APE Asks APS: Please Improve "Test To Stay" to Keep Kids in School
 

APE recently asked APS to address equity issues with its “Test To Stay” (TTS) program which allows students who are not ‘up to date’ on vaccinations and who have been exposed to COVID to remain in school. As confirmed via FOIA, 100% of APS’ “Test To Stay” tests thus far have been negative, showing the value of this program in keeping kids from missing days of school.

APS’ policy that all testing must be performed at Syphax is a significant barrier for working families and those without transportation. This timing is also not consistent with VDH guidance, which recommends that the test be performed the morning before school or after 7pm the day before school. 

APE asked APS to consider school-based testing with an immediate return to school upon testing negative, to reduce missed in-school time for children and mitigate the impact of lost work time to caregivers, as well as the associated equity issues that may result. 

APE received a response from Zach Pope (APS Director, Safety, Security, Risk and Emergency Management) on our query, which further outlines how “Test To Stay” is being implemented. While APS maintained that it is not able to implement school-based testing because of cost and logistics, the letter did clarify that testing hours at Syphax were recently expanded to 8:15 AM to 7 PM (note the website says 8 AM to 7 PM), in order to accommodate more families and improve turnaround time to ensure kids can get back to school as quickly as possible. We applaud this expansion of hours. However, we are still concerned with the missed time in class and the equity issues related to transportation (although Mr. Pope does note that Syphax is accessible via ArtBus) and missed work time for parents who must take their children to Syphax, especially in light of the fact that zero of the program’s students have tested positive thus far. 

We are hearing from parents that they are still getting conflicting messages from contract tracers. To help clarify, here is APS' current policy:

• Upon hearing that a child has been deemed a close contact, parents can pick up that child from school, take them to Syphax and then return them to school immediately upon a negative test result. This is made easier by the expansion of testing hours—for example, if a child is deemed a close contact at 9 AM, the caregiver can pick up the child, have them tested, and potentially get them back to school (and caregiver back to work) within an hour or two. This is important, as every hour of instruction matters!
• For COVID-positive students: Return to school on Day 11 does not require a negative test. Of note, APS is still not following CDC guidance put out in December 2021 for students (however, it is following such guidance for teachers and staff) to return on Day 6 (of note is that VDH guidance also calls for five day isolations for students).
• As of March 16th, APS has added covid-like illness (CLI) testing at Syphax as well, so children who have symptoms like runny noses or a headache can be picked up at school, driven to Syphax for a rapid test and then returned to school upon negative result. Students with symptoms can also return with a provider-proctored antigen or PCR test or a letter from their Physician or ACPH (this protocol is required for all students regardless of vaccination status).

We encourage you to read and reference the letter from APS if you hear conflicting info from APS or ACHD staff. 

Tell APS your thoughts on "Test To Stay".
Tell the School Board how you feel "Test To Stay" and CLI Testing could be improved.
Read VDH/VDOE guidance on testing, contract tracing, etc.
Ask ACPH to help with staffing and logistics for school-based testing.
Forward to a friend or neighbor.

Accelerated Math Across NOVA: How Does APS Compare?
 

Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) recently provided an update on its middle school math program. It included a table that compared MS math course enrollment in school districts across Virginia for school year 2020-21, using the number of students taking SOL exams as a proxy for course enrollment. See VDOE data. 

While LCPS did not include APS in its review, comparable APS data is included below. It should be noted that enrollment patterns for this year may be different given COVID-19 learning loss.
 


There are several interesting takeaways:

• All districts surveyed offered 7^th grade Algebra I. The share of 7^th graders taking Algebra I ranged from 8% in PWCS to 39% in LCPS. The share of 8th graders taking the Mathematics SOL (effectively Pre-Algebra) ranged from 28% in LCPS to 51% in PWCS. 
• APS had a relatively low share of 7th graders taking the Algebra I SOL relative to its peers; this share fell from 20% in 2018-19 to 15% in 2020-21. 
• Several districts, including LCPS, offered 6^thgrade Algebra I in school year 2020-21. However, LCPS just announced that it would no longer offer this course going forward. LCPS did say that it was considering introducing math acceleration into elementary schools.

Views on Acceleration
There has been a debate regarding the extent to which acceleration in middle school math is helpful or harmful. One school of thought argues that math acceleration can turn students off of math and lead them to take fewer courses in high school, and that students would benefit if they had more time in middle school to gain a grounding in math basics before accelerating to algebra. Proponents of this position often point to data showing that some students who took algebra in 8th grade fail or must repeat it. This school of thought suggests that advancing students to algebra in middle school should not be a primary instructional goal. For example, LCPS began scaling back 6^th grade Algebra I last year, initially citing the need 1) to get ready for VMPI (although they subsequently said VMPI was not a factor), and 2) to better align with VA's 2016 SOL revisions which reflected Common Core's call to delay Algebra I until 9th grade for all but the most gifted students. LCPS also noted that only a very small number of accelerated students end up taking multi-variable calculus (MVC). 

The other side of that debate argues that students who are accelerated in math in middle school will be better positioned to do well in math in high school and beyond, that it is important to provide acceleration because the challenge provides students with the opportunity to take higher level courses.  In addition to multi-variable calculus, math acceleration also:

• Opens up space for AP Statistics and AP Computer Science,
• Enables students to apply/matriculate to TJHSST or AOS, and
• Enables students to take math-intensive science courses earlier. 

One way to measure acceleration's success is to look at the number of accelerated students that successfully complete the path through calculus (AB or BC) or AP Statistics. APS data show that the more accelerated the student, the more likely he or she is to continue on to calculus or advanced math. 

• APS looked at Wakefield HS & Yorktown HS students who took Algebra II/Trig in 9th grade (i.e. 7th grade Algebra I) and found that 100% of the Wakefield students took Multivariable Calculus, Calculus AB, or AP Statistics in the 12th grade, while 97% of Yorktown students took Multivariable Calculus, Calculus BC, or AP Statistics. (W&L HS was not included because the IB program has different math graduation requirements.) Source:  MAC 2017-18 Report 
• APS found that roughly 56% of students taking intensified 8th grade Algebra I ultimately went on to take calculus or the IB equivalent, whereas only 16% of students taking regular 8th grade Algebra I ultimately did so. Source: MAC 2019-20 Report. Even in that case, if many 8th grade Algebra I students take AP Statistics senior year, a pathway from 8th grade Algebra I to 11th grade Pre-Calculus would still have been worthwhile for these students.

SOL Scores by Grade
SOL scores are another way to see how accelerated math students are doing. (It is best to look at 2018-19 scores to avoid the distortions of COVID-19 learning loss.) While the bar for passing an SOL is set at the minimum competency level, the shares of SOL pass advanced and failures provide insight into student math understanding.

In general, the more accelerated the cohort of students, the better they fared on SOLs.  Contrary to the view that acceleration might lead to poor math performance, the data suggests that accelerated students tend to perform well on their SOLs. Of course, this may confirm that schools are doing a relatively good job of identifying those students most ready for acceleration. But it does not suggest that accelerated students are struggling more than other students in those classes.

• For thrice-accelerated LCPS students (i.e., beginning Algebra I in 6th grade), more than 70% scored Pass Advanced for Algebra I, Geometry & Algebra II. Given this, it is odd that LCPS chose to end their pathway.     
• For APS students twice accelerated in math (i.e., those who begin Algebra I in 7th grade), roughly 60% scored Pass Advanced in Algebra I and Geometry and more than 30% were Pass Advanced in Algebra II; nearly all the rest were Pass Proficient.  
• APS students once accelerated in math (i.e., those who begin Algebra I in 8th grade) were split between intensified and regular classes. The Pass Advanced share for 8^th grade intensified Algebra I alone would likely have been higher than what is shown for 8^th grade above. 

SOL scores cover the early part of the math pathway whereas AP scores generally reflect the latter part. APS looked at the end of the math pathway and found that in 2017-18, roughly 75% of APS students taking the BC Calculus AP exam and 50% taking the AB calculus exam received a passing score of 3, 4, or 5 (Source: MAC Report 2019-20). For some, the  number of students (particularly in AB Calculus) that did not achieve a passing score suggests that many students were overaccelerated. It was this concern, in part, that led APS to raise the qualifying threshold for 8th grade regular Algebra I. Others would note, however, that a majority of APS calculus students earned a passing AP score, suggesting they had developed good math understanding on the accelerated math pathway. [It’s also worth noting that APS tightened the requirements for entry into 6th grade Pre-Algebra (twice-accelerated) beginning in fall 2018, which may result in higher pass rates for that cohort in HS accelerated math as it progresses down this pathway.]  

Overall
Based on SOL data, a number of students appeared to be succeeding in accelerated math pre-COVID-19. Students taking Algebra I in 9th grade or later often struggled throughout the math pathway, with the Geometry SOL posing a particular challenge. With the termination of the VMPI program, and as the math curriculum is being reconsidered at the state level and at APS, it is important that the state and APS consider these performance data to determine the extent to which students should be permitted, or encouraged, to pursue accelerated math in middle school.
 
Tell APS your thoughts on accelerated math in APS.
Tell the School Board your thoughts on accelerated math in APS.
Forward to a friend or neighbor.

Per APS, the upcoming APS Summer School Program for students meeting specific eligibility criteria begins July 5 and will provide in-person strengthening support, intervention, credit recovery, and Extended School Year Services. Elementary families who have been notified that their students are eligible need to register by March 31—which is just a few days away. The middle and high school registration deadline is May 31; families will be notified of eligibility during May. More information and registration forms are available on the summer school website. 

However, APS is clearly signaling that summer school may not be available for all students who are behind. The eligibility criteria are very specific and focus on students who show “significant weaknesses” in both reading and math, English language acquisition, and “eligible” students with disabilities. APS is encouraging families to have “summer alternatives” in place. APE has heard already from concerned parents that their students with IEPs who are behind will not be eligible for summer school. We have previously highlighted our concerns with APS’ summer school offerings, and are urging APS to work now to hire the staff it needs to expand summer school offerings. This is a crucial opportunity to help catch up students who are behind from pandemic-related learning loss.

Meanwhile, Fairfax County is providing expanded summer school offerings to up to 30,000 students, or close to 17% of its student enrollment, to make up for pandemic-associated learning loss. Last summer, APS offered summer school to approximately 2,900 students, or 10.7% of its student body, and the budget proposal for this year (at page 103) projects summer enrollment of 2,973. Historically, APS has enrolled around 5,000 students in summer school, higher numbers that would be in line with the 17% of students that FCPS has committed to serving this summer. APS’ own data reflects that 14.7% of all students are considered “below basic” on the reading inventory, 19.7% of students require intensive support according to DIBELS, and 26% of students are below basic in math. Offering summer school to only 11% of students is insufficient even to address those populations APS has identified. Indeed, 3,435 students have been identified as being below basic in math as of the winter MI assessment, which alone exceeds the 2,973 spots planned for summer school. APS needs to expand summer school availability.

FCPS has also announced that it will be offering live, virtual tutoring beginning the week after Spring Break—what it characterizes as an 'academic booster shot.' FCPS will be offering this tutoring for the next two academic years, allowing any child who wishes to participate to receive tutoring, in any subject, at any time. While the tutoring is not in-person, it is live. Moreover, FCPS characterized the online delivery format as being necessary to enable adequate staffing (citing burnout among FCPS teachers). We urge APS to offer similar tutoring as soon as possible, which could improve student performance during the school year and reduce the number of students needing summer school strengthening.

Tell APS to allocate more money for summer school this year and aggressively hire staff.
Ask the School Board to press APS for expanded summer school offerings for kids who need it.
Forward to a friend or neighbor.

Correction To Last eNewsletter
 

In last week's eNewsletter feature titled 'APS Must Act to Close the Achievement Gap in Reading and Math,' the Editor’s Note incorrectly stated that the DIBELS and Math Inventory assessments are only administered by APS once per year. In fact, both are administered three times a year: at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year, as reflected in the article itself. We apologize for the error.

Read APE's comprehensive Learning Loss report. 
Ask APS to devote more resources to student-facing positions to address learning loss.
Ask the School Board to prioritize learning loss now and in the budget process.
Forward to a friend or neighbor.

3/24 School Board Meeting Recap
 

Thursday, March 31, 7 PM School Board Meeting on Superintendent's Proposed FY 2023 Budget. Sign up to speak here (sign up is open till 4:00 PM today). 

Monday, April 4, 5:30-7:30 PM Open Office Hours with Reid Goldstein. Sign up here.   

April 5, 2022 6:30 PM Budget Work Session #5. Watch here.

April 6, 2022 at 7PM Arlington Democrats Monthly Meeting on at Lubber Run Community Center and streaming online. School Board Caucus rules expected to be presented.

Thursday, April 7, 7 PM Next School Board Meeting. Sign up to speak here. 

April 8, 2022 3 PM School Board & County Board Joint Budget Work Session. County Board Meeting Room, Bozman Government Center: 2100 Clarendon Blvd., Ste #307, Arlington, VA 22201 More detail here.