Apparently, quality trumps quantity when comparing metrics from public education systems between small schools in Fillmore County and Rochester Public Schools.
According to data available via the Minnesota Department of Education, with schools reporting results on behalf of 792,174 students statewide, most smaller school districts in Southeast Minnesota are performing better than larger districts such as Rochester Public Schools.
Rochester Public Schools boasted enrollment of 15,826 students in during the 2018-2019 school year. Meanwhile, Chatfield Public Schools (841), Fillmore Central Schools (596), Kingsland Public Schools (498), Lanesboro Public Schools (317), Mabel-Canton Public Schools (229), and Rushford-Peterson Public Schools (613), enrolled a combined total of 3,094 students during that same school year. Less than 20% of the RPS enrollment.
2018-2019 Consistent Attendance
Rochester Public Schools ranked lower than all schools in Fillmore County, Minn., in the area of consistent attendance. In fact, at 82.4%, RPS ranked lower than the Minnesota Statewide average of 85.4%.
According to the Minnesota Report Card, made available by the Minnesota Department of Education, “This is a measure of students who attend school on a regular basis and are not frequently absent. A student is considered consistently attending if they attend more than 90% of the time the student is enrolled during the year.”
Here’s how all of the schools ranked in Fillmore County compared to Rochester Public Schools.
Lanesboro Public Schools: 94.5%
Kingsland Public Schools: 93.8%
Rushford-Peterson Public Schools: 91.3%
Chatfield Public Schools: 89.9%
Mabel-Canton Public Schools: 88.7%
Fillmore Central Schools: 88.4%
Rochester Public Schools: 82.4%
2019 MCA Test Scores: Math
Every year, Minnesota public schools participate in the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments to establish comparable benchmarks for individual students and schools.
According to the Minnesota Department of Education, “All students in public schools are required to participate in the statewide assessment program. Reading and mathematics tests are administered in grades 3–8 and high school (students in grade 10 take the Reading MCA, and students in grade 11 take the Mathematics MCA).”
Here’s how all of the schools ranked in 2019 in Fillmore County compared to Rochester Public Schools.
Chatfield Public Schools: 69.2%
Lanesboro Public Schools: 59.6%
Fillmore Central Schools: 55.5%
Rushford-Peterson Public Schools: 53.2%
Rochester Public Schools: 50.5%
Kingsland Public Schools: 47.6%
Mabel-Canton Public Schools: 47.6%
Chatfield Public Schools topped the list with 69.2% of students meeting standards for math. Lanesboro, Fillmore Central, and Rushford-Peterson were a distant second, third, and fourth place, respectively. RPS, Kingsland, and Mabel-Canton demonstrated the greatest opportunity for improvement when compared to peers.
2019 MCA Test Scores:
Reading
In general, it appears that overall MCA scores were stronger in reading compared to math and science for all seven school districts in this comparative analysis.
Here’s how all of the schools ranked in 2019 in Fillmore County compared to Rochester Public Schools.
Chatfield Public Schools: 70.8%
Rushford-Peterson Public Schools: 63.2%
Mabel-Canton Public Schools: 63.0%
Lanesboro Public Schools: 62.8%
Kingsland Public Schools: 62.7%
Fillmore Central Schools: 60.7%
Rochester Public Schools: 56.4%
Chatfield Public Schools again topped the list with 70.8% of students meeting standards in the area of reading. Rushford-Peterson, Mabel-Canton, Lanesboro, and Kingsland hovered around the 63% mark, with Fillmore Central ranked in sixth place with 60.7%. Rochester Public Schools was at the bottom of the list at 56.4%.
2019 MCA Test Scores:
Science
The final piece of the MCA puzzle is science.
Here’s how all of the schools ranked in Fillmore County compared to Rochester Public Schools.
Mabel-Canton Public Schools: 58.2%
Lanesboro Public Schools: 57.5%
Chatfield Public Schools: 56.7%
Kingsland Public Schools: 50.4%
Fillmore Central Schools: 49.6%
Rushford-Peterson Public Schools: 47.4%
Rochester Public Schools: 42.1%
Mabel-Canton Public Schools lead the way with 58.2% of students meeting standards in the area of science. Lanesboro and Chatfield are steady in the 57% range. Kingsland and Fillmore Central hover around the 50% mark, with Rushford-Peterson falling to 47%. RPS finished last at 42.1%.
2018 Graduation Rate
The Minnesota statewide graduation rate was 83.2%. All of the schools referenced in this article performed better than the statewide average.
Here’s how all of the schools ranked in 2018 in Fillmore County compared to Rochester Public Schools.
Lanesboro Public Schools (23 students): 100%
Chatfield Public Schools (65 students): 97%
Kingsland Public Schools (30 students): 96.8%
Mabel-Canton Public Schools (22 students): 95.7%
Fillmore Central Schools (51 students): 94.4%
Rushford-Peterson Public Schools (40 students): 93%
Rochester Public Schools (1,145 students): 87%
Conclusion
Numbers don’t lie. They identify opportunities for improvement and reasons to celebrate.
Lanesboro Public Schools, the second smallest public school district in Fillmore County, Minn., dominates in the areas of consistent attendance and graduation rate. With a graduating class size of 23 students, apparently the personal attention provided to students pays off in the end with a 100% graduation rate.
Chatfield Public Schools, geographically straddling Fillmore and Olmsted Counties, ranks fourth with consistent attendance, but dominates in the areas of math and reading. With a 97% graduation rate, they rank second among all schools analyzed.
Mabel-Canton Public Schools claims the top spot in the area of science for MCA test scores.
Kingsland Public Schools and Mabel-Canton Public Schools tied for last place at 47.6% with MCA test scores in the area of math.
Rochester Public Schools ranks lowest in consistent attendance, along with MCA test scores for both reading and science. And, RPS finishes in last place with a class size of 1,145 students at an 87% graduation rate.
Leave a Reply