Submitted by John Arbeeny.
On 13 November 2024 the Suburban Times carried a Clover Park School District (CPSD) article about its School Board being designated as a “Board of Distinction” by the Washington State School Directors Association (WSSDA). WSSDA is a lobbyist organization for school boards. School boards have to apply for the award and WSSDA designated 37 school boards for the award in 2024 to include CPSD School Board. It’s supposed to be a big honor, one which CPSD has “won” five times since 2016 to date.
According to WSSDA the award acknowledges “…the long-term nature of closing opportunity gaps…recognize(s) that a board’s commitment to visionary leadership, effective governance, and strategic advocacy can take a few years to show up in data indicating improved student outcomes, especially in disaggregated student groups. This year, boards can highlight their decisions, actions, and initiatives that have, over time, led to decreasing opportunity gaps and increasing levels of student success.”
CPSD Board President Pearson states further, “We are focused on providing governance and guidance to the school district in creating a system that supports the education and development of the whole child…Through these efforts CPSD is removing barriers and shrinking gaps that impact our most vulnerable learners. As a result, we are seeing steady growth.” Perhaps schools districts should let parents deal with the “development of the whole child” and stick to academics: that’s what we pay them for.
Nice words but what do they mean when compared to CPSD’s actual long-term academic performance since 2016? It turns out these pronouncements are rather meaningless clichés that often conceal academic reality from the public. Neither the award application nor rationale behind CPSD’s choice for the award has been made public. This gives the appearance of a self -congratulatory award, a “pat on the back” of sorts for school boards.
Unfortunately, the facts since 2016 to date dispute CPSD’s Board of Distinction award. There is a long history of academic mediocrity and decline back to 2016 and continuing to the present. CPSD attendance, academic ranking, students meeting state standards in ELA and math all declined since 2016 and indicate a District failing academically long term. The “opportunity gap” for one minority group in particular, Black students, has not shrunk but rather swelled as their performance fell for ELA and math despite the CPSD DEI program established in 2018.
Below are statistics for CPSD attendance, academic ranking, students meeting State standards and Black students meeting State standards. These statistics do not indicate a system that “…support(s) the education and development of the whole child…”, nor does it indicate as Pearson claims, “As a result, we are seeing steady growth.” Quite the opposite is true and has been since 2016.
| 2016 | 2024 | Change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 82.4% | 65.7% | -16.7% |
| Academic ranking | 46.3% | 25.9% | -20.4% |
| Students meeting State Standards ELA | 49.5% | 37% | -12.5% |
| Students meeting State Standards Math | 42% | 25.6% | -16.4% |
| Black students meeting State standards ELA | 40.2% | 30.3% | -9.9% |
| Black students meeting State standards Math | 30.2% | 18.1% | -12.1% |
https://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/ReportCard/ViewSchoolOrDistrict/100047
Here are some specific academic ranking graphs for CPSD and selected elementary, middle and high schools for 2016 -2024. Granted these are some of the worst examples in CPSD, but they are representative of most District schools with low and/or declining academic performance. The % character used below represents percentiles.
CPSD academic ranking:
2016 46.3%
2024 25.9%
DOWN 20.4%
Tyee Park Elementary School academic ranking:
2016 53.9%
2024 5.1%
DOWN 48.8%
Lochburn Middle School academic ranking:
2016 5.9%
2024 0.4%
DOWN 5.5%
Clover Park High School academic ranking:
2016 12.7%
2024 3.4%
DOWN 9.3%
https://www.schooldigger.com/go/WA/district/01410/search.aspx
The above graphs show a long-term failing school district and schools from 2016 to present. It is a system in which gross chronic academic failure has been tolerated and neglected over the last decade with no apparent recognition or proposed solutions from boards past and present. You need only look at the graphs to understand how difficult it is to turn things around and succeed academically after they’ve hit rock bottom. Once they fall it’s tough to get back up.
How did this happen without School Board awareness?
What about the other WSSDA “Boards of Distinction” winners? Here’s a list of this year’s fifteen awardees in the “Large District Category”, with their 2016 and 2024 academic rankings. Seven of these school districts are well above-average and improved academically. Four school districts slipped academically but three remained above-average. Four school districts, to include CPSD, were ranked academically well below-average and lost even more ground since 2016. These four mediocre (some would say failed) school districts are headed for academic “extinction” unless that downward momentum is arrested and turned around as soon as possible. Even then, it could take nearly a decade of work to see meaningful improvement.
Loss of academic ranking is noted as a “DOWN” percentile (%) change from 2016 to 2024.
| Large District Category | 2016 | 2024 | Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Auburn | 62.6% | 32.8% | -29.8% | Below Average |
| Battle Ground | 67% | 64.8% | -2.2% | Above Average |
| Clover Park | 46.3% | 25.9% | -20.4% | Below Average |
| Edmonds | 63.5% | 69.2% | ||
| Everett | 80.8% | 82.6% | ||
| Federal Way | 27.6% | 13.8% | -13.8% | Below Average |
| Issaquah | 98% | 98.8% | ||
| Lake Washington | 97.5% | 98.4% | ||
| Pasco | 11.4% | 9.6% | -1.8% | Below Average |
| Peninsula | 84.2% | 90.3% | ||
| Puyallup | 64% | 64.4% | ||
| South Kitsap | 77.3% | 56.3% | -21% | Above Average |
| Spokane | 47.3% | 50.2% | ||
| Tacoma | 38.9% | 38.5% | -0.4% | Below Average |
| Yakima | 86.2% | 74.1% | 112.1% | Above Average |
Distinction awards are a way of rewarding excellence and have to be earned. It matters not how many wonderful, new, cutting edge, “whole child” expensive programs have been put in place with the intent of improving academic outcomes if the academic outcomes don’t improve. Effort alone does not necessarily result in improvement. “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” So it is with education.
CPSD has won the “Board of Distinction” many times over the last decade, yet its academic history belies that award. The CPSD Board really needs to step up its academic game now if the future is to hold any promise for the 12000+ students who attend CPSD schools. To do otherwise condemns CPSD to an inexorable slide towards mediocrity and the extinction of opportunity for its students. WSSDA needs to overhaul the “Board of Distinction” award program to focus on actual academic excellence and/or improvement long term, or the award will appear to be nothing more than an equitable “participation trophy”.
Correction: typo error for Yakima School District. Should be -14% decline but still above average.
I recently subscribed to the Suburban Times, since the TNT only gets delivered three days per week and I enjoy more local news. I have been around Lakewood for many years and in fact, subbed as a Suburban Times deliverer back in the day. When I started to read my newly subscribed papers, I was most interested in the articles about the Clover Park School District since I both attended and then taught in this district for many years. It appears that you have a consistent columnist in John Arbeeny. I recognized that name from years ago. My sister babysat for an Arbeeny family on Hipkins Road. I wonder if it is the same family? I digress.
I read a few of his letters which seemed to really slash the work that the district is trying to do for their students. I wondered if it his letters were all like that. They were easily accessible by the push of a button. So I started reading! I was and still am appalled by the negativity he continually spreads about the work our educators are doing! This week’s letter slams the school board for receiving an award from an outside source! Is it really John’s aim to massacre the district and any progress they celebrate having?
It seems that each and every time the district publishes some sort of success, John is up early and researching statistics about test scores and where we are in comparison to other districts. If I was still teaching in the district and seeing his negativity on each and every school, our administration and our board, I would be his worst nightmare! I had way too many successes in my career with the CPSD to allow this negativity to run rampant in a local newspaper.
And what is the free reign Lakewood Cares gets in slamming the education program of the CPSD? I know a few of the members personally which baffles my mind, but obviously the Lakewood Cares agenda and mine are on opposite ends of a spectrum. I have no idea what else in Lakewood upsets them other than the CPSD. Perhaps the Suburban Times needs to just run John’s column every time under a different heading such as. “Another Award….Not so Fast CPSD!” Or “(said school) Celebrates an Advance in GPA Schoolwide? Read This!” Or how about this “CPSD Reading Scores Up From 2016…Nope!”
I am not sure that I want to meet John Arbeeny due to his negativity and need to slaughter the work of the employees of the CPSD. But if it comes to that, I am right here.
Lyle,
John Arbeeny has nothing else to do! We have heard this constant attack from him and from his LakewoodCARES political group for the last 4 years. It started with their CRT claims and just followed the far right political playbook. It took a very ugly turn when it became personal against our superintendent and individual school board members who stood up to the constant attacks. Mr. Arbeeny is not actually out helping the youth in this community. That would require facing the challenges that every teacher and administrator understands first hand in 2024. It would also require Mr. Arbeeny to get beyond his 1950′-60’s view of when he was a student. He exhibits a very limited knowledge of current curriculum, child development and readiness, formative assessments given more frequently throughout the school year to inform instruction, demographics of Lakewood which bring additional challenges to different schools, instructional interventions based on formative assessments, the multiple pathways to a meaningful diploma, the academic growth of students from when they enroll in our district until they exit, the mobility of students in our district, etc. Based on his repetative and simplistic data using only the yearly SBA data comparing apples to oranges, he simply is ill informed by choice! Comparing schools on our military base where every child has a home, an employed parent, health care, and lives in a restricted community to our schools off base that serve more children in crises, poverty and live in unstable environments from day to day is totally irresponsible!
Anyone so concerned about our students would want to do more than make unsubstantiated claims to which Arbeeny has often stooped . A good example is his worn out “diploma mill” claim where he and his club members tried to convince the community our 12th grade students were receiving unearned diplomas based on their old10th grade state test scores! Peddling that lie showed a willingness to say anything in order to promote the Lakewood Cares political agenda. Watch how Arbeeney is unable to own the misinformation he is responsible for creating.
LakewoodCARES advertises they are a “mega brain” in our community made up of experts, yet they certainly are shy about advertising who actually makes up this brain of expertise. Their “diploma mill” fiasco/lie may be one good reason why they are cloaked in darkness. Those working in our schools and with students deserve more respect than wannabes in a club who never show up to help and spend their time criticizing those who do. We’ve also heard a lot of bluster from Cares members at school board meetings. One member stood up and claimed he could show the teachers how to do a better job teaching math and improving scores. Talk is cheap. Did he ever show up?
When I see something that I feel needs to be addressed, I make an appointment and take that concern to the district. I am not shy about pointing out what I believe to be improved upon. I’m also open to be educated on things I do not fully understand. Mr. Arbeeny and his club members have purposely taken a negative approach that solves absolutely nothing. When you are on record for making claims using rumors, simplistic or faulty data, and the latest views from your favorite newscasters and pundits, people stop listening no matter how smart you may be; or think/claim you are.
If Arbeeny has any educational expertise, he certainly has yet to show it!
I sometimes wonder why readers seem offended by the Stats that John Arbeeny presents regarding CPSD.
Why aren’t more people concerned about the slipping education in our local schools. If I were a retired educator and saw that 45% of the students in the district don’t even earn a “B” for attendance (OSPI noted 45% of students miss more than 10% of the school year) I would have serious concern. Attendance, I am sure, makes a difference when it comes to learning/test scores. These scores have sliden over the last several years. Not something, as a retired educator, I would want to read. So, I guess that could be offensive.
What shocks me the most is the tax burden to the property owners of Lakewood. Are we getting our money’s worth?
To put it into perspective
Tuition per Year
St Frances Cabrini – $7,350
Central Washington University – 8,845
The premier local educational institution…
UW – $12,973
SO … at an annual cost per student of $20,370, CPSD should be the Harvard or Princeton of the Pacific Northwest, right?
Unfortunately 70% of the students, per OSPI, are not college ready.
Who at the District is to blame?
A) The Educators
B) The Superintendent/Administration
C) The Board
D) All of the above
KM,
1. If none of the state testing is currently required of private schools in Washington (and in most states in the U.S.), how do we know they produce “college ready” students? Where is the data that uses a standardized test score to rate each private school so parents know if that school’s expense is worth it?
I know parents who enroll their children in private schools because they don’t want the testing or pressure.
2. When No Child Left Behind was put into place in the early 2000’s, every child was put on the same track to be “college ready”. Suddenly, the applied math classes where “hands on” skills supplied solid math concepts to students who “learn by doing” were removed from our schools. As a former teacher, do you believe every student needs to be on a “college ready” track and that they are somehow a failure or the school failed if they fall short of that imposed goal for all? It was not every student’s goal or considered even necessary for every student to go to college when I went to school.
3. Do you believe that poverty impacts school attendance? Do you have suggestions that could address this issue because it is currently not being ignored by our administration, so if you have ideas, please share them. It’s a tough one because the majority of students in this district are from low income families and we have one of the highest mobility rates in the State.
4. Are you aware that the state tests are no longer required once a student decides the different pathway they want to take to earn a diploma? Those who want to go to college will take the tests after leaving middle school. I’m wondering if attendance will increase because students will finally have choices about their interests, the skills they can develop, and how it leads to a future career? This focus on a state test to prove you were worthy of a diploma was not required when I went to Clover Park HS and students, teachers, and the school district were considered one of the best in the state of Washington. Imagine that! We had zero proof of academic achievement other than subjective grades. I see and hear adults in our community who forget they never were under the pressure our current students have faced…no wonder students lost interest or hope. Let’s hope that era of judging success by a test score is over. I’m tired of hearing adults calling our students and teachers failures. I find Mr. Arbeeny’s obsession with test scores actually harmful to students and out of touch with the changes being made.The new Clover Park Academy is just one example of how students can find a pathway that works for them. My grandson recently took the vocational pathway and I would hate for anyone in this community to see him or the school district as a failure. I got my school tax money’s worth. 🙂
Mrs. Arkell-
Thanks for your response
1) My experience, being a past board member of the Cabrini parent association, gave me 1st hand experience as to the success of private schools. Both of my children went on to successfully graduate college as did a large percentage of their friends. My experience is that, parents sent their students to Cabrini for a better education, not to avoid state testing. Also, while they may not have done state testing at Cabrini they did national testing to see how well they are progressing.
2) I am not a retired teacher so I hope what I wrote was not misleading. From my perspective YES all children, up to a certain point, should be set up for success as if they would choose college for themself. Shouldn’t all students from a young age be set up for success?
3) Yes, income can affect education but it should not be a “go to excuse” as to why students are failing. I know the District goes to great lengths, as required by state law, to pick up students regardless of where they are, homeless in district or out of district. That does not negate the fact that 45% still are not getting to school. Maybe it is more than just offering transportation?
4) I, like you, grew up and graduated from CPSD. You are right it used to be a great school district. While testing may not have been needed, to earn a diploma, the district certainly participated in national standardized testing. I bet if I looked through the box of childhood memories my Mom saved I could find my test scores from the 70’s and 80’s.
As tax payers, spending SIGNIFICANTLY more than it cost to attend UW, we should not accept that our District is no longer one of the best. We should expect more from the board, administration and professionals. All of our students should be fully educated to succeed in life. Clearly that is not happening, as evidenced by the test scores that Mr. Arbeeny is correctly concerned about. There is absolutely no way that his constant reminders, that he shares here, are negatively harmful to any students.
I wish your grandson the best in his educational pursuits.
KM Hills,
Thank you for responding. I’m glad you cleared up not being an educator and that you did not send your children to our public schools. Unless you have the breakdown of the demographics of students Cabrini served while you were involved, we are comparing apples to oranges.
Being on the Cabrini Board, what was the mobility of students entering and staying within that private system from K through entrance into a private high school system or to a school district with far different demographics than the City of Lakewood? The mobility data is necessary if you want to claim a private school is better.The longer students stay in the Clover Park School system the greater their achievement. Why do you think that data is completely ignored by Mr. Arbeeny, or by any chronic critic of our district?
If over 60% of our students are low income, how does that compare to Cabrini’s student population? Mobility and income level are not excuses, they are real factors that impact learning on a daily basis. Our School Board and Superintendent have been recognized because they oversee an overwhelming effort to care for every student who is enrolled in this extremely complex school district.
How exactly did you measure the Cabrini students to determine they were “fully educated” if they never took yearly standardized tests?
I didn’t have the luxury of sitting on the sidelines pointing fingers because I taught at Woodbrook. Comparing our student body to that of private schools or to neighboring communities with far different demographics is not reality based. Students are not widgets and just numbers on the OSPI site. When we hired a retired experienced science teacher from one of the most expensive private schools near Lakewood, he lasted one week and quit because he had zero ability to manage our students. And let me be clear, our students were every bit as capable as any other students. He never had faced in his teaching career the challenging circumstances our teachers faced on a daily basis to connect with students and manage a classroom. Kicking kids out is easy, but reaching them and teaching requires skill.
This is why our school board and Superintendent are being recognized! They are out to educate and assist ALL children, not a select few. This is a wonderfully diverse yet extremely complex school district.
The on-going reluctance of Mr. Arbeeny to use anything but SBA data to claim we are a failing district is indeed lazy and harmful to our students. He has done absolutely nothing other than to pretend he is smarter than those in the trenches doing the real work. His views on child development as it relates to education in recent Ietters are quite backwards. Since when is it wrong to care about the social and emotional well-being of our students? Every teacher has to be aware! Perhaps he has not heard of lockdowns and school shootings which every parent now fears. We have child development and mental health experts in our community and Mr. Arbeeny’s views received the attention they deserved. Every parent should also be concerned.
I am relieved we have video tapes of speakers at board meetings going back to 2019, copies of letters to the Suburban Times and many hundreds of public record request of specific school board member’s emails. It paints the complete picture of a very orchestrated and political effort to discredit our school district from people within and outside of our city. That effort continues.
I present facts. Get over it! Facts are just facts. What they reveal may be taken as negative or positive but regardless they are still facts. Deal with them if you can.
In their responses neither Arkell nor Attebery have disputed the facts and figures contained in this article. Rather they have used deflection and ad hominem attacks on the author and Lakewood CARES because that is all they have. But they do have opinions…everyone has one!
CARES doesn’t need to be a “cheer leader” for CPSD. They already have that in the community relation department. Do you actually think that these CPSD puff pieces are appropriate for an adult, parental, tax paying audience? If CARES didn’t reveal these factual statistics would either of you have known the factual state of academic affairs at CPSD and the Board’s ineffectiveness since 2016?
I didn’t think so…and neither would the rest of Lakewood’s/CPSD’s adult population.
BTW: Lyle, you never baby sat my children. Maybe it was the Arbini family.
Bottom line: has the CPSD Board displayed excellence in the jobs since 2016 (give factual examples) or have they not (I’ve given factual examples)?
Mr. Arbeeny, shedding a light on the darkness of your political group, their actions, motives, and misinformation is always a worthy endeavor. Without attacking our schools, students, teachers, and administrators, what exactly do you do as a nonprofit for the benefit of this community? It seems as if you just use the same old claims in the Sub Times as a way to advertise. As a pure politically motivated nonprofit, everything you claim is suspect.
How is it that you choose to ignore formative testing data and are unable to grasp it’s importance in showing student growth? Quite an oversite for someone who likes to claim they are on top of testing data.
As for ad hominem attacks…it really rattles you when people simply expose how you operate. Expect to be called out when your very actions and words are a matter of public record. You personally own the “diploma mill” claim and fed that lie to the public. Did you ever publically apologize to the students you trashed? Your members used it repeatedly. Do you now deny it? Is it all just your hobby to constantly demean Superintendent Banner, our school board members, employees and students? You like to dish out personal attacks and then expect no one to call you out. It really bothers you that our Superintendent and school board are recognized because it spoils the picture you so want to paint. Do better and please stop whining about being held accountable by me.
It doesn’t “rattle” me at all. It merely confirms that critics like yourself have nothing else to offer. I’m secure in my research and the facts. Where are yours and sources?
Simple questions; simple answers.
Which diploma has greater value based upon academic ranking? One from Peninsula School District (90.3 percentile) or CPSD (25.9 percentile)?
Based upon OSPI statistics, on average which district of these two has the higher percentage of students meeting state standards in ELA, math and science? Peninsula (58.9%) or CPSD (31.7%)
Which graduation rate is more reflective of academic performance? Peninsula (91.4%) or CPSD (88.4%)?
Which of these two districts are more efficient per student expenditure as it relates to academic performance? Peninsula ($17,238) or CPSD ($20,370)?
Which school district of these two are college recruiters likely to visit?
Which outstanding students in these two districts is more likely to get recruited to outstanding colleges?
Which district would you rather your grandchild attend?
Mrs. Arkell
First, I re-read point 1) from my above response to you. Please refer back to that as it clearly provides the answer about testing at Cabrini.
Second, In my initial post I never compared CPSD vs. private school. My response was soley answering your question about what my experience had been.
Third, CPSD has ALWAYS had a high transition of students given McChord and Ft Lewis. So let’s stick to comparing CPSD vs CPSD. Test scores have slipped since your time as a student, as you mentioned it was one of the good districts back then, and the test scores have continued to fall over the last 5+ years. So YES mobility and income are “excuses” since we are comparing CPSD vs. CPSD. The same student population.
Test scores have honestly been questionable since 2001. As parents that is when we chose to not only pay taxes, for a District we did not use, but ALSO paid for private school for our daughter’s.
Lastly, as for Mr. Arbeeny, he speaks for himself and maybe Lakewood Cares. I am not associated with either. I, like him, believe the Stats. That year over year CPSD shamefully produces a lower quality product (test scores) while the tax payer continues to pay more.
When do we say ENOUGH!!
Take Care and maybe our patches will cross again.
Let me dispel a couple of myths that have been repeated here and commonly elsewhere and generally accepted without question: mobility, specifically military-connected students and the impact of poverty as excuses for CPSD academic performance.
The myth of “mobility” as an excuse for failing academics is nothing more than an excuse NOT supported by facts. Approximately 33.2% (4,228) of CPSD students are military-connected with the majority of that number (66% or 2,805 students) attending the six elementary schools on JBLM, isolated from the CPSD general student population. The remaining 1,423 (34%) military-connected students are scattered between the District’s off-base elementary, middle and high schools.
These JBLM elementary schools do not present an academic detriment: far from it. They greatly exceed the academic performance of off-base schools in every subject area and across all racial/ethnic categories. Without them, the District’s academic performance would be significantly lower than it already is at 25.9 percentile. The 6 JBLM elementary schools’ average academic ranking is 59% percentile while that of the other 10 elementary schools off-JBLM is 17.3 percentile! JBLM schools also greatly outperform in students meeting state standards in ELA, math and science. Stop spreading the myth that somehow military-connected students are the problem! Indeed they are part of the solution. Those are the facts!
The myth of “poverty” as an excuse for failing academics is nothing more than an excuse NOT supported by facts. In 2016 Lakewood’s poverty rate was 16.6%. In 2024 Lakewood’s poverty rate is 12.65% with a household income of $90,725 which is hardly poor! In reality the poverty rate has gone down in Lakewood since 2016 and along with it the myth that poverty is the cause of CPSD’s decline academically. Stop spreading the myth that somehow poverty and poor students are the problem! Poverty isn’t nearly as bad a stated and poor kids represent an academic potential that has not been tapped by CPSD. Those are the facts!
Mr. Arbeeny, You now claim that poverty plus mobility have no affect on a student’s academic achievement and any suggestion that it does is a myth? That is quite a claim. I just Googled the topic and came up with quite a number of factual studies that counter your claim. Can you please post the research that supports your myth position? Or, is it just your opinion?
If you go back and read my comments on our military families, I made it clear that they had help with housing, at least one parent who was regularly employed and had health care services. There are supports in place to help our military families. All of this is quite different than many of our students who have none of these supports. Or, do you assume mobility only refers to our military families? Their mobility is different than those without any of the same safety nets. I hope that helps you better understand the differences. As a former teacher at Woodbrook, I am well versed in the differences. Perhaps you were in the military and see mobility only through one lens?
When you look at OSPI test data does it tell you how long every child has been enrolled before taking the SBA?
Mr. Arbeeny,
WOW! What were you thinking Thank? Thank you! You just cemented the fact that you make unsubstantiated claims and attempt to mislead citizens. Of all the school districts you decided to use in which to prove your faulty thinking and to try to shame Clover Park, you purposely and foolishly chose to compare to districts that do not share similar demograhics; Peninsula vs Clover Park?
You then used OSPI testing data that does not even reflect graduating seniors!
You asked which of these two school districts had a better chance of college recruiters likely to visit and in which district recruiters from outstanding colleges would find the most outstanding students. Here are a few important statistics you purposefully failed to share that when combined, certainly need to be examined and taken into account.
Peninsula District’s Overall Student Demographics: 75% white; 24% low income; 2.8% ELL; 1.8 % mobile
Clover Park District’s Overall Student Demographics: 26%white; 75% low income; 15% ELL; 6.3% mobile.
Mr. Arbeeny, you just either failed to do your homework or, you actually believe that being white from an economically sound household where you are fluent in English and have lived in the same ccommunity for many years has zero impact on academic achievement! If so, welcome to the world of delusional thinking and chronic denial of the obvious. Please stop pretending to be any kind of education or data expert.
It took a few minutes of my time to look up the demographic data on OSPI. Why do you think the State finds this information important to the overall understanding of academic achievement? Demographics such as poverty and language barriers matter in educating our children, Mr. Arbeeny. It is clear you don’t respect this data or even bother examining it. Your “one -size -fits- all ” world view of education doesn’t exist.
You and LakewoodCARES tried this same lame comparison scam using Steilacoom and University Place scores compared to Clover Park when you ran the David Anderson and Brown school board campaigns. It was the birth of your “diploma mill” lie. You even invented a fake report card and sent it out on their campaign flyers! Remember?
Again, Thank you for this absolute confirmation that your claims are often based on lack of critical thinking using inaccurate or incomplete data anaysis and shoddy research practices.
More excuses about how the poor can’t learn (myth), minorities can’t learn (myth) and military connected students can’t learn (myth). Nothing but excuses. Nothing in your facts relate to the actual education of students. Rather you harp on student group identity differences rather than their common abilities. In case you haven’t heard: identity politics are passe.
CPSD has excellence right here despite all the “obvious” group disadvantages schools may share. You don’t have to go to Peninsula; how about going on JBLM to see what a 90%+ ranked school looks like. Or how about Harrison Prep? How do they succeed despite any disadvantages shared with the rest of CPSD student population? Why has nothing been done for academic flat-liners like Tyee Park, Lochburn and CPHS? Cheri you are part of the problem by defending the indefensible CPSD academic failure since at least 2016.
The question remains: which school district (or CPSD school) would you rather your grandchild attend? Why can’t they all be like that?
Demographically Lakewood and CPSD did not change significantly or dramatically between 2016 and 2024 to account for a drop in CPSD academic ranking in 2016 of 46.3 percentile to 25.9 percentile in 2024.
Nor does it account for the drop from students meeting state standards in 2016 (ELA:48.8%, math:40.8) to that of 2024 (ELA:37%, math: 25.6%). The singular event between 2016 and 2024 was the change in CPSD administration between 2016 and 2018. COVID affected all school districts not just CPSD so that as an excuse is out.
2016:Clover Park District’s Overall Student Demographics: 32%white; 72% low income; 12% ELL; 8% mobile.
2024: Clover Park District’s Overall Student Demographics: 26%white; 75% low income; 15% ELL; 6.3% mobile.
These changes amount to less than a 1% change in demographics in any given year between 2016 and 2024.