sides grouping debate involved parent stamford martin

thank comments enlightening bring points and/or questions 

am i assume want …meet testing standards “more challengedâ€ groupings… suggesting note let know misinterpreted ct board education child left requirements pretty specific mandates i going fault administration doing mandated like state district students don’t goal proficient penalties don’t like admin focus congressman senator improve nclb punitive point rewards developing highest performers just getting mediocrity minimum currently goal/requirements 

secondly stating flexible grouping “…makes harder meet testing standards “more challengedâ€ groupings…â€ i misinterpreting way i directly quoted wrote 

lastly state want stamford demonstrated effective educating children later say …ridiculous bias data gathered distributed evidence presented shows mst year 1 effective educating data readily available confirmation ctreportscom data shows grade 6 scores 90 nclb measurement cohorts increased year 1 mst increase doesn’t detriment high performers simply biased agenda i said exactly need convince math scores ‘lagged’ bit year 1 mst certainly aren’t sree making use year data discussion september 2nd year mst scores available 

i personally know people board members involved discussion active “sreeâ€ community vast majority decent people i believe want what’s best stamford ‘decent’ want what’s best population said i believe minority sides ‘discussion’ that

but sree supporters want avoid ‘circus’ avoid accused certain things like bias racism help stopped continually cherry picking limited data ignoring positive results seen mst refusing compare handpicked cherrypicked data relevant i’ve reviewed analysispdf blatantly misleading financial analyst i know good bad false analysis i comparison prior years/same data stamford students meaningless misleading

a perfect example analytical nature discussion notomst board asks current grade 7 math scores population 5th graders lower cmt performance year pre mst doing ~35 getting d’s f’s state triumphantly “aha…this proves pointâ€ 
how exactly does prove comparative grades 2010 7th graders 2009 2008 pre mst years 5th grade year 1 2 cmts 50 f 10 i honestly idea assume don’t didn’t ask way look number make conclusion don’t compare post mst number corresponding pre mst number conclude absolutely 65 cmt 1 2’s getting b c…is good outcome better pre mst worse let ask right questions analyze data right way concluding 

while idea suit naacp absolute thing stamford needs today help honest debate ask right complete questions analyze data including prior year’s right make statements conclusion maybe right responsibility change tune data doesn’t support pre existing conclusions beliefs