I like and agree with your ideas. Big problem with society is too many parents are not involved with their children's education. The American family is broken and until we fix that we are just putting band aids on a gushing wound.

It's definitely good to build on the positives, but we also must stay rooted in reality. A good district/school *can* do "poorly" on the state report card. How? Most of the proficiency tests basic things. If a student comes to a school and is far behind, even with the best professionals there are many who cannot catch up. In districts that have a large percentage of students who come from poor and otherwise unstable family situations, there's a good chance they will be behind though no fault of their own or the school's. Students do not all arrive at school at the same level of education nor do they have the same resources available at home to reinforce that education whether it be good books, a computer, or educated or even involved parents. That's why districts like Aurora and Hudson typically do well while very isolated rural school districts and urban districts tend to not do as well. The "great" districts as defined by the state have great teachers, but these teachers also have a great foundation to work with. Further, the final "rating" as we've seen can be affected by several factors, so a school can miss several "indicators" but do well in something else and still be rated "Excellent" like Ravenna was last year. See how it can be misleading or at least not show the whole picture if you don't pick up the report and read it yourself?

So how can we evaluate a school?

Well, there currently is no thorough evaluation in existence. All measurements I have seen are based on standardized test scores in one way or another, even the rankings that Newsweek and US News & World Report do. The state report cards largely include those scores and some other quantitative data like attendance rates and graduation rates as well as "Adequate Yearly Progress" which is a federal mandate that test scores must show improvement overall and in certain racial and developmental subgroups. Basically, parents need to be involved and know how to recognize some key elements, all of which are qualitative as opposed to quantitative.
1) Recognize good teachers. This is determined by the environment they create in their classroom (does the student feel safe with the teacher and with his/her peers?), their ability to bring their knowledge to the level of their students, their ability to not only create and hold interest but also to challenge students (education vs. entertainment), and how they treat failures of students (whether they blame the student or they blame themselves for how it was taught).
2) Recognize solid curriculum. Does the school teach kids to actually think or to memorize facts for the upcoming state test? This can be evaluated by looking at what teachers test and how. If tests are simply recalling facts (as most are), that is low-level thinking and likely very little actual learning has taken place. Also, are students given opportunities and encouraged to develop creativity, not just in art or music, or are they being forced to fit into the school's and/or teacher's mold?
3) Recognize curriculum options. What curriculum is available? Does the school/district have class options available for different learning speeds, slow and fast?

Evaluating this on a state level would be VERY difficult, time consuming, and costly, which is why it's important for parents to be more active in the education of their children and not just rely on these report cards to be some kind of "tell-all" as to what schools are good and bad. They can be a useful tool in looking at a much bigger picture, but there's a LOT more to that picture than simply how a school/district performs on a state test. In other words, be proactive instead of reactive.

I agree that we should not solely rely on these ratings but they are a good measure for school districts and I understand that they are not perfect. But it is rare to have a great school perform poorly on the state report card. My point is people rarely state anything positive concerning our schools and only focus on the negative.

What other ways do you suggest we should use in evaluating our schools?

There's a lot more to how good a school is then how well they do or not do on the state tests. Anyone who puts all their faith in the state report cards as an ends-all to school evaluation is missing a huge part of the picture. Congratulations are definitely in order for districts that have done well, but we also must stay rooted in reality.