PARCC Scores for Grades 3-8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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%).

I will simplify my question. Row 10888. What does that 2.9% tell us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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

That's completely true. It's also why DCPS should take a page or two out of KIPP's/DC Prep's/EL Haynes's playbook. Those are schools that are optimized to serve students with higher social and behavioral needs.

BTW, it would seem DCPS did just that when they hired Jenny Niles, but we might have to give her at least a year or two to implement changes and bring results.

[Anonymous]

Could you guys please cut down the post lengths?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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%).

I will simplify my question. Row 10888. What does that 2.9% tell us?

35 8th grade students took a class 8th grade math and 2.9% got a 4 or above.

[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.

You realize that you're preaching to the choir, don't you? Or, don'tyou...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Correct.

[Anonymous]

I will simplify my question. Row 10888. What does that 2.9% tell us?

35 8th grade students took a class 8th grade math and 2.9% got a 4 or above.

This is correct. It is the 8th grade students who are neither in geometry (advanced track) nor algebra (standard track). In other words, math 8 represents kids from the lowest possible math track. The results aren't surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Correct.

This is not an accurate description of the research findings. There is more nuance. Namely, low-performing kids appear to be pulled up. High-performing kids appear to be unaffected (not pulled down). Kids in the middle are pulled down.

[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

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.

Seriously? That sounds irresponsible. Do they just assume that 3rd graders will catch up on the target language, and speak it as well as the students who have been in the school since PreK? Do they take ownership of that goal or is it all on the families?

Or is it a little bit of backwards sorting? "No-one who doesn't speak Spanish in the home would be foolish enough to risk their child's education by enrolling him/her several years behind their peers."

YY would probably love to be able to pull off that hat trick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Correct.

This is not an accurate description of the research findings. There is more nuance. Namely, low-performing kids appear to be pulled up. High-performing kids appear to be unaffected (not pulled down). Kids in the middle are pulled down.

Citation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Correct.

This is not an accurate description of the research findings. There is more nuance. Namely, low-performing kids appear to be pulled up. High-performing kids appear to be unaffected (not pulled down). Kids in the middle are pulled down.

That is an interesting finding PP, one of which I was previously unaware. Could you elaborate? (no snark, genuine question)

[Anonymous]

I think MV would very much like to impose a cutoff entry year for these very reasons. My impression is that the charter board hasn't OK'ed it? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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%).

I will simplify my question. Row 10888. What does that 2.9% tell us?

35 8th grade students took a class 8th grade math and 2.9% got a 4 or above.

That's my problem with taking a blended average comparing a school that only goes from pk-5 with those that go pk-8. The 6-7-8 scores are all lower, even at Deal. It's comparing apple sauce to apple-banana sauce. It is also no surprise to anyone that 5th grade scores at schools that don't feed into Deal are not good. The Basis and Latin 5th grade scores are great, but where exactly are those kids coming from? (I am NOT arguing conspiracy or that it's wrong, just that there's an obvious brain drain issue.)

If you want to compare schools then doing it grade by grade is the only way to even try and use these scores to compare schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You realize that you're preaching to the choir, don't you? Or, don'tyou...

Not so much. You're arguing statistical data that shows that diversity can pull a kid up. I'm saying that I am not willing to flirt with the line between up, stasis and down. Casue it's my kid.

[Anonymous]

I love these District Measured folks!!
https://public.tableau.com/profile/kevin.lang#!/vizhome/PARCC3through8TestScores-School/Dashboard3

The comparative visual presentation of the percentages is really helpful. You'll find that, for the most part, the math and ELA % match up with some really striking exceptions. The most striking exception is Latin PCS middle school, where the math proficiency is that of a completely different school from its ELA proficiency.

Having said that, let's keep in mind that this was a trial run, schools could be off for any number of reasons, most notably including because they experienced technical problems. In truth, many schools were told that this is a trial run and not to get students wall worked up about it.