|
At the 1/7/10 Middletown Board of Education meeting, Board member Dr. Nicholas Mauro stepped away from his board seat and addressed the Board of Education as a member of the public. During this speech, Dr. Mauro shared his own research relative to Middletown’s graduation rate making a number of allegations including:
- The graduation data presented by the Superintendent in a Times Herald-Record (TH-R) “My View” editorial was inaccurate and not feasible;
- And the Superintendent's credibility is questionable.
An analysis of Dr. Mauro’s research verifies and proves that he, himself, misunderstood and misquoted the very documents that he referenced as facts, including the 12/17/09 “My View” editorial written by Dr. Eastwood. Dr. Mauro inappropriately used such data to question the validity of the accomplishments of Middletown’s students and staff, and our district.
Additionally, Dr. Mauro’s sloppy and false analysis of the school district’s graduation data resulted in a vicious attack on the Superintendent’s credibility. Dr. Mauro stated: “…for Dr. Eastwood to either not know or misquote that is something that really puts into question his credibility on the ability to report data.”
Isn’t it ironic that Dr. Mauro’s own faulty research methods would result in false and misleading statements? Statements that unfairly and viciously attempt to demean the extraordinary accomplishments of the Middletown City School District.
The following is a point-by-point response (with the real facts) to Dr. Mauro's comments, which are a continued attempt to discredit and demean staff, students, and the reputation of the District.
|
|
Transcript of Dr. Mauro’s remarks before the Board of Education (1/7/10):
“I would like to give the information that I wasn’t able to give when we were giving the reports. That is the only reason why I am here now. In the December 17th “My View” column Dr. Eastwood said and quoted him as saying that we have had almost a doubling of our graduation rate since 2004.”
Dr. Mauro's remarks: video clip
(Meeting January 7, 2010)
|
District’s Response:
Dr. Mauro misquoted Dr. Eastwood’s comments in the 12/17/09 TH-R “My View (PDF)” editorial.
1. Dr. Eastwood’s “My View” editorial refers to the number of graduates, NOT the graduation rate, as stated by Dr. Mauro. The numbers of graduates and the graduation rate are two different and distinct statistics. This is like comparing apples to walnuts.
2. Dr. Mauro inaccurately quoted Dr. Eastwood when he was reading the TH-R “My View” editorial. Dr. Eastwood stated that the “number of graduates has almost doubled” since he has been at Middletown (with 262 graduates in 2005 vs. 406 graduates in 2009). Dr. Mauro misread the editorial and then misquoted Dr. Eastwood, stating that Dr. Eastwood said that the “graduation rate” had almost doubled.
What is the difference between number of graduates and graduation rate?
- Number of graduates would be the number of students who actually graduate from a given cohort group (number of students entering 9th grade for the first time and graduating four years later).
- Graduation rate is the percentage of the graduating cohort group actually graduating.
Remember the analogy of apples to walnuts? Trying to mix the two different and distinct statistics is a huge and disastrous mistake. Basic math knowledge would distinguish between the number of something versus the percentage of something.
Dr. Mauro's inability to accurately quote Dr. Eastwood and then use that inaccuracy to develop his analysis and conclusions was the first mistake in his presentation to the Board of Education.
Link to Dr. Eastwood's "My View (PDF)" editorial
Link to historical chart: Number of Graduates (PDF)
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
“I have the numbers that I got from the New York State Report Card if you don’t want to believe me you can merely Google the New York State Report Card and this information is there. Our graduation rate for 03–73%,
04–67%, 05–70%, 06–71%,
07–68%, 08–68%, if we use the number of freshman in that cohort for the '09 class it would be 610 students that would give us a graduation rate, considering there were 387 graduates in that class, of 63.4%.”
|
District’s Response:
Link to: New York State Report Cards
3.The number of 610 students, who Dr. Mauro referenced in his presentation, was the number of students he thought (see the 2005-06 Report Card) were in the 2005 cohort (coming into 9th grade for the first time in September 2005 and members of the 2009 graduating class).
Problem 1:
If you read that Report Card carefully, you will note that the 610 figure refers to the number of students enrolled in 9th grade, not the 2005 cohort.
What’s the difference? Number of students enrolled includes students entering 9th grade for the first time, as well as other students who do not have enough credits to be considered 10th graders.
- The cohort group only includes students entering 9th grade for the first time.
- What is the number difference between both groups?
610 enrolled
524 in the cohort
Using a number that was almost 100 students larger in any calculation would dramatically deflate the statistical average. Unfortunately, that is exactly what Dr. Mauro did.
Dr. Mauro also incorrectly used that same number throughout his analysis causing even more errors in his research. These miscalculations developed many multiple and drastically erroneous conclusions.
Problem 2:
Another problem associated with Dr. Mauro's use of the 610 enrollment figure is that he thought that it was for the 2005 9th grade class (which would have graduated in June 2009), when in fact it was for the 2004 9th grade class (see Report Card) which would have graduated in June 2008, NOT June of 2009 as reported by Dr. Mauro.
Once again, Dr. Mauro misread and misunderstood the documents he was reading. This problem caused him to develop more errors in his analysis and data presentation.
4. Good research consists of testing for the validity and reliability of data. A very quick and effective way for Dr. Mauro to have tested his data would have been to review the information for the 2005 cohort (graduating class of 2009) against the previous year’s (2004-05) 8th grade. If he had conducted this simple test, he would have seen that the 8th grade enrollment was 530. A number nowhere near 610 students. That should have been a red flag relative to his use of 610 students. The numbers were not comparable.
5. Dr. Mauro stated that in 2004, the graduation rate was 67% as reported on the 2003-04 Report Card. He implied this was the 2000 graduate cohort data (graduates of 2004).
Again, the data he reported was actually the 1999 graduation cohort.
Additionally, the information on the Report Card for the graduating class of 2004, and prior, have been known to contain misinformation since the data sent to the State Education Department (SED) by the District in those years contained significant inaccuracies. If Dr. Mauro had simply asked for help, understating or clarification, he would have discovered the facts rather than reporting inaccurate data.
Dr. Eastwood has previously stated, “… that any graduation data prior to his appointment as Superintendent of Schools was inaccurately reported to the State Education Department.” Dr. Eastwood reported this information to the Board of Education in the fall of 2004 and it has been general knowledge since then.
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
“I don’t have that cannot see that here now, but maybe I can put up the graphic later. But there were no alteration in our graduation rates between '03 and '09 even if you consider our graduation rate of 67% in '04 it would be impossible to double that number.”
|
District’s Response:
6. Even using a graduation cohort analysis, Dr. Mauro’s analysis and conclusions are false as he used incorrect data for such analysis.
If he had used the correct data, he would have discovered that there was a dramatic improvement even in the graduation rate from 2004 to 2009.
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
“Our graduation rate has been on the average of approximately 69.5% over this time period and there has been no doubling and I feel that the Superintendent to have quoted that in his "My View" column he stated that our graduation rate….”
|
District’s Response:
7. If Dr. Mauro had used correct data, and conducted appropriate analysis, he would have discovered that there was a dramatic improvement even in the graduation rates.
8. The improvement in graduation rates, given our demographics, is a significant accomplishment and should be applauded NOT dismissed with false accusations and reporting of data as Dr. Mauro has done. Such attacks significantly damage the reputation and demean the success of the District and the community.
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
“…has almost doubled since 2004 is really troublesome because this information is readily available online and there has been no doubling of our graduation rate, although we have many promising indicators that things are improving in terms of our being on the identification list and in terms of test scores. We have not actualized that in our graduation rate, which is the prime indicator of our achievement, and for Dr. Eastwood to either not know it or to misquote that is something that really puts into question his credibility on the ability to report data.”
|
District’s Response:
9. Dr. Mauro’s lack of understanding and insufficient research resulted in a data report that misrepresented the students and staff of the District, as well as misled the public concerning the District’s performance.
Dr. Mauro misread and misinterpreted the editorial in the TH-R, thereby starting with a false premise.
As an elected school board member, there is a clear expectation by the Middletown City School District community to be accurate and mindful when presenting information in a public forum.
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
“And we can see very clearly here,” Mr. Geiger interjects by stating “Nick I have to…” Dr. Mauro stated “excuse me.” Mr. Geiger stated “you're excused…Nick I caution you in your language of being critical and evaluative in public.” Dr. Mauro responds back, “I am questioning his credibility I am questioning his credibility and that legally can do it…”
|
District’s Response:
10. Dr. Mauro’s accusations lack credibility due to his flawed research and accusations. Dr. Eastwood’s statements and data presentations have always been accurate, reliable, and verifiable. This was clearly an attempt to discredit the Superintendent. The unfortunate collateral damage from his attack has been the possible demoralization of our students, staff, and our supportive community. These accusations are a continuation from a few individuals who are providing false and misleading statements to further a personal agenda which does not focus on the mission of providing our students with a quality education and life skills.
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
Mr. Geiger states “Be very careful.” Dr. Mauro continues, “If you look at the numbers provided by the state – if I am allowed to finish you usually don’t interrupt other people when they are at the mic. When you look at the numbers the graduation rate has not doubled just look at that. I was interrupted and would like to be able to finish. If you look at the numbers the graduation rate has not doubled and Dr. Eastwood’s statement is false.”
|
District’s Response:
11. Number of students graduating in the 2004 graduation cohort–262
Number of students graduating in the 2009 graduation cohort–406
Click Here (PDF) to view the New York State notification of the District's progress
|
|
Continuation of Dr. Mauro’s remarks:
Ms. McKean tries to interject several times, “We would be happy to present to the Board yet again the same information we presented and we will explain why the information on the Report Card as you are reading it does not reflect the same numbers.”
Dr. Mauro states: “Well I wish you would explain that to the state because I gather the state is also asking for confirmation of this information.”
Ms. McKean: “The state is not asking for confirmation of this information and has come down several times and reviewed our information and guaranteed it is correct.”
Dr. Mauro: “So the 67% in '04 is incorrect, the 67% in '04 is incorrect? I don’t think so. It would not be possible to double the rate from that time.”
|
District’s Response:
12. As previously established, Dr. Mauro’s research was seriously flawed and resulted in malicious and false accusations.
|