|
Cognition is the process by which knowledge is acquired through the use and interpretation of environmental symbols. When groups of students achieve results that indicate aggregate performance at a particular level in one area, the group should be expected to achieve aggregate performance at the same level in other cognitive areas. Groups can do just as well in one cognitive area as in any other cognitive area. Evidence suggests that differences in achievement levels among groups in various subject areas do not result from differences in cognitive ability; that is, one subject is not inherently easier or more difficult than any other. All things being equal, humans are born with about equal potential to learn any subject (barring neurological deficits or extreme gifts). The original research of Dr. David Ausubell at the University of Illinois and more recent studies at the Departments of Pediatrics and Neurology at the University of Chicago (under the direction of Peter R. Huttenlocher, M.D. and Arun S. Dabholkar, M.D.) confirm that the differences in the ways children learn at different ages are due largely to the development of cerebral synapses, which can be greatly influenced by environmental stimulation and protein in the diet. Equalization of expectations of cognition among groups should not be applied to individuals within those groups. Every group contains individuals who perform either far below or far above the norm or average of the group. Harvard educator Howard Gardener cautions that such group analysis should not be directly applied when reviewing the performance of each individual student, in light of “multiple intelligences.” Multiple intelligences differentiations are an entirely separate issue in that such research deals with individual differentiated abilities that cut across domains. Within cognitive domains, achievement levels should be similar among various groups. When group achievement differs significantly from subject to subject, factors such as the nature and quality of instruction, time on task, testing situations, environmental influences, and nutrition may be affecting performance. Some of these factors are under the control of school personnel, and can be organized to produce positive effects on student achievement. The following discussions focus on the major subject areas of reading (and/or English Language Arts) and mathematics. A. Norm-Referenced Tests Results from 2000-01 show that scores in mathematics on the Terra Nova exceed the cohort mean (50th percentile) in all but grade one, but performance does not reach the effectiveness level (66th percentile) in any grade. Scores in reading achieve the cohort mean in all grades tested, reaching the effectiveness level in only grades one and two. Overall, district-wide performance as measured by the Terra Nova. is higher in reading than in mathematics, except in grade 6, as shown in the graph below:
B. Standards-Based Tests On the Mississippi Curriculum Test, performance in reading is generally higher than in mathematics, except in grades 2 and 3, as shown in the graph below:
C. OVERALL ANALYSIS: Cross-Subject Norm-Referenced and Standards-Based Test Results On both tests, performance appears to be higher in reading than in mathematics. On the MCT, the patterns in performance across the grade levels and across subjects is similar to patterns at state levels, suggesting that the district patterns may be related to the tests themselves or to state-mandated standards and/or curriculum. Nevertheless, to be an effective school district and to encourage value-added achievement, district leaders may wish to address the reasons for the general gap between the subjects and work to strengthen the rigor and continuity of the mathematics program. On the Terra Nova, students perform at higher levels in reading than in math. Of particular note is the large gap between performance in reading and mathematics in the first grade. Such a noticeable discrepancy may be the result of uneven emphasis on the content areas or ineffective teaching methods. The fact that performance levels are similar in reading and math in the second grade reinforces this observation. A review of the high school subject area testing program of the Mississippi Department of Education yields results shown in the table below. Oxford improved its standing in all but one area (English II), including a significant 27-place improvement in the Biology I test.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
