...The calculation of FACT scores included multiple errors; correction of these flaws would alter the results of the 2011 FACT assessments. OLO determined that the FACT scoring: (a) double counted points for the Administrative parameter; (b) used incorrect square footage data in the calculation of maintenance and utility consumption rates for some schools; (c) used Piney Branch Elementary School as the scoring benchmark in the Utility and Energy Efficiency parameter without accounting for the presence of a swimming pool at the school; (d) included a formulaic error in the calculation of relative water consumption rates; and (e) failed to adjust for a clear data outlier in the calculation of relative school maintenance costs. While OLO identified the above five errors, OLO did not conduct a complete audit of all FACT scoring calculations...
I don't understand. The math works out in common core.
ReplyDeleteImpressive process, but useless results.
ReplyDeleteLike everything else they do, it is a ton of BS and bad math to cover up decisions that are political and designed to quiet the vocal few.
ReplyDeleteMy concern is that they are including things in the "full renovation" score that could be easily fixed without a full renovation (see page 55). And when they do address items (such as updating the sprinklers, etc) the scores are not updated to reflect this. So, theoretically, a school could have a very high score due to carpeting issues and other easily remedied items, have those issues addressed, and still sit at the top of the full renovation list.
ReplyDeleteThey also need to account for overcrowding in these scores...it will better identify where re-opening former schools would be more cost-effective than trying to remodel an existing building.