At the Scottsdale Parent Council (SPC) meeting in February, Dr. Cindy Bochna, Director of Assessments and Accountability, and Ms. Lea Mitchell, Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services from Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) gave a presentation of the K-12 Statewide Assessments. You can view the video of the meeting here, SPC 2-19-25 Meeting.
A couple of interesting and somewhat disturbing points came out during the presentation and discussion.
One being how SUSD and most of the schools are “A” rated by the Arizona Department of Education.
For those of you not familiar with the AZ report card process, according to the Arizona Department of Education website, the
“Arizona Revised Statutes § 15-241 requires the Arizona Department of Education, subject to final adoption by the State Board of Education, to develop an annual achievement profile for every public school in the state based on an A through F scale.
The system measures year to year student academic growth, proficiency on English language arts, math and science. It also includes the proficiency and academic growth of English language learners, indicators that an elementary student is ready for success in high school and that high school students are ready to succeed in a career or higher education and high school graduation rates.”
To find out what grade your child’s school has been awarded, and how many points the school earned in each category, go to AZ Report Cards and search by the name of the school.
I understand that the Arizona Department of Education assigns the grades and SUSD didn’t establish the criteria, nor the weighted values assigned for the grading, but I think it is important that parents understand exactly what goes into the grades assigned and how to interpret them.
So, when you are looking at your child’s school to determine the assessment grade and detailed scoring, I encourage you to scroll down and look at the other information available, specifically the student achievement in state academic assessment reports.
These reports provide details on student proficiency rates for ELA, math, and science. By looking at previous years, you can see how the data is trending.
During the discussion at the SPC meeting, using Chaparral High School as an example, I asked Dr. Bochna and Ms. Mitchell how Chaparral is given an A grade when across all three academic subjects, an average of only 53% of the students are proficient. I asked how a 53% could be an A, isn’t that more like an F?
What I found disturbing was the response I got from Ms. Mitchell. She explained that Stephen Curry and Steve Kerr, both NBA players, only made 45% of the shots they took yet they were rated as world champion basketball players.
So, Ms. Mitchell, are you saying 53% makes you a world champion in academics? Really?!?
Statements like this are silly and make me wonder just how serious they are about education. SUSD students and parents deserve better.
At one point during the meeting, I asked how Arizona compared to the rest of the country. I said that I thought we were somewhere around 48th or 49th. Both Dr. Bochna and Ms. Mitchell said I was wrong, and that Arizona was somewhere around 30th or so in terms of ACT scores across the nation.
In a follow-up email, Dr. Bochna provided me with the following information:
When you look at the data and sort it from highest to lowest, Arizona is right where I said we are, tied with Mississippi and Hawaii for 47, 48, and 49th positions. Arizona is nowhere near the top 30 or whatever position Ms. Mitchell thought. If they were analyzing the data, they should know that. Being a top performer in a state that ranks at the bottom is nothing to brag about.
When you put this performance in some context, the 21.5 ACT score for SUSD is less than impressive. The average ACT score for incoming students at ASU is 26. While a score of 20-23 is considered competitive at many mid-tier colleges, a score of 24-28 is needed for more selective colleges. To get into a top engineering school, a student needs something like a 30 in math and 36 for a composite score. I’m sure there are a handful of students out of the 20,000 in SUSD who score that high, but to get an average of 21.5, many students do not.
While I certainly encourage you to listen to the entire meeting (Dr. Menzel responds to questions at the beginning of the meeting) the points I discussed here are found in the 44:00 to 1:00:00 portion and the 1:13:00 to 1:24:00 segment in the video. Listen for yourself.
For anyone that has been paying attention to what has been happening in SUSD over the past few years, it comes as no surprise that academic performance under Dr. Menzel has been terrible. Thousands of SUSD students each year are not proficient in ELA, math or science, yet over 92% graduate high school in four years. Remember, Dr. Menzel has never met any of his academic performance goals throughout his tenure at SUSD.
This academic record has contributed, in large part, to the steady decline in enrollment, leading to major financial issues the Governing Board is now struggling with. As has been his practice for the past few years, Dr. Menzel proposes cutting teachers and instructional staff positions and hiring more unlicensed social workers to solve the budget crisis, a crisis that his poor management has caused. Actions, if taken, will ensure the Governing Board will be dealing with the same problem again next year.
At the last Governing Board meeting, Member Pittinsky told Dr. Menzel he wanted to see a deep dive into causes of the declining enrollment. He wants to understand what parents are saying during exit surveys as they pull their children out of SUSD and see the data by site and grade level. All of us involved with SUSD would like to see that information.
I wish Dr. Pittinsky the best of luck as he tries to get this information from Dr. Menzel.
As I have said on multiple occasions, identifying the root cause of the problem and fixing it is the only way anything will change. Unfortunately, change takes time; time that thousands of SUSD students don’t have.
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
The latest Arizona Department of Education (ADE) report reveals that a majority of Arizona students continue to fail the statewide assessment.
This year, only 41 percent of students passed the English Language Arts (ELA) portion, while 33 percent passed the mathematics section.
The ADE revealed these declining results last Wednesday in a press release. However, ADE presented the results as overall gains, noting that students experienced increases of three percent in English Language Arts (ELA) and two percent in mathematics.
Despite the tumult of the Delta & Omicron variants, our students & teachers did something remarkable: increased academic scores. Thanks to historical federal funding, schools hired more staff, improved technology & invested in students. It's paying off. https://t.co/478ptrIAVk
Yet, last year’s results may not be weighed against these most recent results — the 2021 assessment report disclosed that “a significant number of students” weren’t tested, and therefore those results shouldn’t carry as much weight. Test results from Hoffman’s first year in office, 2019, were only slightly better than those this year: 42 percent of students passed both ELA and math.
It could be argued that those results were part of an upswing in testing that occurred under Hoffman’s predecessor, Diane Douglas. In 2016, 38 percent of students passed ELA and math. In 2017, 39 percent of students passed ELA and 40 percent passed math. In 2018, 41 percent of students passed both ELA and math.
Additionally, only a few percentage points were gained overall despite the ADE dedicating millions of COVID-19 relief funds to improve test scores.
Superintendent Kathy Hoffman said that she’s petitioning the state to increase funding by lifting the aggregate expenditure limit (AEL) to further improve test scores.
“If we want to continue increasing scores, defunding our public schools will have the opposite impact,” said Hoffman. “The infusion of federal dollars shows that increased funding can increase learning outcomes, not just on test scores but in our student’s abilities to thrive and contribute to our state.”
In an interview with “The Conservative Circus,” Hoffman’s opponent, former superintendent and attorney general Tom Horne, declared that the statewide assessment results constituted an emergency. He noted that student proficiency had fallen far from his 2003 to 2011 tenure, when Arizona students were over 60 percent proficient in math and over 70 percent proficient in English.
“It’s hard to imagine it could be worse,” said Horne.
Horne claimed that Hoffman was focused on implementing systems that distracted from proper education, citing social-emotional learning (SEL) as one problematic distraction.
“With social-emotional learning, the teachers are discouraged from imposing discipline because it might hurt some kids’ feelings,” said Horne.
Tom Horne, running for AZ Superintendent of Public Instruction, discusses Kathy Hoffman's LGBTQ chat portal plus th https://t.co/AiRJVJ6KTa
During the interview, Horne also opined that the ADE links to sexualized LGBTQ+ chat rooms for minors weren’t legal. As AZ Free News reported this week, Hoffman was sued last month for linking to these chat rooms on the ADE website.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Altadeña Middle School 6th grade English Language Arts (ELA) teacher Sara Adams was recorded teaching her students about gender identity and not trusting their parents on the subject. Adams said to her students that those who tell them otherwise, like their parents or other family members, are part of the “older generations,” intimating that their elders’ teachings of right and wrong concerning gender were a “hard line.”
“So, now keep in mind that our society has changed somewhat in ways for the better, okay? No longer for most people is that a hard-drawn line,” said Adams. “Ok? That line gets blurred. There are still people in our society, the older generations, who, that’s the hard line. That’s how they grew up. That’s their mentality. You don’t cross that line. You are a boy, you are a girl, those are your roles, you know what you are supposed to do.”
Adams encouraged her class to reject that hard line. She said it was a “good thing” that the hard line is no longer permanent, and relayed that the hard line would disappear completely after the older generations die off.
“But as your generations [are] coming around and the generations that are gonna come after you. We are hoping that that line completely disappears. And there is no line. And you are free to be whoever it is who you want to be. And you dress and act and do whatever it is that you want to do because that is who you are,” said Adams. “Sometimes it’s a hard line for some. Sometimes it’s a faint line. Sometimes you can see the line’s been blurred and then someone comes and redraws it. That’s where we’re still at.”
Adams asked her students about society’s standards for boys’ preferences and behaviors. Children in the class respond that boys can’t wear dresses, play with dolls, or “be pretty,” and that they were expected to only play sports. Adams insinuated to the children that their parents’ teachings on right or wrong concerning gender were inaccurate.
“What else boys aren’t you supposed to do? And it might be that you heard this from family members,” said Adams.
Adams expanded on one student’s notion that boys can’t “be pretty” by saying that meant boys couldn’t wear makeup, style their hair, or wear nails. When a student asked why a boy would do those things, Adams replied that certain people desired them and added quickly that boys shouldn’t.
“Because some people like that. It’s who they are. But boys aren’t supposed to do that,” said Adams.
Then Adams asked the boys if they were supposed to cry. When the boys respond “yes,” Adams rebutted that “society says no.” She then asked the boys if they were supposed to show their emotions. Even when some of the boys respond “yes,” Adams interjected: “No, rub some dirt on it — you’re fine.” A little boy can be heard crying: it’s unclear whether he was serious or not.
“Don’t show your feelings. That’s a girl thing. Aw, you little sissy! Isn’t that all you’ve heard before as boys? Don’t cry! There’s no crying, you’re a boy!” said Adams.
Adams and her fellow teachers in Kyrene School District (KSD) appear to have shaped the students to be in agreement with their teachings already. Several of Adams’ middle school students came to the teacher’s defense on social media, both of whom put gender identity descriptions in their bios. Both students admitted that the incident didn’t occur during their class period.
One Twitter user who identifies as a “merman,” @rraae7, claimed that Adams was their ELA teacher. The user claimed that Adams was responding to a book in their curriculum, insisting that she was an “amazing teacher” and that many of the user’s peers supported what Adams was teaching.
“This is my ELA teacher. She was responding directly to the curriculum and explaining to the class (not my period) how people view the kid in this book and how things were viewed at the time. That’s exactly why [in] this recording she said that your grandparents have probably told you this,” wrote the user. “This is so dumb that you guys jump straight to assuming, this is a middle school kid recording this, you have no clue what they are trying to do??!! Ms. Adams is an amazing teacher and I know MANY people could support this. I can’t believe somebody would do this.”
this is my ela teacher. she was responding directly to the curriculum and explaining to the class (not my period) how people view the kid in this book and how things were viewed at the time. that’s exactly why i’m this recording she said that ur grandparents have probably told-
Another user who identifies as “she/her,” @Lauren_NotEmo, agreed that the point of the assignment was to discuss gender identity issues.
“Hi I’m Lauren and Mrs Adams is also my teacher. She was talking about this in class and this was about the book that we were learning in class,” wrote the other user. “I think this is ridiculous and not called for but this was not my period also when this happened.”
Hi I’m Lauren and Mrs adam’s is also my teacher she was talking about this in class and this was about the book that we were learning in class I think this is ridiculous and not called for but this was not my period also when this happened.
It also appears that Adams’ district would be on board with her use of class time. KSD submitted a “Visioning Survey” to parents concerning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), culture, Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT), and Social Emotional Learning (SEL). As AZ Free News has reported, SEL and this version of CRT maintain congruous teachings with Critical Race Theory.
@kyrenesupt is the worst. Today we were got a survey & you can tell they are going woke. They are working on a policy for their strategic plan to define culture, equity, diversity, etc. it’s clear by their intent & language these words don’t mean what they used too. pic.twitter.com/ebVcH4yrOD
