Surprisingly little change in NAEP scores for NYC students compared to NYS & nation; & NCES finds no link between school closures and scores

The NAEP results were released today for every state and many large urban districts.  Unsurprisingly, given the disruptions to learning due to the pandemic,  most states saw significantly declines in all four areas tested:  4th and 8th grade reading and math.  The declines in math were especially large.  

In NYC, 4^th grade math scores dropped but so did 22 other districts; and somewhat surprisingly, there was no significant change in NYC scores in the three other categories: 8^th grade math, 4^th grade reading or 8^th grade reading.

NYC scores declined less  than many other districts and better than NY state as a whole, which showed significant drops in all four areas, including 4^th grade math and reading, as well as 4^th & 8^th grade math.

You can check out the data for reading and math.  

Especially given the bitter and ongoing controversy over school closures and remote learning, here is the quote of the day from NCES Commissioner Peggy Carr: 

 “There’s nothing in this data that tells us that there is a measurable difference in the performance between states and districts based solely on how long schools were closed."

 Below is a pdf copy of screenshots captured off today's NCES online webinar, with titles I've added focusing on NY State and NYC results.  Comments welcome. 

New info from DOE on the NYC student data breach — with some critical follow-up questions

 

 

Update: 8/25/21 - Another data leak from NYC schools was revealed - in which a Upguard, a security company, found that the personal information of thousands of students stored on an unencrypted Microsoft Power Apps portal exposed, along with other government and company data:

The portal belonging to the NYC Department of Education had a list called “contacts” with 412,220 records containing full names and district borough numbers, and a list called “Studentaccounts” with 291,955 records containing full names, usernames, district borough numbers, and email addresses for the “nycstudents.net” mail domain– likely the school-assigned email addresses for students, though it is difficult to verify the identities of minors with publicly available data.

More on this story here.

___

 Recently,  Chalkbeat reported on a data breach that affected over 1000 NYC students and teachers. The reporter followed up with another story that suggested this breach was caused by an insecure storage of student and teacher data on a Google drive, first discovered in January 2021 by high school students at Brooklyn Tech. Though these students reported this insecure situation to an administrator at their school immediately, it was ignored until they found in March 2021 that the problem had grown worse, when they emailed three DOE officials to alert them. I was asked to see if I could find out more  by a NYC parent leader, and followed up with an email to Joe Baranello, the chief privacy officer of DOE. 

I asked him for copies of the letters sent to parents and staff whose data was breached, and for more information about how these breaches occurred and what data elements were accessed. To his credit, he responded within a few days with more details and provided four breach notification letters as attachments.

All four letters were dated July 30, 2021. Letters #1 and #2 were addressed to parents about an unspecified March 2021 breach; the second letter included reference to specific data elements that were accessed, with that information redacted. Letter #3 was addressed to parents whose children's data was breached in an earlier August 2020 incident. Letter #4 was addressed to teachers about the March 2021 breach. 

In all cases, these letters inexplicably claim that this data was seen by only a single NYC student. Joe's email, which follows, included more information about the specific data elements that were breached. Below his message are several follow-up questions I asked him, including the fact that the data stored in Google drive appears to have been unencrypted, and the long delay in notifying parents aboutt these breaches, both of which appear to violate the state student privacy law. 

If and when I get more information from DOE or elsewhere, I will update this post. Meanwhile, if you or your child were affected, please let us know at info@studentprivacymatters.org . Thanks!

 ___  

From: Baranello Joseph <JBaranello3@schools.nyc.gov> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 11:15 AM To: leoniehaimson@gmail.com Cc: Siciliano Lauren <LSiciliano2@schools.nyc.gov>; Sharma Anuraag <ASharma6@schools.nyc.gov>; Nathan Judy <JNathan@schools.nyc.gov>; Gantz Toni <TGantz@schools.nyc.gov>   

Subject: RE: Data leak affects about 3,000 NYC students and 100 employees, officials confirm - Chalkbeat New York 

 Hello Leonie, Thank you for your inquiry. We have attached the template letters that were used for these notifications, which provide additional information on what occurred and what was viewed. Impacted individuals would have received the letter applicable to them. The information implicated varied by individual. To that end, the templates include variable fields that were populated based on the specific information implicated for each person. 

Approximately 3,000 students and 100 staff were impacted. The variable fields are listed below, and which were involved varied widely from student to student. No social security numbers of students or parents were involved to our knowledge (the DOE does not collect parent or student SSNs for routine inclusion in its databases). For 5 employees, full SSNs were included. We are committed to protecting the privacy of our staff and school communities, and a DOE student should not have been able to view these files. We have no indication that anyone's information was further shared or misused at this time, and the DOE implemented aggressive measures to prevent this from happening again. Out of an abundance of caution we are offering free credit monitoring service to impacted individuals. Student data:

• Student Academic
• Student Biographic
• Student Health
• Student Name
• Student ID
• Student Date of Birth
• Special Education
• Parent Information

Employee data:

• Name
• Social Security Number
• Social Security Number (Last 4 digits only)
• Date of Birth
• Employee ID

The following specific documents were viewed for fewer than ten students per document type:

• Individualized Education Program
• Emergency Contact Card
• Government ID
• Special Education Remote Learning Plan
• Section 504 Plan
• Birth Certificate

Sincerely, Joseph A. Baranello Deputy Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer New York City Department of Education 

 ____  

From: leoniehaimson@gmail.com <leoniehaimson@gmail.com> 

Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 5:06 PM  

To: 'Baranello Joseph' <JBaranello3@schools.nyc.gov> Cc: 'Siciliano Lauren' <LSiciliano2@schools.nyc.gov>; 'Sharma Anuraag' <ASharma6@schools.nyc.gov>; 'Nathan Judy' <JNathan@schools.nyc.gov>; 'Gantz Toni' <TGantz@schools.nyc.gov>; Leonie Haimson <leoniehaimson@gmail.com> 

Subject: RE: Data leak affects about 3,000 NYC students and 100 employees 

Dear Joe: Thank you for sharing the letters that were sent to parents and school staff about these breaches. I have several follow-up questions:  

Question 1: In letter #3, dated July 30, 2021, DOE informed parents of the following: “In August 2020, a DOE student reported that they viewed various electronic files that contained education records and personal information about you and/or your child. The DOE immediately took steps to address it.” Why such a long delay in notification for this breach, especially as the NY State regulations for NYS Ed Law 2-d specifically require breach notification as early as possible and in no case more than 60 calendar days after its discovery? “  

Question 2 – This Chalkbeat article reports that a group of Brooklyn Tech students accessed personal data in January 2021 and March 2021; why is there no notification to parents of the January 2021 breach? “The students unintentionally discovered they had access to these documents in January. They noticed that the Google Drive folder where they uploaded their class assignments during remote learning contained documents uploaded by students and staff at schools across the city. Those documents included second graders’ classwork, a parent-teacher conference sign up sheet, and college recommendation letters, said a Brooklyn Tech High School student who asked to remain anonymous.”  

Question 3 – Why the delay in notification for the March 2021 breach referenced above, in letters #1 and #2, especially as DOE learned about it shortly thereafter, according to the Chalkbeat article? Again, the July 30 letter is more than 60 calendar days after the date of discovery, despite the notification requirements in the regs.  

Question 4 – Why do all four letters refer to only one student accessing this data, when the Chalkbeat article refers to a group of students accessing much personal data in January and March? 

Question 5- Has the DOE looked into the possibility that not only this group of high school students, but other individuals as well may have accessed personal data for thousands more students/teachers, given how easily this data was found? What further investigations are being done?  

Question 6 – Clearly the data was not encrypted if students were so easily able to access it. Are you aware that the State privacy law and regs require that the sharing of personal data with any third party such as Google requires the encryption of all personal data in motion and in rest? Does DOE intend to comply with this requirement of the law in the future?  

Question 7 – Why is the New York City Department of Education sending letters to parents from a P.O. Box in Suwanee, GA? 

 Question 8 - Why does the DOE tell parents in these letters that if they “want to discuss this matter or have any questions” about these breaches, they need to create an account with a private company called IDX, rather than the contact someone at DOE itself – especially the law required districts to appoint a Chief Privacy Officer to be the contact person for parents’ questions and concerns regarding privacy?

Moreover, the link provided in the letter requires parents to create an account with this company that that in turn obligates them to accept onerous Terms of Service that “will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless IDX, our subsidiaries and affiliates, and each of our respective officers, directors, agents, partners and employees (individually and collectively, the “IDX Parties”) from and against any loss, liability, claim, demand, damages, expenses or costs ("Claims") arising out of or related to (a) your access to or use of our Services or Website”? 

Moreover, IDX also limits any claims of damages to binding arbitration, and in its Privacy Policy, claims it can use their customers’ information for many purposes, including sharing with credit bureaus and/or “With vendors, consultants, and other service providers who need access to such information to carry out work on our behalf, including marketing our products and services.” Again, thank you for your work for NYC children, and for providing these letters to me. 

Hoping for a timely response, 

Leonie Haimson
Co-chair, Parent Coalition for Student Privacy
www.studentprivacymatters.org
info@studentprivacymatters.org

Update on class size caps, violations & strikes in NYC, LA, Oakland and Florida

Update 3/2/19:  After a seven-day strike, the Oakland district and the union have tentatively agreed to a new contract that includes an 11% salary increase over four years, more counselors, psychologists, related service providers and speech pathologists, and to phasing in lower class size caps starting next school year in Kindergarten to 23 students per class;  1st-3rd grade classes to 26 students per class ; 4th-5th grade classes to 29  students per class and HS classes in core subjects to 31.  By 2021, these class size caps will be further reduced by one. (All these caps lower than current UFT contract  that hasn't changed in 50 years.)  The OEA union summary of the agreement is here; the entire agreement is here; separate chapters are here.

Wednesday, the UFT announced the beginning of an expedited process to resolve class size violations in five high schools where violations had been chronic: Benjamin N. Cardozo High School, Francis Lewis High School, and Academy of American Studies, in Queens, and Leon M. Goldstein High School and Secondary School for Journalism, in Brooklyn.  Chalkbeat wrote about this here. 

This process was negotiated as part of the new UFT contract and is supposed to accelerate the lengthy and often ineffective way that excessive class sizes in schools have been addressed in the past, especially where violations have repeatedly occurred over the years.  The UFT press release  says the grievances will be referred "immediately to arbitration and the arbitrator’s decision must be implemented by the DOE within five days.”

Yet neither Chalkbeat the article nor the UFT press release provides any information about how many other NYC public schools in addition to these five schools still suffer from class sizes over the cap. What the UFT did say about all these other schools was this:

In addition to the expedited process for chronically overcrowded classes, the UFT will be working with district superintendents and the citywide Class Size Labor Management Committee to resolve oversize class complaints in other schools. Any schools where class size issues are not resolved by this process will be eligible for arbitrators' hearings, with the additional requirement that arbitrators' remedies must be implemented within five school days.

The class size caps according to the UFT contract are listed here:

Kindergarten: 25 students contained
Grades 1-6 in elementary schools: 32 students
JHS/MS: 33 students in non-Title I schools; 30 in Title I schools.
HS: 34 students.

Coincidentally, on Friday, the DOE released the audited Oct. 31 data for class sizes this fall, citywide, by district and by school.   When the law requiring DOE reporting was first passed over a decade ago, in part because of our advocacy, we pushed for two reporting periods, once in the fall and once in the spring, because we knew that high school classes were reconstituted in the second semester and we wanted to have a handle on those class sizes as well and try to provide pressure for them to be lowered as promptly as possible. 

Unfortunately, the DOE interpreted the law another way and after releasing the Oct. 31 data on Nov. 15, uses the Feb. 15 date to release the same basic data from Oct. 31, now just audited, rather than class size data from the  second semester.  The City Council has never challenged them on that interpretation.

Anyway, over the weekend we looked at the just-released audited fall data two ways, one assuming the Title I middle school cap of 30 pertains, and the other way assuming the non-Title One middle school cap of 33.  (About 83% of NYC public schools receive Title one funds, according to this DOE budget allocation memo – yet I don’t know of any middle schools where teachers grieve class sizes between 31-33; parents/teachers, please correct me if I’m wrong.)

The audited data shows that as of Oct. 31, there were 49,442 students in 1,311 classes that violated the class size limits,  assuming non-Title one caps of 33 in middle school:

# of classes and students over UFT limits, no Title I MS	Number of Students in Classes over UFT limits	Number of Classes over UFT limits
K-8 (assuming MS cap of 33)	12,676	399
HS	36,766	912
Total	49,442	1311

Assuming the smaller cap of 30 in Title one middle schools, there were more than twice as many violations in grades K-8, for a total of 67,656 students in 1908 classes:

# of students and classes over UFT Limits	Number of Students in Classes over UFT limits	Number of Classes over UFT limits
K-8 (assuming MS cap of 30)	30,890	996
HS	36,766	912
Total	67,656	1,908

The Oct. 31 audited data also shows that the largest percentage of violations occur in Kindergarten (affecting 7% of students) and middle school (5%-7% of students, assuming a cap of 30).

An article from the UFT newspaper dated Nov. 1, 2018 cites figures showing 401 schools citywide and 2,056 classes were out of compliance as of the 10th day of school this year, which was September 18. The same article also reports a class size cap of 30 for middle schools.  Assuming this limit to be true, only about 150 classes out of more than 2000 were brought into compliance between Sept. 18 and Oct. 31. I would guess that most of these schools did not lower class sizes after Oct. 31, but do not know for sure since neither the UFT nor the DOE report on this data.

In any case, these class size caps are far too large, and haven’t been lowered in over fifty years since the days of Albert Shanker, who was able to negotiated both salary increases and smaller classes, although  now of course we know far more about the tremendous benefits of class size reduction for student and teacher success. 

Though the UFT did not negotiate smaller caps in the new contract (according to teacher Arthur Goldstein because the “DOE told us point blank they had no interest in that”),  as a result of the recent Los Angeles strike, LA teachers won both higher salaries and smaller class size caps, as well as a resolution from the school board calling for a moratorium on charter schools.   

Yet the LA class size caps were originally far larger than those in NYC.  Moreover, there was a clause in the contract allowing the district to ignore the caps completely by claiming “financial necessity”, they had claimed nearly every year.  Thankfully, the union also managed to eliminate that clause in the new contract. 

After a strike at four Chicago International Charter Schools was settled last week, those teachers won higher salaries and smaller classes, including class size caps of 30 at all three of the chain’s high schools, significantly smaller than the UFT high school caps of 34.

Oakland teachers have announced they too plan to strike on Thursday, and among their demands are both higher salaries and smaller class size caps.  The fact-finder report proposed that Oakland teachers should get both, and “that lower class sizes will improve teacher retention and educational outcomes.”

While Oakland teachers are demanding caps be lowered by two students per grade, the fact-finder instead recommended a decrease in one student per class “to be fully implemented by July 2020, with 20% of schools having an implementation date of July 2019. The intent is for implementation to happen first at the highest-needs schools. I also recommend that the parties form a joint class size reduction taskforce. This task force will be charged with looking at ways to fund further class size reductions to be implemented by July 2021.”

The fact-finder report also disclosed the current class size caps at Oakland schools: Kindergarten classes at 27; 1^st-3^rd at 30; 4th-6^th at 31; 7-12 at 32 in most core subjects – smaller in every grade except Kindergarten and middle school than NYC, assuming Title one middle school caps of 30. The Oakland fact-finder also agreed with the union that there should be financial penalties imposed on the district for violating these caps.

Class size caps in Florida schools are smaller yet – as a result of a referendum in 2002 that amended their state constitution.  No more than 18 students per class are allowed in prekindergarten through grade 3; 22 students in grades 4 through 8; and 25 in high school classes.  Though schools are provided with flexibility to some degree, especially in elective and AP courses, the vast majority abide by the caps according to the official state reports.  Charters and public “schools of choice” are  allowed to meet these figures through school-wide average figures rather than classroom caps.

As the Tampa Bay Times reported last month,

According to the Department of Education, only 474 of 18,755 traditional classrooms missed the mark in the fall count — most of them in Polk and Hendry counties. …Even districts using a more liberal rule that lets them apply averages to their “schools of choice,” a program implemented by lawmakers in 2013, had slightly increased problems. This fall, 18 of 2,873 “choice” schools — 0.6 percent — violated the rules of 18 students in K-3 classes, 22 in grades 4-8 and 25 in high school.

The Florida class size caps have  led to nearly ideal statewide class size averages , as shown in the data for the 2017-2018 year of 15.5 students per class in preK-3^rd grade, 17.8 students per class in 4^th-8^th grade, and 18.6 students per class in high school. In 2002,  then-Governor Jeb Bush confided to state legislators he had “devious plans’ to eliminate the class size caps, and various members of the Legislature have tried to scrap them over the years, but they have been unable to do so because of their huge popularity among parents and teachers.

In any case, we shall see if Oakland teachers, like Los Angeles and Chicago charter school teachers before them, achieve both salary increases and reductions in class size.  I will be rooting them on and crossing my fingers that they do.

NYC Schools, Kids, Parents and Teachers will march in historic demonstration for climate action Sept. 21

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Kate Finneran, Kate@Avaaz.org,
801-634-8811 
DATE:  9/15/14                                                            

                                                                                                      

NYC Schools, Kids, Parents and Teachers to March

Local Schools to join the People’s Climate March this Sunday September 21st

New York – Upwards of 100,000 people are expected to join the People’s Climate March this Sunday, September 21 in what will be the largest demonstration for climate action in history. The People’s Climate March has been endorsed by over 1,200 organizations, including the nation’s largest environmental groups, 80 labor unions, faith-based groups, and social justice groups including environmental and climate justice groups in New York City.

We are expecting over 10,000 kids, parents, teachers, and high school students to march on

Sunday, September 21st

WHO:   10,000 NYC kids, parents, teachers, K-12 youth, college students

Upwards of 100,000 total marchers in Manhattan. 

WHERE:   Kids and Parents Meetup pre-march

66th and Central Park West, north to 68th

WHAT:   People’s Climate March

WHEN:   September 21st, assembling between 9-10 am

On September 23, President Obama and world leaders are coming to New York City for a historic UN summit on climate change. On Sunday, we’ll take to the streets to demand the world we know is within our reach: a world with an economy that works for people and the planet. A world safe from the ravages of climate change. A world with good jobs, clean air, and healthy communities for everyone.

As parents, grand-parents, teachers, and friends,  we have a historical responsibility to demand that our world leaders respond to the threat of climate change with real solutions. The Kids, Parents, and Teachers contingent of the march will feature activist and musician, Peter Yarrow of Peter, Paul, and Mary, his daughter Bethany Yarrow, Cellist Rufus Cappadocia, and more.

This is a peaceful, permitted, family-friendly march.

More details available at: http://peoplesclimate.org/logistics/

Details about NYC Schools involvement at: http://peoplesclimate.org/schools/

###

King and Tisch finally coming to hear from NYC parents next week!

Commissioner King and Merryl Tisch, head of the board of Regents, are finally coming to hear from NYC parents on their controversial education agenda, after already appearing at 14 forums in the rest of the state.  

Unfortunately, they have given us only one week of warning and will hold only three forums over two nights: Tuesday Dec. 10 in The Bronx and Brooklyn; and Wednesday Dec. 11 in Manhattan.  Here and below are the locations and times.

PLEASE come and let your voice be heard at one of these forums, and let these all-powerful state officials know how you feel about the Common Core, testing and privacy, including their plan to share the personal information for all public school students in the state with inBloom Inc. -- the only state in the country that hasn't yet pulled out of this project.  

Here is a flyer you can post in your schools for Manhattan and Brooklyn; Bronx is coming soon.

Tuesday, December 10 in Brooklyn   

Medgar Evers College
1650 Bedford Avenue (map here)
6:30-8:30 PM

Tuesday, December 10 in The Bronx

Evander Childs Campus
800 East Gun Hill Road (map here)
6:00-8:00 PM

Wednesday, December 11 in Manhattan

Spruce Street School

12 Spruce Street (map here)

6:00-8:00 PM  (SEE NEW TIME)

MDRC report on NYC small schools and gaming graduation rates

 

The latest version of the Gates-funded reports from MDRC has been released, showing graduation rates for NYC students who were assigned to the new small schools through the supposedly random HS admissions process were 6 to 9.5 percent higher compared to those who “lost” the lottery and were assigned to large schools instead.  Overall, it has some of the same weaknesses that I noted – along with others in the previous report:  

1-The comparison groups are not necessarily equally matched – it does not separate out free and reduced lunch students, who are expected to have very different outcomes.

2 – The comparison also does not separate out special education students who are severely disabled – those that are taught in a regular classroom vs. those assigned to self-contained classes.

Indeed, though it claims comparable figures in both sets of schools, the authors admit that for both special education students and English language learners, “the sample sizes for these subgroups” at the small schools were so limited they could not compare outcomes between both sets of students.

3- Not all small schools held lotteries, as not all of them were oversubscribed – only presumably the more popular schools which may have been those with the most successful outcomes.

Assuming that there are real advantages to attending a small school, there could be many reasons for this higher rates unmentioned in the report:

•  Peer effects:  given that a student has to attend an information session and apply to a small school, this screens out many of the most at-risk kids, including recent immigrants, those with unstable home lives and “over-the-counter” students – those who do not enter the high school application process and who, according to most accounts, are usually assigned to the large schools.  The effect of being in a class along with other more actively engaged students or those with more ambitious parents may in itself bring substantial benefits – apart from any quality inherent in the school itself.

• Though the report cites no difference in 10^th grade average class sizes (28), stats apparently drawn from the state report cards, this is highly unlikely, as many large high schools feature classes at the union contractual maximum of 34.  Generally small schools have been able to cap enrollment and thus class size at lower levels than the large schools.  In fact, the report says that the new schools were chosen by DOE according to whether they planned to have their teachers “responsible for a manageable number of students” with a “reduced teacher load” –which is unlikely to occur with class sizes at the contractual maximum.

•  During the Bloomberg administration, there has been tremendous pressure placed on New York City teachers to pass at least 80 percent of their students, and to boost their scores on Regents exams – with schools graded and teachers evaluated on the results. Until this year, in fact, teachers graded the Regents exit exams of students at their own schools, with staff at small schools marking the exams of their own students. 

See the terrific book by John Owens who worked at one of the small schools, entitled  Confessions of a Bad Teacher – making clear the immense pressure imposed on teachers to graduate as many students as quickly as possible. Given that the small schools have younger teachers and those less likely to have institutional memories of the way things used to be, the more likely it is that they will be responsive to these pressures.  As the report notes, principals appreciated how their teachers were more “adaptable.”

• Yet another issue that the report fails to address is how the rapid increase of small schools that are more space intensive and capped their enrollments at lower levels exacerbated conditions at the large schools– making them even more overcrowded with the highest need students, and significantly diminishing their educational opportunities.  Although the report notes that graduation rates have increased to a lesser extent at the large schools as well, many schools that had been relatively successful soon found themselves on the failing lists – including Lehman HS and quite a few others.

•  Finally, data is a funny thing and graduation rates can be calculated in all sorts of ways.  The state and the DOE both claim that the city’s graduation rates for the class of 2010 was 61 percent. The MDRC report estimates graduation rates for the same year in their study for students at the small schools at 74.6 percent and 65.1 percent for the matched comparison group – suggesting that those who applied to small schools were a comparatively higher achieving group, even among those “randomly” assigned to large schools.

Yet the most recent analysis from Education Week published last June showed NYC graduation rates for the class or 2010 at 54 percent. Among the 50 largest districts in the nation, only Albuquerque, Denver and Detroit had lower rates; with NYC tied with Milwaukee. Why the difference? 

EdWeek’s methodology is complex, but it basically calculates the graduating rate by comparing the number of students that enter high school each year to those who are promoted to the next grade, and then graduate four years later with a regular high school degree – figures that are hard to fudge.  In contrast, the state and the DOE exclude all students who are said to have transferred out of district or to private or parochial schools or who are “discharged” – including those who leave for GED programs.  

The oversight for student transfers and discharges is notoriously lax.  In a report I co-authored several years ago, we found a very high and rising discharge rate in NYC schools.  This report led to a 2011 audit from the NY State Comptroller’s office, which stated that more than half of all discharges lacked proper documentation; and that even after extensive searches by DOE, 10-15 percent of discharges should have been reported as dropouts. There has been no audit since. The MDRC study reports that data for fully 19 percent of students who entered both small schools and large couldn’t be found four years later.

The EdWeek list of graduation rates of the largest school districts in the country for the class of 2010 are here and below.  Official DOE figures show that the rate has only declined slightly since then.  Almost as disturbing is that NYC is the only district listed among the fifty that failed to provide enough information for EdWeek to conclude whether its graduation rate is higher or lower than would be predicted, given the demographic background of the students.  So much for transparency at Tweed!

District Grad Rates 2010 from Education Week by CSM