The group that was NOT bribed had a small (about one-half of a percent) rise in reading proficiency.
The group that WAS bribed (up to $100 every two weeks per student if they did everything right) had a decrease of nearly 2% in reading proficiency.
Furthermore, if you follow the same group of students from one year to the next, the results are even more dramatic. In the control group, the students who were 6th graders in 2007-8 and were (for the most part) 7th graders in 2008-9, went from 37.9% proficient to 44.3% proficient, a rise of about 6.5%. And over the same time period, the students who were 7th graders the first year and mostly became 8th graders the next year went from 49.5% to 49.9%, a rise of about 0.4%.
However, in the experimental group, the 6th graders in SY 2007-8 who generally became 7th graders in SY 2008-9 went from 40.7% proficient in reading to 32.1% proficient, a rather large DROP of about 8.6%. And the experimental group’s 7th graders the first year, who mostly became 8th graders the second year, went from 41.0% proficient to 36.5% proficient, a drop of about 4.5%.
So, it appears that the bribes are counter-productive in reading.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Capital Gains update
The folks over at GFBRANDENBURG'S BLOG have been crunching some statistics around the DCPS Capital Gains program and the analysis doesn't point to success.