PARCC Scores for Grades 3-8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the YY students don't get in off the WL, and never have. They get in through the lottery. The wait-in-line system has never brought in the majority.

Common sense dictates that life on Free or Reduced Meals and Chinese studies rarely mix well. Flash forward ten years and the data will have been collected.

The Wait-in-line system strong affected the WL, but the real power was always sibling preference (and teacher preference and staff preference). How many lottery seats were there this year for PK? Less than 10? Everything is taken by a self-perpetuating system. BTW, LAMB and even DC Bi are no different. They just have different founding families, which is what established the culture of the school. 5 years from now everyone will be saying the same about ITS, CM, and MV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks seem to be worried that "less able" kids will impede their own child's learning, or hope that higher performing kids will improve it. That, in principle, seems to make sense. Other smart kids should challenge my own. Children who struggle with learning may demand more of the teacher's time and take away from my own children.

But the data for WOTP elementary schools don't seem to bear that out. As others have pointed out, the scores of white children across most WOTP schools are the same (statistically at least, though that is hard to gauge given this is the first time the test has been administered). Rather the differences seem entirely a result of a yawning achievement gap between white and black students and between economically advantaged and disadvantaged (to use the term provided by the test results). Perhaps that is because AA or economically disadvantaged students in these schools are not behavioral problems. Or perhaps as much as we think we are devoting more resources to help economically disadvantaged children, that in fact is a bit of a fantasy or woefully not enough (or for some, nothing much that schools can do), and the result leaves economically advantaged children (where WOTP white children largely fall) unaffected.

One last thought, it may still be the case that being around other high performing children has some benefit. These data are not definitive. But I might note that being around a diverse set of children -- economically, culturally, racially, etc.. -- may also have lifelong benefits equally or of even greater importance. Benefits that do not show up on a test, but that make for well-rounded and more understanding citizens.

These are worthy points. We do, however, have studies to prove that lower SES children in higher SES schools (particularly if the SES percentage is 25% - 30%, and never less than 50%) perform better than their similarly disadvantaged peers, all things being equal.

It's difficult to account for/compensate for (I'm not sure the best term here) the stability that comes from safe, peaceful homes, with two married parents and high educations. The ingredients for success have already been sown.

I really don't want my children to grow up among the thoughtlessly privileged (little snots who will become big snots). I also don't want them to grow up among the perennially deprived and endangered (the pool of children statistically most likely to become criminals).

I think you're missing PP's point. PP is not talking about lower SES children benefiting from higher SES classmates. PP is talking about the higher SES kids benefiting from being exposed to a diverse student body and that some of these benefits may be intangible but real.

I'm not missing PP's point. What I'm adding to it, is that there is a threshold, beyond which these benefits become significantly less statistically observable, or even begin a downturn. The absolute top-line is that at least 50% of students must be from mid/high SES homes. Ideally, we'd be talking 20%, with 30% being the top-line. The culture of performance will be established by the majority. The bigger the majority, the easier it is to establish and then keep in place.

[Anonymous]

But there are 85,465 public school students in DC (charter and DCPS) and 74% are economically disadvantaged. There simply aren't enough of the mid/high students in the system to achieve the ideal ratios.

http://learndc.org/schoolprofiles/view?s=dc#equityreport

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take the average of both scores, here are the best-performing schools (the share of kids scoring 4+):

Janney ES 0.7375
Ross ES 0.7255
Lafayette ES 0.719
Mann ES 0.706
Eaton ES 0.689
Stoddert ES 0.678
Murch ES 0.6745
Key ES 0.6495
Basis DC PCS 0.6335
Brent ES 0.626
Washington Yu Ying PCS 0.6105
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Elementary 0.6045
Washington Latin PCS - Middle School 0.5845
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Middle 0.568
KIPP DC LEAD Academy 0.549
Oyster Adams Bilingual School 0.5445
Deal MS 0.536
Hyde Addison ES 0.5165
School Within School at Goding 0.513
Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB) PCS 0.458
Maury ES 0.44
Shepherd ES 0.4335
Hearst ES 0.4225
Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS 0.383
Two Rivers PCS 0.375
Mundo Verde Bilingual PCS 0.354

Can you do the same list with the percentage of economically disadvantaged added? Would be helpful seeing which schools do the best with the poorer students. Thanks!

What exactly are these "averages"? Are you simply adding up every available score and dividing by the number of scores? Are you weighting by the number of students taking the test per grade? Good lord, for those schools that have a MS are you including the Algebra scores in your "average"? As in, the Algebra score that even Deal pulled a 2.9% in (not a typo)?

DCUM is such a dangerous place. Someone posts numbers and the sheep on this board comment on it for 9+ pages without even asking if the data makes sense.

The real horror is how Deal pulled a 2.9% in Algebra. This is supposed to be the best middle school in DC?? Shudder.

The chart I'm looking at shows 70.8% of Deal 7th grade Algebra I test takers (out of 185 7th graders in Algebra I) (which is the standard advanced class -- not the small number who would be in Geometry in 7th) scored 4+. What are you looking at?

Spreadsheet called "PARCC 2015 Grades 3-8 Aggregated State, Sector, and School Results". Filter by school name (Deal MS) and tested grade (8) and you'll see a 2.9% for All Math. I don't pretend to be an expert on this data set. But my point is that the OP copied and pasted a bunch of "averages" without explanation of how she arrived at those numbers. And if she included the upper level math results in that average (let alone failed to weight the numbers) then the numbers are meaningless.

[Anonymous]

How was Hardy's scores? (I cannot get into the site. Some security protocol on my computer-argh)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks seem to be worried that "less able" kids will impede their own child's learning, or hope that higher performing kids will improve it. That, in principle, seems to make sense. Other smart kids should challenge my own. Children who struggle with learning may demand more of the teacher's time and take away from my own children.

But the data for WOTP elementary schools don't seem to bear that out. As others have pointed out, the scores of white children across most WOTP schools are the same (statistically at least, though that is hard to gauge given this is the first time the test has been administered). Rather the differences seem entirely a result of a yawning achievement gap between white and black students and between economically advantaged and disadvantaged (to use the term provided by the test results). Perhaps that is because AA or economically disadvantaged students in these schools are not behavioral problems. Or perhaps as much as we think we are devoting more resources to help economically disadvantaged children, that in fact is a bit of a fantasy or woefully not enough (or for some, nothing much that schools can do), and the result leaves economically advantaged children (where WOTP white children largely fall) unaffected.

One last thought, it may still be the case that being around other high performing children has some benefit. These data are not definitive. But I might note that being around a diverse set of children -- economically, culturally, racially, etc.. -- may also have lifelong benefits equally or of even greater importance. Benefits that do not show up on a test, but that make for well-rounded and more understanding citizens.

These are worthy points. We do, however, have studies to prove that lower SES children in higher SES schools (particularly if the SES percentage is 25% - 30%, and never less than 50%) perform better than their similarly disadvantaged peers, all things being equal.

It's difficult to account for/compensate for (I'm not sure the best term here) the stability that comes from safe, peaceful homes, with two married parents and high educations. The ingredients for success have already been sown.

I really don't want my children to grow up among the thoughtlessly privileged (little snots who will become big snots). I also don't want them to grow up among the perennially deprived and endangered (the pool of children statistically most likely to become criminals).

I think you're missing PP's point. PP is not talking about lower SES children benefiting from higher SES classmates. PP is talking about the higher SES kids benefiting from being exposed to a diverse student body and that some of these benefits may be intangible but real.

I'm not missing PP's point. What I'm adding to it, is that there is a threshold, beyond which these benefits become significantly less statistically observable, or even begin a downturn. The absolute top-line is that at least 50% of students must be from mid/high SES homes. Ideally, we'd be talking 20%, with 30% being the top-line. The culture of performance will be established by the majority. The bigger the majority, the easier it is to establish and then keep in place.

Argue your semantic intellectual data til the cows come home. You will never convince me that my kid isn't better off in a classroom of high performers where the teacher can concentrate on teaching (and not distractions) and where the lowest common denominators don't bring the the speed and sophistication of the work down. It simply doesn't track. Now if you tell me that I can have that and diversity, great. But there it simply doesn't pass the smell test to argue that my kid is better off surrounded by more than 50% of the kids being below grade level and not prepared to go to college because diversity is more important that academic success and the academic environment.

My kid isn't a statistical data point, and, with all due respect, I care more about my kid than I do yours, and more than I care about the needy and downtrodden in this world. I care about them too, btw, but I'm not as much as I care about my kid and their education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How was Hardy's scores? (I cannot get into the site. Some security protocol on my computer-argh)

All math (not broken out with Alg or Geom) = 23.% scored 4 or above; ELA = 21.9% 4 or above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take the average of both scores, here are the best-performing schools (the share of kids scoring 4+):

Janney ES 0.7375
Ross ES 0.7255
Lafayette ES 0.719
Mann ES 0.706
Eaton ES 0.689
Stoddert ES 0.678
Murch ES 0.6745
Key ES 0.6495
Basis DC PCS 0.6335
Brent ES 0.626
Washington Yu Ying PCS 0.6105
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Elementary 0.6045
Washington Latin PCS - Middle School 0.5845
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Middle 0.568
KIPP DC LEAD Academy 0.549
Oyster Adams Bilingual School 0.5445
Deal MS 0.536
Hyde Addison ES 0.5165
School Within School at Goding 0.513
Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB) PCS 0.458
Maury ES 0.44
Shepherd ES 0.4335
Hearst ES 0.4225
Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS 0.383
Two Rivers PCS 0.375
Mundo Verde Bilingual PCS 0.354

Can you do the same list with the percentage of economically disadvantaged added? Would be helpful seeing which schools do the best with the poorer students. Thanks!

What exactly are these "averages"? Are you simply adding up every available score and dividing by the number of scores? Are you weighting by the number of students taking the test per grade? Good lord, for those schools that have a MS are you including the Algebra scores in your "average"? As in, the Algebra score that even Deal pulled a 2.9% in (not a typo)?

DCUM is such a dangerous place. Someone posts numbers and the sheep on this board comment on it for 9+ pages without even asking if the data makes sense.

The real horror is how Deal pulled a 2.9% in Algebra. This is supposed to be the best middle school in DC?? Shudder.

The chart I'm looking at shows 70.8% of Deal 7th grade Algebra I test takers (out of 185 7th graders in Algebra I) (which is the standard advanced class -- not the small number who would be in Geometry in 7th) scored 4+. What are you looking at?

Spreadsheet called "PARCC 2015 Grades 3-8 Aggregated State, Sector, and School Results". Filter by school name (Deal MS) and tested grade (8) and you'll see a 2.9% for All Math. I don't pretend to be an expert on this data set. But my point is that the OP copied and pasted a bunch of "averages" without explanation of how she arrived at those numbers. And if she included the upper level math results in that average (let alone failed to weight the numbers) then the numbers are meaningless.

You're doing it wrong, you are selecting the subject category of 3to8 which means you are getting data for 6th graders that tested in Algebra 1. You have to select all in the subject category then tested grade to Algebra I to get the Algebra I data. The 4s and 5 equal 45.9%.

The averages PP had that you questions are simply the % of students that got a 4 or a 5 in the subject.

[Anonymous]

I think what PP was saying is that there are studies which show that so long as the high-SES kids make up a certain proportion of the kids (I heard it was 60-70%) they are not "dragged down"; and yet the 30-40% of low SES kids are pulled up.

Thus if your school is 50-60-70% high SES, studies suggest they will do as well academically than if at a 100% high SES school, PLUS they will have the benefit of a diverse student body.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take the average of both scores, here are the best-performing schools (the share of kids scoring 4+):

Janney ES 0.7375
Ross ES 0.7255
Lafayette ES 0.719
Mann ES 0.706
Eaton ES 0.689
Stoddert ES 0.678
Murch ES 0.6745
Key ES 0.6495
Basis DC PCS 0.6335
Brent ES 0.626
Washington Yu Ying PCS 0.6105
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Elementary 0.6045
Washington Latin PCS - Middle School 0.5845
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Middle 0.568
KIPP DC LEAD Academy 0.549
Oyster Adams Bilingual School 0.5445
Deal MS 0.536
Hyde Addison ES 0.5165
School Within School at Goding 0.513
Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB) PCS 0.458
Maury ES 0.44
Shepherd ES 0.4335
Hearst ES 0.4225
Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS 0.383
Two Rivers PCS 0.375
Mundo Verde Bilingual PCS 0.354

If these are the best performing schools what are the worst.!?!

Less than .20-.10 percent scoring 4+

Just like YY started out struggling on paper as far as scores are concerned, ITS and MV will be on par with YY in a few years. They have matching demographics and no reason not to succeed. By every indication, families love it there. PP pointed out that the 3rd graders (I think kids that started there in PK4) are in the mid 50s.

ITS and MV have different admissions entry options than YY. Also, until last year YY had time stamp waitlists which one could guess helped ensure dedicated families attending.

Sorry, what would those be? Don't they all use the common lottery as the entry point? And don't both MV and YY have grade cut-offs, after which a student is deemed too old/far behind to catch up with the target language?

YY has always been perceived to have benefited from the fairly high SES of its population.

MV doesn't have a cutoff for grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks seem to be worried that "less able" kids will impede their own child's learning, or hope that higher performing kids will improve it. That, in principle, seems to make sense. Other smart kids should challenge my own. Children who struggle with learning may demand more of the teacher's time and take away from my own children.

But the data for WOTP elementary schools don't seem to bear that out. As others have pointed out, the scores of white children across most WOTP schools are the same (statistically at least, though that is hard to gauge given this is the first time the test has been administered). Rather the differences seem entirely a result of a yawning achievement gap between white and black students and between economically advantaged and disadvantaged (to use the term provided by the test results). Perhaps that is because AA or economically disadvantaged students in these schools are not behavioral problems. Or perhaps as much as we think we are devoting more resources to help economically disadvantaged children, that in fact is a bit of a fantasy or woefully not enough (or for some, nothing much that schools can do), and the result leaves economically advantaged children (where WOTP white children largely fall) unaffected.

One last thought, it may still be the case that being around other high performing children has some benefit. These data are not definitive. But I might note that being around a diverse set of children -- economically, culturally, racially, etc.. -- may also have lifelong benefits equally or of even greater importance. Benefits that do not show up on a test, but that make for well-rounded and more understanding citizens.

These are worthy points. We do, however, have studies to prove that lower SES children in higher SES schools (particularly if the SES percentage is 25% - 30%, and never less than 50%) perform better than their similarly disadvantaged peers, all things being equal.

It's difficult to account for/compensate for (I'm not sure the best term here) the stability that comes from safe, peaceful homes, with two married parents and high educations. The ingredients for success have already been sown.

I really don't want my children to grow up among the thoughtlessly privileged (little snots who will become big snots). I also don't want them to grow up among the perennially deprived and endangered (the pool of children statistically most likely to become criminals).

I think you're missing PP's point. PP is not talking about lower SES children benefiting from higher SES classmates. PP is talking about the higher SES kids benefiting from being exposed to a diverse student body and that some of these benefits may be intangible but real.

I'm not missing PP's point. What I'm adding to it, is that there is a threshold, beyond which these benefits become significantly less statistically observable, or even begin a downturn. The absolute top-line is that at least 50% of students must be from mid/high SES homes. Ideally, we'd be talking 20%, with 30% being the top-line. The culture of performance will be established by the majority. The bigger the majority, the easier it is to establish and then keep in place.

Argue your semantic intellectual data til the cows come home. You will never convince me that my kid isn't better off in a classroom of high performers where the teacher can concentrate on teaching (and not distractions) and where the lowest common denominators don't bring the the speed and sophistication of the work down. It simply doesn't track. Now if you tell me that I can have that and diversity, great. But there it simply doesn't pass the smell test to argue that my kid is better off surrounded by more than 50% of the kids being below grade level and not prepared to go to college because diversity is more important that academic success and the academic environment.

My kid isn't a statistical data point, and, with all due respect, I care more about my kid than I do yours, and more than I care about the needy and downtrodden in this world. I care about them too, btw, but I'm not as much as I care about my kid and their education.

The assumption you're making is that ALL low SES kids are below grade level and not prepared for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take the average of both scores, here are the best-performing schools (the share of kids scoring 4+):

Janney ES 0.7375
Ross ES 0.7255
Lafayette ES 0.719
Mann ES 0.706
Eaton ES 0.689
Stoddert ES 0.678
Murch ES 0.6745
Key ES 0.6495
Basis DC PCS 0.6335
Brent ES 0.626
Washington Yu Ying PCS 0.6105
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Elementary 0.6045
Washington Latin PCS - Middle School 0.5845
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Middle 0.568
KIPP DC LEAD Academy 0.549
Oyster Adams Bilingual School 0.5445
Deal MS 0.536
Hyde Addison ES 0.5165
School Within School at Goding 0.513
Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB) PCS 0.458
Maury ES 0.44
Shepherd ES 0.4335
Hearst ES 0.4225
Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS 0.383
Two Rivers PCS 0.375
Mundo Verde Bilingual PCS 0.354

Can you do the same list with the percentage of economically disadvantaged added? Would be helpful seeing which schools do the best with the poorer students. Thanks!

What exactly are these "averages"? Are you simply adding up every available score and dividing by the number of scores? Are you weighting by the number of students taking the test per grade? Good lord, for those schools that have a MS are you including the Algebra scores in your "average"? As in, the Algebra score that even Deal pulled a 2.9% in (not a typo)?

DCUM is such a dangerous place. Someone posts numbers and the sheep on this board comment on it for 9+ pages without even asking if the data makes sense.

The real horror is how Deal pulled a 2.9% in Algebra. This is supposed to be the best middle school in DC?? Shudder.

The chart I'm looking at shows 70.8% of Deal 7th grade Algebra I test takers (out of 185 7th graders in Algebra I) (which is the standard advanced class -- not the small number who would be in Geometry in 7th) scored 4+. What are you looking at?

Spreadsheet called "PARCC 2015 Grades 3-8 Aggregated State, Sector, and School Results". Filter by school name (Deal MS) and tested grade (8) and you'll see a 2.9% for All Math. I don't pretend to be an expert on this data set. But my point is that the OP copied and pasted a bunch of "averages" without explanation of how she arrived at those numbers. And if she included the upper level math results in that average (let alone failed to weight the numbers) then the numbers are meaningless.

You're doing it wrong, you are selecting the subject category of 3to8 which means you are getting data for 6th graders that tested in Algebra 1. You have to select all in the subject category then tested grade to Algebra I to get the Algebra I data. The 4s and 5 equal 45.9%.

The averages PP had that you questions are simply the % of students that got a 4 or a 5 in the subject.

Set aside Algenbra vs the overall issue I have with the "averages". Deal, tested grade 8, all math = 2.9% Is that not actually a % of kids in that category who scored 4+? Seriously asking here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take the average of both scores, here are the best-performing schools (the share of kids scoring 4+):

Janney ES 0.7375
Ross ES 0.7255
Lafayette ES 0.719
Mann ES 0.706
Eaton ES 0.689
Stoddert ES 0.678
Murch ES 0.6745
Key ES 0.6495
Basis DC PCS 0.6335
Brent ES 0.626
Washington Yu Ying PCS 0.6105
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Elementary 0.6045
Washington Latin PCS - Middle School 0.5845
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Middle 0.568
KIPP DC LEAD Academy 0.549
Oyster Adams Bilingual School 0.5445
Deal MS 0.536
Hyde Addison ES 0.5165
School Within School at Goding 0.513
Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB) PCS 0.458
Maury ES 0.44
Shepherd ES 0.4335
Hearst ES 0.4225
Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS 0.383
Two Rivers PCS 0.375
Mundo Verde Bilingual PCS 0.354

Can you do the same list with the percentage of economically disadvantaged added? Would be helpful seeing which schools do the best with the poorer students. Thanks!

What exactly are these "averages"? Are you simply adding up every available score and dividing by the number of scores? Are you weighting by the number of students taking the test per grade? Good lord, for those schools that have a MS are you including the Algebra scores in your "average"? As in, the Algebra score that even Deal pulled a 2.9% in (not a typo)?

DCUM is such a dangerous place. Someone posts numbers and the sheep on this board comment on it for 9+ pages without even asking if the data makes sense.

The real horror is how Deal pulled a 2.9% in Algebra. This is supposed to be the best middle school in DC?? Shudder.

The chart I'm looking at shows 70.8% of Deal 7th grade Algebra I test takers (out of 185 7th graders in Algebra I) (which is the standard advanced class -- not the small number who would be in Geometry in 7th) scored 4+. What are you looking at?

Spreadsheet called "PARCC 2015 Grades 3-8 Aggregated State, Sector, and School Results". Filter by school name (Deal MS) and tested grade (8) and you'll see a 2.9% for All Math. I don't pretend to be an expert on this data set. But my point is that the OP copied and pasted a bunch of "averages" without explanation of how she arrived at those numbers. And if she included the upper level math results in that average (let alone failed to weight the numbers) then the numbers are meaningless.

You're doing it wrong, you are selecting the subject category of 3to8 which means you are getting data for 6th graders that tested in Algebra 1. You have to select all in the subject category then tested grade to Algebra I to get the Algebra I data. The 4s and 5 equal 45.9%.

The averages PP had that you questions are simply the % of students that got a 4 or a 5 in the subject.

Set aside Algenbra vs the overall issue I have with the "averages". Deal, tested grade 8, all math = 2.9% Is that not actually a % of kids in that category who scored 4+? Seriously asking here.

3.9% got a 5. Another 40% got a 4.

A 4 is meeting expectations - so what most are focusing on is the number who got 4 or higher (which for Deal, grade 8, all math = 43.9%).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprised by the low number of SPED at MV. For such a big school - that's pretty low.

Not as low as Basis. That's actually quite disturbing, but then they just kick kids out.

Actually are quite a few 'higher' performing schools with disturbingly low levels of SPED students.

SWW High School - .7%
Banneker - 2.4%
McKinley - 2%
Ellington - 4.6%

That's not as disturbing as you think. Those are DCPS test-in schools. Students who need services within DCPS can still get them. Basis is its own little school district, and it can kick students out whenever it wants until it runs into an IDEA lawsuit.

That's why their newest school is private and not even in DC. They are all about the attrition model.

PP who's psoted a couple times. It is exactly as disturbing as I think.

My BASIS kid with an IEP is also an advanced learner who needs accommodations and minimal services. I am not sending that child to Coolidge, our IB high school because they cannot meet DC's needs. SWW would not allow extended time and typing accommodation on their entrance exam - which is a huge barrier to entry and makes no sense academically. I don't have the tiem or resources to file an IDEA lawsuit against DCPS over this but we could.

FWIW BASIS, College Board and PARCC allow DC to have extra time, and a computer to type written responses.

You wouldn't have to sue alone. Contact Washington Lawyers Committee: http://www.washlaw.org

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take the average of both scores, here are the best-performing schools (the share of kids scoring 4+):

Janney ES 0.7375
Ross ES 0.7255
Lafayette ES 0.719
Mann ES 0.706
Eaton ES 0.689
Stoddert ES 0.678
Murch ES 0.6745
Key ES 0.6495
Basis DC PCS 0.6335
Brent ES 0.626
Washington Yu Ying PCS 0.6105
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Elementary 0.6045
Washington Latin PCS - Middle School 0.5845
DC Prep PCS Edgewood Middle 0.568
KIPP DC LEAD Academy 0.549
Oyster Adams Bilingual School 0.5445
Deal MS 0.536
Hyde Addison ES 0.5165
School Within School at Goding 0.513
Latin American Montessori Bilingual (LAMB) PCS 0.458
Maury ES 0.44
Shepherd ES 0.4335
Hearst ES 0.4225
Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS 0.383
Two Rivers PCS 0.375
Mundo Verde Bilingual PCS 0.354

Can you do the same list with the percentage of economically disadvantaged added? Would be helpful seeing which schools do the best with the poorer students. Thanks!

What exactly are these "averages"? Are you simply adding up every available score and dividing by the number of scores? Are you weighting by the number of students taking the test per grade? Good lord, for those schools that have a MS are you including the Algebra scores in your "average"? As in, the Algebra score that even Deal pulled a 2.9% in (not a typo)?

DCUM is such a dangerous place. Someone posts numbers and the sheep on this board comment on it for 9+ pages without even asking if the data makes sense.

The real horror is how Deal pulled a 2.9% in Algebra. This is supposed to be the best middle school in DC?? Shudder.

The chart I'm looking at shows 70.8% of Deal 7th grade Algebra I test takers (out of 185 7th graders in Algebra I) (which is the standard advanced class -- not the small number who would be in Geometry in 7th) scored 4+. What are you looking at?

Spreadsheet called "PARCC 2015 Grades 3-8 Aggregated State, Sector, and School Results". Filter by school name (Deal MS) and tested grade (8) and you'll see a 2.9% for All Math. I don't pretend to be an expert on this data set. But my point is that the OP copied and pasted a bunch of "averages" without explanation of how she arrived at those numbers. And if she included the upper level math results in that average (let alone failed to weight the numbers) then the numbers are meaningless.

You're doing it wrong, you are selecting the subject category of 3to8 which means you are getting data for 6th graders that tested in Algebra 1. You have to select all in the subject category then tested grade to Algebra I to get the Algebra I data. The 4s and 5 equal 45.9%.

The averages PP had that you questions are simply the % of students that got a 4 or a 5 in the subject.

The averages are the % of students that got a 4 or 5 in 3to8 Math and English. I did not include Algebra. Looking at Algebra now, it appears that Hardy did better than Deal:

School Name Tested Grade Subject Category Subgroup % level 4+
Friendship PCS Technology Preparatory Academy Algebra I Algebra I All 1.4%
Whittier EC Algebra I Algebra I All 3.3%
Columbia Heights EC (CHEC) Algebra I Algebra I All 4.0%
Sousa MS Algebra I Algebra I All 15.4%
Oyster Adams Bilingual School Algebra I Algebra I All 19.7%
Stuart Hobson MS (Capitol Hill Cluster) Algebra I Algebra I All 23.7%
School Without Walls at Francis Stevens Algebra I Algebra I All 32.0%
Deal MS Algebra I Algebra I All 45.9%
Hardy MS Algebra I Algebra I All 57.7%