Submitted by John Arbeeny.
Lakewood CARES is providing an academic-based response to schools highlighted in the Clover Park School District (CPSD) “#SuperSchoolShoutOut“articles in The Suburban Times. This is data you will not find elsewhere in CPSD community relations pieces, School Board meeting agendas or monthly “Inside Schools”. This week’s CPSD “beaming with pride” article covers Idlewild Elementary which was featured in a Suburban Times article on 25 January 2025:
This CPSD article is devoid of any actual academic-related information. Can you tell by reading it how things are academically at Idlewild? No, I didn’t think so. I commend teacher Julie Tran and fifth- grader Colleen McMonagle for their effort and interests. However this CPSD community relations article is anecdotal at best and deceptive at worst. Unfortunately, Idlewild has been in a precipitous academic decline since 2019. Who’s responsible for this collapse? The CPSD School Board, past and present, and Superintendent.
Idlewild achieved its highest statewide academic ranking in 2019 at an above-average 56.9 percentile. Compare that to the 2024 academic ranking of 17.6 percentile, well below average. 82.4 % of Washington’s elementary schools outperform Idlewild academically. That is a 69% drop in academic ranking in just five years.
Compare Idlewild’s 2024 academic ranking of 17.6 percentile with the average ranking for all CPSD elementary schools at a dismal 25.9 percentile. The academic disparity between the best and worst elementary schools in CPSD is huge. The top eight elementary schools (six of which are on JBLM) are ranked at 53.3 percentile while the bottom eight elementary schools are ranked at an incredible 12.6 percentile. In effect there are two elementary school “districts” within CPSD, a disparity that Board and Superintendent have failed to address. This Schooldigger.com graph displays Idlewild’s academic rankings since 2016 to present:
Idlewild Elementary School Academic Ranking
https://www.schooldigger.com/go/WA/schools/0141000252/school.aspx
The Office of the Superintendent for Public Instruction (OSPI) data shown below on the next two slides come from its “Report Card” website and go into further detail about Idlewild’s academics and related factors:
Idlewild Elementary School academic performance, student population
Unfortunately OSPI changed its “report card” front page so their academics would look better than in actuality. OSPI entirely eliminated the poorly understood Student Growth Percentile (SGP) and relegated it to a back page on the OSPI report card. OSPI further downplayed the importance of SGP, which CPSD continues to tout instead of academic achievement, as follows:
“It is at the discretion of Washington school districts whether or not to distribute student growth reports to families and students. OSPI recognizes that the model is complex, and, given other competing initiatives, investing the necessary time and energy into training on SGPs may be a lower priority.”
Although SGP is the metric preferred by teachers and CPSD administration, SGP doesn’t tell you anything about academic proficiency in which most parents and tax payers are interested. Have you ever seen your children’s or their school’s SGP on their report card?
OSPI then changed the names of the remaining front page report card data, without explanation thereby hiding their academic performance behind misleading long-winded educational jargon.
“Students on Track for College-level Learning Without Needing Remedial Classes” replaced the previous easily understood “Students Meeting State Standards”. This is a misleading, confusing, name change especially at elementary and middle school level. How is it an appropriate academic evaluation metric for elementary and middle schools? Answer: it isn’t. It’s nonsense!
“Students Showing Foundational Grade Level Knowledge and Skills or Above” (SSFGLKSA for brevity here) is another OSPI fiction. “Students Meeting State Standards” originally only included “Above Average” and “Well Above Average” students. SSFGLKSA added “Below Average” students to the mix to deceptively boost its sagging academic statistics by lowering standards. This instantly increased the apparent student academic performance with no actual increase in student academic performance! In a briefing to CPSD School Board member, CPSD Dir. of Assessment and Program Evaluation, Brian Gabele, rationalized the addition of “Below Average” students into the mix because, “Well at least they learned something!” That’s what the practice of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) ideology does. It doesn’t actually improve performance. It merely lowers the standards, so performance seems to improve without actually doing so.
Now back to Idlewild Elementary:
In 2018/19 the percentage of Idlewild students meeting State standards in ELA (English Language Arts) was (59.1%), math (54.5%) and science (59.8%) for an average of 57.8%. In 2024 the average percentage of Idlewild students meeting State standards was 31.8% (ELA (35.6%), math (26.6%) and science (33.3%): 68.2% of Idlewild students did not meet these State standards. That gives you some idea of significant decline of Idlewild’s academic performance over the last five years. What students fail to learn in elementary school follows them and negatively compounds upon itself into middle school, high school, after graduation and into adult life.
Idlewild Elementary School attendance, teachers, spending
Idlewild’s regular attendance is 79%, which is far better than the CPSD average attendance of 65.7%. This is an exception to the rule across the District where normally low attendance equals low academic performance. Yet despite a high attendance rate, Idlewild’s academic performance has significantly declined, so something(s) else must be going on systemically to affect academic performance.
Idlewild’s class size is about one teacher to 12.3 students (1:12.3) which is below the CPSD average ratio of 1:15. It was not that long ago when teacher-student ratios were between 1:20 -1:30. Yet despite both low teacher/student ratios and high attendance Idlewild’s academic performance is in decline.
In 2019/20 the Idlewild expenditure per student was $14,262. By 2022/23 (latest figures) it had ballooned to $19,743 in just four years. That’s an annual increase of about 8.5%. Yet despite that increase in spending academic proficiency has declined.
This is a phenomenon seen across the CPSD: higher spending, lower academic achievement. Yet CPSD goes to the legislature each year with its hand out for more funding. It’s hard to plead “poverty” when in 2023 Clover Park reported 356 employees making more than $100,000 per year; the average CPSD employee salary was $73,142 (excluding benefits) in a city where the per capita income is $40,711.
https://openpayrolls.com/rank/highest-paid-employees/washington-clover-park
The Office of the Superintendent for Public Instruction (OSPI) data shown below on their “Report Card” website goes into further detail about Idlewild’s Student Growth Percentile (SGP):
Idlewild Elementary School “Student Growth Percentile” (SGP)
Idlewild’s Student Growth Percentile (SGP) is a mixed bag. In 2018/19 Idlewild’s SGP in ELA was 52 percentile and in math 67 percentile. In 2023/24, just six years later, it had declined to ELA at 37 percentile and math at 35 percentile. The State median SGP score is 50 percentile. Thus the 2018/19 SGP signified that Idlewild was above/well above the median and making progress academically, while the 2023/24 SGP indicated that Idlewild was steadily losing ground academically.
On the plus side, minorities’ growth generally outperformed in English and math, which brings into question the CPSD often-claimed “disparities” between racial and ethnic groups. From the look of Idlewild’s 2023/24 SGP data it would appear that Whites are the ones with an academic growth disparity.
https://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/ReportCard/ViewSchoolOrDistrict/102223
If you have a student who attends Idlewild, or any other CPSD school, and want a change in academic performance, then you’re going to have to get involved! You deserve more in return for your hard-earned tax dollars. It’s the future of your children! Find out how your school is performing academically and what it is going to take to improve that performance.
School Board members are your elected representatives, not just rubber stamps for hired CPSD employees. Contact them and hold them accountable. Wondering who your CPSD Board representative is? Try contacting the Board’s President, Alyssa Anderson Pearson, via email form at:
https://www.cloverpark.k12.wa.us/cms/One.aspx?portalId=236158&pageId=61380455
I’m sure she’ll welcome the opportunity to answer all your questions.
Yet again, CPSD failing students, but still getting paid (& well) without student performance/achievements coming into play.
This paragraph says it all: This is a phenomenon seen across the CPSD: higher spending, lower academic achievement. Yet CPSD goes to the legislature each year with its hand out for more funding. It’s hard to plead “poverty” when in 2023 Clover Park reported 356 employees making more than $100,000 per year; the average CPSD employee salary was $73,142 (excluding benefits) in a city where the per capita income is $40,711.
Time for a change! Our students deserve better. Pay based on Performance.
Perhaps this was an oversight, but comparing individual employee salary to per capita income is not a valid comparison as I understand it. Please clarify your comment. Thank you.
There are several ways to determine a city’s resident income. Per capita is one way. If you have objections to that then try median household income which for Lakewood is about $55,723. Any measure used is going to be somewhat skewed by a 13% poverty rate at one end of the scale and the wealthy at the other end of the scale.
https://cityoflakewood.us/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Lakewood_Fact_Sheet_september2022.pdf
Very comprehensive… and disturbing… spending, performance, etc. The avg class size you’re reporting seems VERY LOW. Is that real?
One thing missing seems to be the excuse that I’ve heard before is the number of students that CPSD encounters via JBLM, mostly, who are ESL (English as a Second Language) challenged. I know you mentioned schools ON JBLM, but the JBLM dependents are thicker in Lakewood, I think, then most of the surrounding communities, at least in per capita numbers.
No excuses, just offering ??? something… a perspective.
I worked for SBCTC compiling data for that agency when Mr. Reykdal was there. He’s brilliant, that’s for sure, but the agency, as well as OSPI had, let’s say, a way with numbers. I was frequently asked to adjust the ‘cohort’ in my queries if the ‘outcomes’ weren’t what they wanted to see. No, I can’t prove it. He (Mr. Reydal) does have exceptional presence and a way with words. If they changed ‘what’ they are basing their reports on I would highly suspect that they didn’t like what they were seeing, that it wasn’t supporting their funding model or promoting their personal objectives somehow.
I can’t help myself. Is it the same test that’s been offered over the period of time in question? I can’t help wondering if it’s fair to call out a decline if it’s not the same unit of measure/test.
I’m not familiar with School digger. How reliable is their info?
The JBLM myth is one that is floated to explain low academic performance when exactly the opposite is true. As stated, the 6 JBLM elementary schools are at the very top academically of all CPSD schools. Approximately 2/3rds of all “military connected” students attend school at JBLM elementary schools with the other 1/3 spread out between the off-base elementary, middle and high schools.
OSPI pulled this switch of academic metrics and informed no one until it became an issue just before the 2024. CARES “outed” this switch some 3 weeks before it was even briefed to the CPSD School Board. Even then there was some uncertainty why the change was necessary and confusion over how applicable especially at elementary and middle school level.
I do not have the Schooldigger.com algorithm but have done some investigation. Their summaries, which I attach as a comment to the CPSD “puff pieces” track for the most part with OSPI data. I also studied the academic rankings which provide an academic graphic trend which is not part of the OSPI report card and for good reason. It gives at a glance where academics are headed over time. I looked at the quartiles of academically ranked elementary, middle and high schools and found that there was a very close correlation between academic ranking and OSPI academic metrics.
Manipulating the numbers to achieve the desired result is seen elsewhere in OSPI and CPSD. Just take a look at the graduation rates which increase annually at the direction of OSPI at the same time academic performance is falling.
For teacher/student ratios take a look at the attached charts which show 380 students and 31 teachers: do the math. While class size might vary (some teachers may not actually be teaching) the teacher/student ratio gives some idea of the relative class size.
I think testing has been the same since about 2016. The SBA in ELA and math has been around since at least 2016 while the WCAS for science was added in 2017/18.
Concentrate on reading and math and not the “fluff”. This used to be an excellent school.