2014-15 THROUGH 2017-18. THERE ARE THREE LEVELS OF ANALYSIS. Overall performance in Fort Worth schools over three years. • The performance of Fort Worth students is benchmarked against the state average performance, accounting for student characteristics. • The performance of charter school students within Fort Worth are then compared to that of similar traditional public school (district school) students within Fort Worth. Performance for Fort Worth charter schools and the other Public schools in Fort Worth over three years. Performance in the 2017- 2018 school year by school type, race, poverty status, English language learner (ELL) status, special education status and gender. WE MAKE TWO SETS OF COMPARISONS. 01 02 03
  • 7. Achievement scores capture what a student knows at a point in time. They are influenced by students’ prior conditions in addition to schools’ contributions. Growth scores indicate how much progress a student makes from one year to the next. Growth scores allow us to zero in on the contributions of schools separately from other factors that affect point-in-time scores. ACHIEVEMENT VS. GROWTH We analyze student growth in standard deviation units so that the results can be assessed for statistical differences. The full set of findings appear in the Appendix. In the following graphs of findings, we transform growth from standard deviation units into days of learning based on a typical 180-day school year. IN THIS STUDY WE MEASURE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AS HOW MUCH GROWTH STUDENTS MAKE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT Measure of Academic Performance
  • 9. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018 Growth (in Days of Learning) significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Overall Fort Worth Results > Reading & Math Average One-Year Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Students Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year and Subject
  • 10. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018 Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains in Reading for Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year significantly different at p< 0.05 charter Research Findings > Sector Analysis > Reading VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH charter district Reading Charter vs. District '15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18 Tests of Differences
  • 11. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018 Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains in Math for Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year significantly different at p< 0.05 charter district Research Findings > Sector Analysis > Math VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Math Charter vs. District Tests of Differences '15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18
  • 12. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 CMO Charter Schools Independent Charter Schools Growth (in Days of Learning) Relative Learning Gains for Students in Fort Worth CMO-Affiliated Charter Schools and Independent Fort Worth Charter Schools Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Charter Subsector Analysis > vs. state & comparison within Fort Worth § Redacted because of a very small number of independent charter schools involved in the analysis. Tests of Differences Reading sig CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools § Math CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools §
  • 13. -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 Growth (in Days of Learning) Charter District Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector > Reading
  • 14. -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 Growth (in Days of Learning) Charter District Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector >Math
  • 15. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Black Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Black Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Black Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 16. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Charter Black Students Fort Worth District Black Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Black Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and Black Students in Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Black Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter Black vs. District Black Math Charter Black vs. District Black Tests of Differences sig
  • 17. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Hispanic Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Hispanic Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Hispanic Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 18. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Charter Hispanic Students Fort Worth District Hispanic Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Hispanic Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and Hispanic Students in Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Hispanic Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic Math Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic Tests of Differences sig
  • 19. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Students in Poverty Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Students in Poverty Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Poverty Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Students in Poverty ALL VS. STATE
  • 20. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Charter Students in Poverty Fort Worth District Students in Poverty Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Fort Worth Charter School Students in Poverty and Fort Worth District School Students in Poverty Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Poverty Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Students in Poverty VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty Math Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty Tests of Differences sig
  • 21. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth ELL Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All ELL Students in Fort Worth Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > ELL Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 22. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Charter ELL Students Fort Worth District ELL Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for ELL Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and ELL Students in Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > ELL Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter ELL vs. District ELL Math Charter ELL vs. District ELL Tests of Differences sig
  • 23. -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 Fort Worth Special Ed Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Students in Special Education Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Special Education Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Special Ed Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 24. -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 Fort Worth Charter Students in Special Ed. Fort Worth District Students in Special Ed. Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Fort Worth Charter School Students in Special Ed. and Fort Worth District School Students in Special Ed. Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Special Ed. Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Special Ed Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter Sped vs. District Sped Math Charter Sped vs. District Sped Tests of Differences sig
  • 25. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Male Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Male Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Male Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 26. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Charter Male Students Fort Worth District Male Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Male Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and Male Students in Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Male Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter Male vs. District Male Math Charter Male vs. District Male Tests of Differences sig
  • 27. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Female Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Fort Worth Female Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Female Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 28. -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 Fort Worth Charter Female Students Fort Worth District Female Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Female Students in Fort Worth Charter Schools and Female Students in Fort Worth District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Female Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN FORT WORTH Reading Charter Female vs. District Female Math Charter Female vs. District Female Tests of Differences sig
  • 29. Summary of Findings The summary of the findings from the analysis of Fort Worth schools is presented here.
  • 31. Acknowledgments Texas Education Agency, Texas Schools Project, and Texas Higher Education Advisory Board provided supports in the acquisition of student-level data. Fort Worth Education Partnership assisted CREDO with verifying the list of public schools in Fort Worth. Disclaimer: The conclusions of this research do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official position of the Texas Education Agency, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, the Texas Workforce Commission or the State of Texas.
  • 32. Types of Charter Schools • With more schools and students than a single charter school, CMOs have some operational advantages in their ability to spread administrative fixed costs, thus providing the possibility of greater efficiency. In addition, CMOs may be able to support additional programs and more robust staffing. • Whether CMOs lead to better student outcomes is a matter of interest across the country. • There are only two independent charter schools with student growth scores in Fort Worth during the span of this study; we redact the results for this type due to the small number of the schools. OUR ANALYSES OF FORT WORTH CHARTER SCHOOLS INCLUDE A BREAKOUT OF CMOS AND INDEPENDENT CHARTERS. There are two types of charter schools. CHARTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS (CMOS) Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the operation of at least three charter schools. INDEPENDENT CHARTER SCHOOLS Organization holding the charter and overseeing the operation of a single charter school. It may run the school directly or contract with an organization which provides services to one or two charter schools.
  • 33. Methods The annual academic growth of students in Fort Worth from 2014-15 to 2017-18, overall and by sector, is benchmarked to the state average growth, accounting for student characteristics. We also explore how one-year growth of Fort Worth students for the period ending in Spring 2018 differs by school type, race, poverty status, English language learner status, special education status, and gender.
  • 34. Days of Learning While these tools create precise and reliable answers, they are presented in technical terms that are not user-friendly to a general audience. To translate the technical results into terms that are accessible to non- technical audiences, CREDO developed Days of Learning. CREDO USES ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND SOPHISTICATED STATISTICAL TOOLS TO MEASURE STUDENTS, SCHOOLS AND THE EDUCATION LANDSCAPE. Think about the students in your state’s public schools. For many of their years of schooling, they take achievement tests to measure what they know at the end of the school year. We can identify the average score for each test each year. Imagine a student who scores exactly at the average in one year, say 4th grade, and then in the following year, scores exactly at the average again on the 5th- grade test. The amount of year-to-year learning for that student show us what the average learning is for all the students who took both tests. We do that calculation for every grade the state tests: 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th, and so on. CREDO uses those annual measures of average learning to represent a typical year of learning, and equates that to a typical 180-day school year. We say that the student in our example has gained 180 days of learning. If a student makes more progress than the average student, we take the amount of extra achievement and translate it into 180-days of learning plus “X” extra days. We are creating a measure of student learning as if the student went to school for 180 days plus X days. The size of “X” depends on how much more the student learns than the average student — if it’s a lot more, then “X” will be a large number, and if it’s a small amount more, “X” will be a small number. The same is true for students who do not learn as much as the average student. Instead of adding to the 180-days-of-learning average, we subtract from that base to reflect the smaller-than-average advances that those students realize. In these cases, the difference leads to numbers such a “165 days of learning” or “152 days of learning”. Against the average standard of 180 days, these smaller days show that students learned as if they had only attended school for 180 days minus X days during the school year. 01 02 03 04 05 06 3rd Grade 4th Grade = 180 days More than 180 days Less than 180 days Student A Student A
  • 35. Overall Fort Worth Results Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g F o r t W o r t h O v e r a l l 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 -0.04** -25** -0.06** -36** F o r t W o r t h O v e r a l l 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.05** 27** 0.04* 21* F o r t W o r t h O v e r a l l 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 -0.01 -4 -0.01 -7
  • 36. Fort Worth School Sectors Compared to State Average Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.04 24 0.01 7 C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.06* 36* 0.05 26 C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.01 3 -0.05 -27 D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 -0.05** -27** -0.06** -38** D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.05** 26** 0.04* 21* D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 -0.01 -5 -0.01 -6
  • 37. Comparison of School Sectors within Fort Worth Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.09** 51** 0.08 44 C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.02 10 0.01 5 C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.01 7 -0.04 -22
  • 38. Charter Subsector Analysis Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g F o r t W o r t h C M O s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.00 0 -0.05 -32 F o r t W o r t h I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e § - - - - F o r t W o r t h C M O s v s . F o r t W o r t h I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s § - - - - § R e d a c t e d b e c a u s e t o o s m a l l n u m b e r o f F o r t W o r t h i n d e p e n d e n t c h a r t e r s c h o o l s a r e i n v o l v e d i n t h e e s t i m a t i o n .
  • 39. Student Subgroup Analysis> Black Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Black Students F o r t W o r t h B l a c k S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.03* -20* -0.01 -6 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s -0.03 -16 -0.07 -44 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s -0.03* -20* 0.00 -3 Compared with Black Students in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.01 3 -0.07 -42
  • 40. Student Subgroup Analysis> Hispanic Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Hispanic Students F o r t W o r t h H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.01 2 -0.01 -5 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.01 5 -0.07 -44 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.01 2 0.00 -2 Compared with Hispanic Students in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.00 2 -0.07 -42
  • 41. Student Subgroup Analysis> Students in Poverty Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Students in Poverty F o r t W o r t h S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y O v e r a l l 0.00 1 0.00 -2 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.01 5 -0.06 -36 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.00 0 0.00 1 Compared with Students in Poverty in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.01 5 -0.06 -37
  • 42. Student Subgroup Analysis> ELL Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of ELL Students F o r t W o r t h E L L S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.04** 21** 0.00 1 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.01 2 -0.09 -56 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.04** 21** 0.01 4 Compared with ELL Students in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s -0.03 -19 -0.10 -60
  • 43. Student Subgroup Analysis> Special Ed Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Special Ed Students F o r t W o r t h S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.01 -3 0.01 6 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.11 66 0.09 52 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s -0.01 -6 0.01 4 Compared with Special Ed Students in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.12 71 0.08 47
  • 44. Student Subgroup Analysis> Male Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Male Students F o r t W o r t h M a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.00 -3 -0.01 -7 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.01 8 -0.03 -18 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s -0.01 -3 -0.01 -6 Compared with Male Students in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.02 11 -0.02 -13
  • 45. Student Subgroup Analysis> Female Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Female Students F o r t W o r t h F e m a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.01 -5 -0.01 -8 F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.00 -1 -0.06 -35 F o r t W o r t h D i s t r i c t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s -0.01 -5 -0.01 -6 Compared with Female Students in District Schools in Fort Worth F o r t W o r t h C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.01 4 -0.05 -29