Schools ranked by state

[Anonymous]

Fascinating article. DC is ranked 27 overall but has very high drop out rates and low math scores.
https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/

[Anonymous]

Obviously we all know that it's difficult to compare DC to other states, and a more meaningful comparison would be comparing DC to other large cities. However, how interesting that DC has the highest median ACT score.

[Anonymous]

I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

[Anonymous]

Yes to noting the inherent problem in comparing a very dense, urban muncipality to states, but I do agree it's interesting.

Mostly it just helps you to see how poverty rates are so closely correlated with education quality. Like why does Michigan score so much lower than Minnesota? Well the cities in Michigan have higher poverty rates than those in Minnesota, that's why. It's why New Mexico is last (sky high poverty rates) and Mass/Conn/NJ score so high (lots of rich people living in the suburbs of thriving cities with high paying jobs there, and in Conn/NJ, they don't even deal with the negatives of actually having the city in their state).

In that context, it's interesting to look at DC scores, because I think the reason we're smack in the middle is that while of course we have a lot of poverty as a major city, we also have a lot of rich people with high paying jobs. And more and more of these people are choosing to live in DC instead of in the suburbs, and to send their kids to public schools, which is actually pretty high compliment to something DCPS and the charters are doing.

DC also doesn't deal with any rural poverty, which I think can be a harder problem to overcome with regards to education because in a city you can easily transport poor kids to the resources, but that's not true in rural areas. Kids in DC can all benefit from something like MLK library, and amazing resource, and it's basically impossible to make that kind of resource available to kids in rural Mississippi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

I agree but the schools in DC are highly divided by income. If wealthy kids actually attended school with poor kids the outcomes are much better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we all know that it's difficult to compare DC to other states, and a more meaningful comparison would be comparing DC to other large cities. However, how interesting that DC has the highest median ACT score.

DC isn't a large city. It isn't even a large school district. It's in the top 100, but barely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_school_districts_in_the_United_States_by_enrollment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we all know that it's difficult to compare DC to other states, and a more meaningful comparison would be comparing DC to other large cities. However, how interesting that DC has the highest median ACT score.

DC isn't a large city. It isn't even a large school district. It's in the top 100, but barely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_school_districts_in_the_United_States_by_enrollment

It isn’t a state. We have elected officials from other states over-ruling our laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

I’d be real interested to learn just how much actual experience you have with high poverty DC public schools EOTR. If you really think the most at risk student residing there are routinely - or, for that matter, ever - get the opportunities that you have described simply by virtue of geographic proximity you are sadly mistaken. There are many kids in Ward 8 who have never even been on the metro and can count on one hand the number of times they’re crossed the Anacostia River.

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we all know that it's difficult to compare DC to other states, and a more meaningful comparison would be comparing DC to other large cities. However, how interesting that DC has the highest median ACT score.

DC isn't a large city. It isn't even a large school district. It's in the top 100, but barely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_school_districts_in_the_United_States_by_enrollment

It isn’t a state. We have elected officials from other states over-ruling our laws.

Yes duh. But if you want to compare school district to school district, we're closest in size to Atlanta.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

That is wildly mis categorizing the experiences of students in those schools. Holy moly this is from outerspace land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

I’d be real interested to learn just how much actual experience you have with high poverty DC public schools EOTR. If you really think the most at risk student residing there are routinely - or, for that matter, ever - get the opportunities that you have described simply by virtue of geographic proximity you are sadly mistaken. There are many kids in Ward 8 who have never even been on the metro and can count on one hand the number of times they’re crossed the Anacostia River.

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

My child attends a Title 1 school EOTP (though not EOTR) with a large contingent of Ward 7 and 8 students and a very high percentage of at risk kids, and these are absolutely experiences they have.

I also grew up in a rural area and if you don't understand the advantages of living in an urban center, even for poor and lower middle class students, then perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about. I'd rather grow up poor in DC than poor in rural Mississippi, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

I’d be real interested to learn just how much actual experience you have with high poverty DC public schools EOTR. If you really think the most at risk student residing there are routinely - or, for that matter, ever - get the opportunities that you have described simply by virtue of geographic proximity you are sadly mistaken. There are many kids in Ward 8 who have never even been on the metro and can count on one hand the number of times they’re crossed the Anacostia River.

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

My child attends a Title 1 school EOTP (though not EOTR) with a large contingent of Ward 7 and 8 students and a very high percentage of at risk kids, and these are absolutely experiences they have.

I also grew up in a rural area and if you don't understand the advantages of living in an urban center, even for poor and lower middle class students, then perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about. I'd rather grow up poor in DC than poor in rural Mississippi, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

EOTP is not EOTR. And I also grew up rural. You are not an expert on urban poverty simply because your kid goes to school with poor kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

I’d be real interested to learn just how much actual experience you have with high poverty DC public schools EOTR. If you really think the most at risk student residing there are routinely - or, for that matter, ever - get the opportunities that you have described simply by virtue of geographic proximity you are sadly mistaken. There are many kids in Ward 8 who have never even been on the metro and can count on one hand the number of times they’re crossed the Anacostia River.

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

My child attends a Title 1 school EOTP (though not EOTR) with a large contingent of Ward 7 and 8 students and a very high percentage of at risk kids, and these are absolutely experiences they have.

I also grew up in a rural area and if you don't understand the advantages of living in an urban center, even for poor and lower middle class students, then perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about. I'd rather grow up poor in DC than poor in rural Mississippi, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Test scores in DC are substantially lower than in Mississippi. 32 percent of four graders in Mississippi are considered proficient in Math. In DC, the figure is 24 percent. Same with reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it’s better to compare DC to cities rather than states. It is also not a fair comparison to look at low income students as all the same. It has to be a different environment when everyone is poor (VW) than to be poor in a city with some of the highest incomes in the nation. Your poverty is so much more pronounced and in your face.

I just talked about this in my post, but I would argue that being poor in a city has big advantages because you are more likely to get access to high quality public resources. Being poor in a very rural area means that you may have extremely limited access to libraries, museums, educational enrichment, the arts, or even being able to see and interact with highly educated people.

In DC public schools, even the most at risk kids get opportunities like touring Smithsonian museums, meeting Supreme Court justices, attending performances at the Kennedy Center, going to career days with lawyers and scientists and teachers and medical professionals, etc. Even the teachers themselves in DCPS are generally much higher educated than they would be in a rural area, with a high percentage having advanced degrees.

Yes, it's hard to be a have not surrounded by haves. But sometimes it's worse to be a have not surrounded by have nots, it you have any hopes of ever having more.

I’d be real interested to learn just how much actual experience you have with high poverty DC public schools EOTR. If you really think the most at risk student residing there are routinely - or, for that matter, ever - get the opportunities that you have described simply by virtue of geographic proximity you are sadly mistaken. There are many kids in Ward 8 who have never even been on the metro and can count on one hand the number of times they’re crossed the Anacostia River.

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

My child attends a Title 1 school EOTP (though not EOTR) with a large contingent of Ward 7 and 8 students and a very high percentage of at risk kids, and these are absolutely experiences they have.

I also grew up in a rural area and if you don't understand the advantages of living in an urban center, even for poor and lower middle class students, then perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about. I'd rather grow up poor in DC than poor in rural Mississippi, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Test scores in DC are substantially lower than in Mississippi. 32 percent of four graders in Mississippi are considered proficient in Math. In DC, the figure is 24 percent. Same with reading.

Also you’re dealing with parents who have the resources and knowledge to to enter the lottery and commute to a school. Commuting to a school requires a pretty stable home life.