What the Consensus on Rankings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 0-27 cannot be right for Churchill. Are you sure it wasn't 20/27?

Get the magazine. Or check it in the grocery line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In terms of test scores, graduation rates and college preparedness Whitman is the clear leader but it often get penalized because save for a couple of domestic help type's kids there are simply no poor areas that feed into it and is all but void of FARMs. Now that doesn't make for a great school necessarily because those kids would probably do well anywhere but Whitman does a great job cultivating them.

Looking at the college acceptances (which really should be reflective of your 3 points), that is not the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 0-27 cannot be right for Churchill. Are you sure it wasn't 20/27?

Get the magazine. Or check it in the grocery line.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Magazine/September-October-2015/College-Admissions-Chart/index.php?cparticle=3&siarticle=2#artanc

0 to 27 per the article.

Whitman - 1/26
WJ - 2/16

[Anonymous]

The magazine is cleary wrong. No way Harvard would admit 0 students from Churchill, and take 2 from that armpit known as WJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In terms of test scores, graduation rates and college preparedness Whitman is the clear leader but it often get penalized because save for a couple of domestic help type's kids there are simply no poor areas that feed into it and is all but void of FARMs. Now that doesn't make for a great school necessarily because those kids would probably do well anywhere but Whitman does a great job cultivating them.

Looking at the college acceptances (which really should be reflective of your 3 points), that is not the case.

Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The magazine is cleary wrong. No way Harvard would admit 0 students from Churchill, and take 2 from that armpit known as WJ.

I dare you to call the editor or the author of the article about it and confront them about this supposed error.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.

That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.

That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.

?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.

That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.

That was meant to be a happy face

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.

That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.

?

No the kids are just cherry picked by having wealthy parents..a tough admissions standard!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.

That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.

?

No the kids are just cherry picked by having wealthy parents..a tough admissions standard!

Indeed. Those magnate kids work hard to meet that standard!

[Anonymous]

Rankings based on mean scores aren’t helpful in terms of gauging opportunity or quality. It mostly reflects socio-economic standing, and intended to justify real-estate values. The college admissions data above seems more on point since it’s about real people and outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Mcps publishes sat scores from each hs. Whitman is always on the top and churchill is the second. Wootton is the third on the list. The magnets, blair n rm, graduate around 100 students every year and publish the sat score internally . There is no way the top 100 students from whitman perform better than the kids from the madnet programs. The one who said the whitman kids are as good as the magnet kids has never had any kid reach the level.
need to sender my magnet kid to the bus stop now. Maybe we should beg DC to go to Whitman next year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rankings based on mean scores aren’t helpful in terms of gauging opportunity or quality. It mostly reflects socio-economic standing, and intended to justify real-estate values. The college admissions data above seems more on point since it’s about real people and outcomes.

But the college admissions data doesn't account for legacy/donor status.

The whole picture basically reflects race/ethnicity and SES. When MoCo people say they moved from east county to west so their kids could attend the "best" schools, they really mean rich schools with a lot of whites and Asians.

[Anonymous]

If your DC is at the magnets now you should know the SAT scores (since they are shared internally). What are they? We can then compare them to the other schools.

It is worth remembering that not every child chooses to go to a magnet, and that students who come in after 8th grade (and some would argue after 6th made it harder) don't have the option of a magnet program.