Report says states aren’t honest about grad rates

By Emily Richmond

Thursday, June 23, 2005 | 8:55 a.m.

States aren't being honest enough about their high school graduation rates and the widely ranging formulas being used are only further muddying the waters, according to a new report by an education watchdog group.

The Education Trust's new report "Getting Honest About Grad Rates" notes that Nevada reported a graduation rate of 75 percent in 2003. That was 20 points higher than the rate calculated for the 2001 academic year by an outside organization using a different but widely accepted formula.

Additionally Nevada's target graduation rate doesn't set the bar high enough, according to the report. The Silver State's accountability plan calls for a 50 percent graduation rate or "improvement" once that goal is met.

States that set annual percentage goals scored higher with the Education Trust. New Hampshire has set its graduation rate goal at 75.2 percent by 2007, with gradual increases until 95 percent is met in 2014, the final year of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

The Urban Institute, the Harvard Civil Rights Project and the Education Commission of the States have all used or endorsed the cumulative promotion index for tallying graduation rates. The index uses enrollment and diploma-count data estimate how many students will graduate on time with a regular diploma.

For its report the Education Trust compared the index numbers calculated by the nonprofit Urban Institute for the 2000-01 academic year with those released by individual states for the 2002-03 academic year. Only four states had gaps larger than Nevada's between their own calculations and those of the think tank -- North Carolina, New Mexico, South Carolina and Mississippi.

The gaps "raise questions about the accuracy and honesty of these states' graduation-rate definitions, and educators, policymakers and advocates should call for an explanation," the report concludes.

Sue Daellenbach, testing director for the Clark County School District, said with a 35 percent transiency rate it's a daily struggle to keep track of the students who come and go.

The district last year began using a new formula for its own records, comparing how many students were enrolled in the spring of their junior year to the number of diplomas handed out by the end of the following summer.

But the Nevada Education Department uses a different formula, comparing student enrollment over a four-year period, for the accountability report submitted to the U.S. Department of Education as part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

Using the new formula Clark County put its graduation rate at 83.1 percent for the 2002-03 academic year. Using its own formula the state calculated the district's graduation rate for the same year at 72 percent, compared with 75 percent statewide. Both Clark County and the state count adjusted diplomas for special education students and certificates of attendance toward the overall graduation rate. Students who complete the required high school coursework but do not pass all sections of the state proficiency exam receive certificates instead of diplomas.

"Everybody has a different formula and everybody believes they have the right one," Daellenbach said. "That's why its important to look at the circumstances and facts behind the numbers."

Kathy Christie, vice president of knowledge management for the Education Commission of the States, said a recent study by her organization showed high graduation rates varied nationwide from 50 percent to 96 percent.

"That's a pretty broad range," Christie said. "But the point of No Child Left Behind was never to compare one state to another. It's to have each state try and meet the goals it has set for itself."

It's not just graduation formulas that differ from state to state but the depth and breadth of the data being collected, Christie said. Some states, including Nevada, have just begun tabulating rates by ethic group, while other states haven't yet started doing that, Christie said.

"States are just beginning to get the kind of data systems in place that those types of statistics can be collected accurately," Christie said. "Until there's accurate data we can trust none of the (state graduation) formulas are going to work particularly well."

The Nevada Education Department, using state and federal funds, developed a new computer system to track exactly that type of data. Known as SAIN, the system has been in place for about 16 months and is not yet running at full capacity, State Board of Education President John Gwaltney said.

"At this juncture I have not seen enough evidence that SAIN is as complete or as reliable as it needs to be," Gwaltney said.

He said he would support making Nevada's graduation rate goals more specific in terms of percentages once the state is certain the necessary data is being collected and tallied by its 17 school districts.

The graduation formulas used by the Education Trust as well as those used by the U.S. Department of Education also don't give districts credit for students who earn adult education diplomas after leaving regular high schools, Gwaltney said.

Given the lure of jobs offering good pay without a high school diploma, Nevada's schools deserve extra credit for encouraging those individuals to return to school, Gwaltney said.

"Those students should are to be celebrated, not ignored," Gwaltney said.

State Sen. Bob Beers, R-Las Vegas, who has proposed various legislation regarding public education over the last several years, said he wasn't overly concerned about the disparity between Nevada's graduation numbers and those used in the Education Trust's report.

"What really matters is that we consistently report our graduation rate and determine whether we are doing better or worse," Beers said. "We need to continue comparing our apples to apples, even if some East Coast advocates are calling them oranges."