Oregon’s state department of education officials launched a new tool Thursday that is meant to be much more transparent and user-friendly, months after a national report gave the state a failing grade for its awkward, complicated display of important school data.
However, according to a national expert, the state’s improvement effort, which has been underway for almost two years and was prompted by the findings of a federal audit, still falls far short of the best-in-class examples from other states.
The public no longer needs to download complicated spreadsheets and PDFs in order to examine basic data about their child’s school, such as class sizes, absenteeism, graduation rates, and test scores, thanks to Oregon’s new version of the federally required report cards on district and school performance.
Rather, data visualizations are used to present such information online. A webpage with charts and graphs describing demographics, enrollment levels, and per-pupil expenses that are compared to state averages is displayed when the name of a school or district is typed in.
However, the state’s update lacks the vital capability of quickly comparing the average student’s growth across several years to identify advancements, plateaus, or losses.
Rather, the data for each year is shown on a different page.
Additionally, school-level data from before the epidemic, when the majority of schools and districts did significantly better than they do now, is not displayed by the new tool. A static link at the bottom of the page that directs readers to a report created following the most recent release of state testing data only provides access to state level pre-pandemic data.
According to Morgan Polikoff, an education professor at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and a lead author of the study on state report cards conducted for the nonpartisan Center for Reinventing Public Education, it is crucial to make it simple for the public to compare performance now with that prior to the pandemic.
children’ learning and well-being were negatively impacted by coronavirus containment efforts and school disruptions, and testing indicates that Oregon children have recovered from pandemic lows more slowly than their counterparts in the majority of other states.
Polikoff pointed out that policymakers and the general public may become lulled into a false sense of security regarding how students and systems are doing if it is difficult to compare pre- and post-pandemic measurements and clearly map the losses.
Even if we reassessed [the new report card], it would still do poorly. Polikoff stated, “I don’t think it’s better in the big ways, but it’s better in some small ways.” Transparency regarding a school’s performance is still lacking. Comparing schools to one another and to schools before COVID is still quite challenging.
Governor Tina Kotek praised the new Oregon report card tool in a statement, stating that the public can now quickly access and comprehend how local schools are performing. The online report card demonstrates our emphasis on results and openness.
During a media briefing this week, Oregon Department of Education officials recognized that the tool does not function for year-to-year comparisons. However, they stated that the new choices are but a beginning. According to Dan Farley, assistant superintendent for research, evaluation, data, accountability, and reporting in the department, the agency does not currently have the funds to create a dynamic data display that would incorporate accountability elements.
According to Farley, consumers will have to choose which year of data they want to view, one year at a time. It is made to look the same year after year.
“Oregon’s new effort gets some things right,” Polikoff said. He claimed that the state should be commended for emphasizing student group performance and for not concealing the achievement differences between Asian and white children and other students of color on a variety of metrics. He added that it makes it evident to families how their child’s school is performing in comparison to the district and state norms.
However, Polikoff noted that the shortcomings extend beyond the absence of cross-comparison capabilities and longitudinal data.
He mentioned Illinois, Indiana, and Tennessee as excellent examples and stated that many states assign schools an A through an F, a color score, or some other method of determining whether a school is headed in the correct direction. There are no such signs on Oregon’s new screens.
“With Oregon’s new online report card, I just don’t think a regular person would really know if a school is improving or not,” Polikoff stated.
Throughout the academic year, the Oregon Department of Education makes data available, such as test results and absenteeism rates in the fall and updated enrollment figures and graduation rates in the winter. However, Farley informed reporters this week that the online report cards will only be updated once a year, even though they are meant to serve as a one-stop shop for important data.
This fall, The Oregonian/OregonLive created a tool that lets the public view state test results at any school in the state over an eight-year period. Look for Iithere.
Julia Silverman writes for The Oregonian/OregonLive about K–12 education. You can contact her at jsilverman@oregonian.com.
