PARCC test results - slight increase in scores overall, white students see drop, Wilson plunges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are white parents going to be clamoring to get into Banneker? It was the top scoring high school in DCPS with 98% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in literacy and 62% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in mathematics. School Without Walls was 84% proficiency in literacy and 52% proficiency in mathematics.

Have you been paying attention to this thread?

Not only is Banneker a test-in school, but it counsels out a large number of its students (anyone whose GPA drops below 3.0, even in the middle of a year). Combine that with the non-existent special ed or ELL populations and, voila, the few students who remain to actually take the PARCC do very well.

If Wilson could do all that, it'd probably be the best in the nation. If SWS was as aggressive as Banneker in counseling students out, its scores would be higher.

Just a correction - i said it used to be 3.0.

I think DCPS has reworked the Banneker grading system so that it's less draconian -- by it is still a school with significant attrition from 9th to 12th.

Thank you for the clarification. I'd love to see the comparable attrition data from SWS.

Banneker considers, standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. After admission, placement tests are administered to determine the student's skill level. On the other hand, students are not admitted to Walls unless they pass the entrance exam.

According to learnDC.org (thank you PP for the suggestion), Banneker and SWS have completely different attrition profiles.

Enrollment at Banneker:
- 9th: 167
- 10th: 114
- 11th: 74
- 12th: 94

Approx. attrition rate: 44%

Enrollment at SWS:
- 9th: 160
- 10th: 142
- 11th: 150
- 12th: 138

Approx. attrition rate: 14%


Quite relevant when we compare PARCC numbers, correct?

(Both are great schools, but there's no need to hype results)

Maybe. PARCC is only supposed administered in during high school once, in 10th grade for ELA and whenever the right year happens based on their math level.

For 2014-15 DCPS tested kids in 9th and 10th for ELA. No idea what they did for 15-16. At any rate if they normalize to just 10th the attrition issue will be less stark between SWW and Banneker.

But how do you normalize for the fact that, based on general data above, Banneker has kicked out 32% of its lower-performing students by 10th grade, and SWW only 11%?

That 21% difference makes Banneker look like a better school than it actually is.

Don't forget SWW wipes out loads of kids before they are admitted through their required testing. Many kids can't pass that math test and don't even make it into the school.

??

Banneker does the same, since they are both test-in schools.

The question is what happens to students once they happily enter the school building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are white parents going to be clamoring to get into Banneker? It was the top scoring high school in DCPS with 98% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in literacy and 62% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in mathematics. School Without Walls was 84% proficiency in literacy and 52% proficiency in mathematics.

Have you been paying attention to this thread?

Not only is Banneker a test-in school, but it counsels out a large number of its students (anyone whose GPA drops below 3.0, even in the middle of a year). Combine that with the non-existent special ed or ELL populations and, voila, the few students who remain to actually take the PARCC do very well.

If Wilson could do all that, it'd probably be the best in the nation. If SWS was as aggressive as Banneker in counseling students out, its scores would be higher.

Just a correction - i said it used to be 3.0.

I think DCPS has reworked the Banneker grading system so that it's less draconian -- by it is still a school with significant attrition from 9th to 12th.

Thank you for the clarification. I'd love to see the comparable attrition data from SWS.

Banneker considers, standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. After admission, placement tests are administered to determine the student's skill level. On the other hand, students are not admitted to Walls unless they pass the entrance exam.

According to learnDC.org (thank you PP for the suggestion), Banneker and SWS have completely different attrition profiles.

Enrollment at Banneker:
- 9th: 167
- 10th: 114
- 11th: 74
- 12th: 94

Approx. attrition rate: 44%

Enrollment at SWS:
- 9th: 160
- 10th: 142
- 11th: 150
- 12th: 138

Approx. attrition rate: 14%


Quite relevant when we compare PARCC numbers, correct?

(Both are great schools, but there's no need to hype results)

Maybe. PARCC is only supposed administered in during high school once, in 10th grade for ELA and whenever the right year happens based on their math level.

For 2014-15 DCPS tested kids in 9th and 10th for ELA. No idea what they did for 15-16. At any rate if they normalize to just 10th the attrition issue will be less stark between SWW and Banneker.

But how do you normalize for the fact that, based on general data above, Banneker has kicked out 32% of its lower-performing students by 10th grade, and SWW only 11%?

That 21% difference makes Banneker look like a better school than it actually is.

Don't forget SWW wipes out loads of kids before they are admitted through their required testing. Many kids can't pass that math test and don't even make it into the school.

??

Banneker does the same, since they are both test-in schools.

The question is what happens to students once they happily enter the school building.

Not true. Banneker only requires standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. A placement test is administered after admission to determine the students' skill levels. Walls is more restrictive since it requires that the applicants pass an entrance exam in addition to the requirements mentioned for Banneker. I applaud Banneker's willingness to take a chance on students that might not be admitted to Walls.

[Anonymous]

Can we get back to PARCC?

Or start a new thread to debate which is the better application school - SWW or Banneker?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are white parents going to be clamoring to get into Banneker? It was the top scoring high school in DCPS with 98% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in literacy and 62% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in mathematics. School Without Walls was 84% proficiency in literacy and 52% proficiency in mathematics.

Have you been paying attention to this thread?

Not only is Banneker a test-in school, but it counsels out a large number of its students (anyone whose GPA drops below 3.0, even in the middle of a year). Combine that with the non-existent special ed or ELL populations and, voila, the few students who remain to actually take the PARCC do very well.

If Wilson could do all that, it'd probably be the best in the nation. If SWS was as aggressive as Banneker in counseling students out, its scores would be higher.

Just a correction - i said it used to be 3.0.

I think DCPS has reworked the Banneker grading system so that it's less draconian -- by it is still a school with significant attrition from 9th to 12th.

Thank you for the clarification. I'd love to see the comparable attrition data from SWS.

Banneker considers, standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. After admission, placement tests are administered to determine the student's skill level. On the other hand, students are not admitted to Walls unless they pass the entrance exam.

According to learnDC.org (thank you PP for the suggestion), Banneker and SWS have completely different attrition profiles.

Enrollment at Banneker:
- 9th: 167
- 10th: 114
- 11th: 74
- 12th: 94

Approx. attrition rate: 44%

Enrollment at SWS:
- 9th: 160
- 10th: 142
- 11th: 150
- 12th: 138

Approx. attrition rate: 14%


Quite relevant when we compare PARCC numbers, correct?

(Both are great schools, but there's no need to hype results)

Maybe. PARCC is only supposed administered in during high school once, in 10th grade for ELA and whenever the right year happens based on their math level.

For 2014-15 DCPS tested kids in 9th and 10th for ELA. No idea what they did for 15-16. At any rate if they normalize to just 10th the attrition issue will be less stark between SWW and Banneker.

But how do you normalize for the fact that, based on general data above, Banneker has kicked out 32% of its lower-performing students by 10th grade, and SWW only 11%?

That 21% difference makes Banneker look like a better school than it actually is.

Don't forget SWW wipes out loads of kids before they are admitted through their required testing. Many kids can't pass that math test and don't even make it into the school.

??

Banneker does the same, since they are both test-in schools.

The question is what happens to students once they happily enter the school building.

Not true. Banneker only requires standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. A placement test is administered after admission to determine the students' skill levels. Walls is more restrictive since it requires that the applicants pass an entrance exam in addition to the requirements mentioned for Banneker. I applaud Banneker's willingness to take a chance on students that might not be admitted to Walls.

...and then kicking out 32% of them within a year?

Doesn't look like a great idea to me, but if everyone is on board, well, we do live in a free country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to PARCC?

Or start a new thread to debate which is the better application school - SWW or Banneker?

Agreed

What surprised you the most about the new PARCC results?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eh. These tests are dumb and - at best - measure demographics, not education quality.

There was nothing that happened at Wilson that could have caused this big a drop. I thought the tests were a joke when Wilson kids (including mine) did well, I think they are a joke now that Wilson kids are doing no so well.

My child just told me her teacher said the test really doesn't matter, just do good in your classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. These tests are dumb and - at best - measure demographics, not education quality.

There was nothing that happened at Wilson that could have caused this big a drop. I thought the tests were a joke when Wilson kids (including mine) did well, I think they are a joke now that Wilson kids are doing no so well.

My child just told me her teacher said the test really doesn't matter, just do good in your classes.

[Anonymous]

On the charter side -- how well DC Prep continues to do; Latin's drop in scores for ELA. DCI's lackluster scores.

Among the strong DCPS elementaries -- the smaller schools seem to be doing better across all demographic groups (Stoddert, Ross, Hearst).

[Anonymous]

What do we think about Kaya Henderson reminding the media today that for the 2016 PARCC, principals will start being held accountable for the results (they weren't the last 2 years bc the test was new)?

Do you think that will change what happens for your kids this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The drop at Wilson is bad. I suspect some of it is kids not taking the test and kids not caring about the test. Also, didn't they made Seniors take the Geometry test last year if they hadn't taken it before -- even if they took Geometry at years prior? But that may not explain it all.

But the focus on Wilson ignores the fact that other high schools are still scoring 0% on the math portion. It doesn't matter where your kids go to school, that is alarming when you look at education in DC.

I really don't put too much weight into the test since my smart, white, high SES kids tend to do poorly (sorry Wilson and Deal).

But like you I am shocked at scores of the other high schools. Eastern I actually had hopes for. Tech, horrible. Then you look at the ones they sunk hundreds of millions of dollars renovating -- pathetic. Truly pathetic that those teachers are allowed to continue to work for DCPS.

Oh, right. Must be the teachers. Fire the teachers. Hire new ones. Then check the scores. Wait a minute. We've been here before.

Its not just the teachers. Its the "peer groups." C'mon guys. We know where this is going.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are white parents going to be clamoring to get into Banneker? It was the top scoring high school in DCPS with 98% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in literacy and 62% of its students scoring at or above proficiency in mathematics. School Without Walls was 84% proficiency in literacy and 52% proficiency in mathematics.

Have you been paying attention to this thread?

Not only is Banneker a test-in school, but it counsels out a large number of its students (anyone whose GPA drops below 3.0, even in the middle of a year). Combine that with the non-existent special ed or ELL populations and, voila, the few students who remain to actually take the PARCC do very well.

If Wilson could do all that, it'd probably be the best in the nation. If SWS was as aggressive as Banneker in counseling students out, its scores would be higher.

Just a correction - i said it used to be 3.0.

I think DCPS has reworked the Banneker grading system so that it's less draconian -- by it is still a school with significant attrition from 9th to 12th.

Thank you for the clarification. I'd love to see the comparable attrition data from SWS.

Banneker considers, standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. After admission, placement tests are administered to determine the student's skill level. On the other hand, students are not admitted to Walls unless they pass the entrance exam.

According to learnDC.org (thank you PP for the suggestion), Banneker and SWS have completely different attrition profiles.

Enrollment at Banneker:
- 9th: 167
- 10th: 114
- 11th: 74
- 12th: 94

Approx. attrition rate: 44%

Enrollment at SWS:
- 9th: 160
- 10th: 142
- 11th: 150
- 12th: 138

Approx. attrition rate: 14%


Quite relevant when we compare PARCC numbers, correct?

(Both are great schools, but there's no need to hype results)

Maybe. PARCC is only supposed administered in during high school once, in 10th grade for ELA and whenever the right year happens based on their math level.

For 2014-15 DCPS tested kids in 9th and 10th for ELA. No idea what they did for 15-16. At any rate if they normalize to just 10th the attrition issue will be less stark between SWW and Banneker.

But how do you normalize for the fact that, based on general data above, Banneker has kicked out 32% of its lower-performing students by 10th grade, and SWW only 11%?

That 21% difference makes Banneker look like a better school than it actually is.

Don't forget SWW wipes out loads of kids before they are admitted through their required testing. Many kids can't pass that math test and don't even make it into the school.

??

Banneker does the same, since they are both test-in schools.

The question is what happens to students once they happily enter the school building.

Not true. Banneker only requires standardized test scores, teacher recommendation, and the interview. A placement test is administered after admission to determine the students' skill levels. Walls is more restrictive since it requires that the applicants pass an entrance exam in addition to the requirements mentioned for Banneker. I applaud Banneker's willingness to take a chance on students that might not be admitted to Walls.

...and then kicking out 32% of them within a year?

Doesn't look like a great idea to me, but if everyone is on board, well, we do live in a free country.

So Walls eliminating hoards of kids from the get go is OK, but Banneker giving them a chance and deciding later they can't handle the curriculum is not OK and different? OKie dokie.

And whoever said Banneker is a test-in school, it is not.

[Anonymous]

NO schools in DC are test in.

Even at Walls the application test scores don't determine who gets in. That just narrows down the pool. The interviews used to pick the accepted students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NO schools in DC are test in.

Even at Walls the application test scores don't determine who gets in. That just narrows down the pool. The interviews used to pick the accepted students.

Thank you, I didn't know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Why are the grade 3 ELA scores at some of the traditionally high performing schools so much lower compared to the other grades?"

Yep. The Janney 3rd graders tanked ELA but not math, the 5th graders tanked math but not ELA, but the 4th graders rocked both. Very, very strange. One would think that in a school with a well thought-out curriculum and mostly the same staff year to year, the scores from grade to grade would be fairly consistent. My guess is that either there were excessive technology errors on some of the test days or the test design is just off. For Wilson, I'd guess parents may have told their kids to not worry about tanking the test, but I don't have the sense that happened at Janney since the issue seems to be with one test or the other but not both.

Same thing seems to have happened at all other elementary schools. ELA grade 3 may have been more (relatively) difficult than ELA later grades.

I pulled many of the other high performing schools and can find evidence of the grade 3 ELA issue only at Janney, Lafayette, and Eaton.

Actually Stoddert had this issue too. ELA 3rd grade 70% vs. ELA 4th grade 86%. A 16 point difference is kind of large whereas the Math scores were much closer with only a 5 point difference.

Yu Ying's 3rd grade had the same issue. 3rd graders scored on ELA 31% vs. 69% in 4th and 5th (and last year's 3rd grade score of high 60s) )and Math 46% vs. 68% and 73% for 4th and 5th grade (and last year's 3rd grade score of low 60s).

Would love to know if there was a change to the test to explain what seems like a widespread (and alarming) trend!

[Anonymous]

The only change I heard about was that there were fewer questions. This allows less room for errors.