DC CAPE SCORES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your floor should be looking at schools where majority are at grade level. Then very good chance that is where the teaching will be.

Then you need to know if there is a good cohort of higher performing kids by looking at number of 5’s.

Only kids good at test taking do well on CAPE is a myth that families at poorly performing schools want you to believe and how they justify low scores.

CAPE is not hard. It tests you grade level content and what kids should know. 5 shows that the kids have a deeper understanding of concepts.

Then go talk to parents at these schools and see how the curriculum and teaching is set up

I’m very familiar with the secondary math CAPE test. It IS hard. In fact, it is significantly harder than the SOLs in VA. There’s a reason DC was the only place left taking PARCC from the original group that started with it. They changed the name because it’s now only taken in DC, not because the test changed.

A lot of the questions on the math section are harder (intentionally imo) than they need to be if you simply created a question to assess proficiency of a particular standard.

FWIW, I hear that the SOL in VA have gotten easier. They have lowers the standards and it is not good.

+1. I teach in VA and the test is a joke. There no writing assessment until 5th and the writing prompts are terrible. CAPE is significantly harder, especially the writing prompts. Most of my students (high population of ELs) would be 1s or 2s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone done the analysis of percentages of 5s? I'm going to be honest and say that I am confident my UMC white kid with most statistical advantages you can name (parental education, married parents, etc) would get 4s anywhere, but a 5 might depend on the school/teaching. It's also a good way of judging schools that have a sizeable advanced cohort. Lots of the schools we are considering have kids peel off in 5th grade for charters, so I'd be particularly interested in how non-economically disadvantaged (white if it's the only proxy) 3rd and 4th or, if that's too complicated, just 4th graders do. But I'd also happily take any data related to 5s if anyone has pulled out the data.

lol ok. Kids get 5s because they are motivated and focused and get how to take tests. It is not actually about teaching to the test. At that age you can’t really teach those abilities.

Right. I don't care what my kid gets on the CAPE for the sake of it, so I don't want schools that teach to the test. I want schools with a large number of kids who get 5s so that there's a cohort to teach advanced material to.

DCPS doesn't really do this, even with a large cohort of 5s.

I’ll correct above. DCPS doesn’t do this because there are no kids getting 5’s at many schools.

I agree DCPS does not provide advanced material to advanced kids as part of their curriculum.

Individual teachers sometimes do, however.

But as previously noted, you can't find this out by looking at test scores because you don't know WHY kids at a particular school are getting 5s. Is it because the schools teachers are doing a particularly good job of offering advanced content to students who are ready for it? Or is it because parents at the school are paying for a lot of enrichment and tutoring? Or, another possibility: the school follows DCPS grade level curriculum in the classroom, but offers additional enrichment in math and ELA via after school programs or clubs which enables kids who are interested to work ahead?

You have to visit the school, talk to the faculty, talk to current and former families, etc. CAPE scores are the beginning of an inquiry, not the end.

Fun little fact for you all- these tests offer exclusively grade level content (in math- this is harder to discern in ELA). Therefore, the kids scoring 5s do not have to know any above level content, but rather have to know grade level content at a deeper level. To me, this is far more important and indicative of their reasoning skills and overall mathematical prowess. It likely means that for kids getting 5s, they answered more of the "explain your reasoning" type questions correctly. I do not teach content above my grade level and yet get a pretty decent percentage of students scoring 5s. Learning the content for the grade levels above is not all it is cracked up to be, especially if the reasoning and deeper understanding is lacking.

This is very true. I went to a montessori school where I learned content up to grade 3 or so in PK4 and K. It made the rest of my elementary school career quite boring and made me over-confident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting how Stokes is one of the few schools that has most kids getting 4+ on both tests yet underperforms for 3+ given its at risk percentage. That indicates a significant achievement gap: mostly 4s and 5s but also more 1s and 2s than one might expect. If I were considering the school I would want to know how it works with such a range of students.

Stokes is a small school that can lead to some variation in the data. Not sure if why you would pick out Stokes, but here is some data that shows why Stokes is doing better than other well regarded schools.

- For economically disadvantaged kids scoring 3+ on ELA Stokes Brookland is 14 points higher than Janney and 18 points than Mann.

- For Black students there are a total of 6 ES in all of DC that have higher 3+ scores on the ELA portion. There are too many WOTP schools scoring lower to list, but Janney is 28 points lower.

- For Black students there are only 18 ES that have higher 3+ scores for math. Not as good there, but still 10 points above Janney.

So why would you call out Stokes and not Janney for achievement gaps? If I were a family of a Black child, I would think Stokes is a fine option.

A 3 is not considered on/above grade level in dcps. Only 4’s and 5’s are. Charters, however, include 3’s for some reason.

Because 3s really actually are very, very close to grade level, and on the tests given in other states it would considered grade level. What they are doing is both reasonable and rational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

PP here, I also want to add that spending a month teaching to the test takes away from quality teaching that could have been done in those 30 days.

Incorrect. You sound like a parent who doesn't even have kids at testing age yet.

At young ages, teaching to the test is valuable just like any teaching is valuable. Kids are learning how to look at an exam question, how to sort through multiple choice answers, how to type a response, how to manage time during an exam, etc. All skills they will need throughout their school years. These skills take time to learn, especially when a child is only in 3rd grade, when CAPE begins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

PP here, I also want to add that spending a month teaching to the test takes away from quality teaching that could have been done in those 30 days.

Incorrect. You sound like a parent who doesn't even have kids at testing age yet.

At young ages, teaching to the test is valuable just like any teaching is valuable. Kids are learning how to look at an exam question, how to sort through multiple choice answers, how to type a response, how to manage time during an exam, etc. All skills they will need throughout their school years. These skills take time to learn, especially when a child is only in 3rd grade, when CAPE begins.

It’s only valuable because we make standardized testing valuable. In a world where college admissions are- well we’re dropping such requirements.

It’s an artificial barrier that does not indicate any true skill. I agree with the other teacher in the sense that it is wasteful. Unfortunately due to the reality of US politics and classism teaching to test is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

PP here, I also want to add that spending a month teaching to the test takes away from quality teaching that could have been done in those 30 days.

Incorrect. You sound like a parent who doesn't even have kids at testing age yet.

At young ages, teaching to the test is valuable just like any teaching is valuable. Kids are learning how to look at an exam question, how to sort through multiple choice answers, how to type a response, how to manage time during an exam, etc. All skills they will need throughout their school years. These skills take time to learn, especially when a child is only in 3rd grade, when CAPE begins.

It’s only valuable because we make standardized testing valuable. In a world where college admissions are- well we’re dropping such requirements.

It’s an artificial barrier that does not indicate any true skill. I agree with the other teacher in the sense that it is wasteful. Unfortunately due to the reality of US politics and classism teaching to test is important.

Meant to say ‘well we were dropping such requirements.’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting how Stokes is one of the few schools that has most kids getting 4+ on both tests yet underperforms for 3+ given its at risk percentage. That indicates a significant achievement gap: mostly 4s and 5s but also more 1s and 2s than one might expect. If I were considering the school I would want to know how it works with such a range of students.

Stokes is a small school that can lead to some variation in the data. Not sure if why you would pick out Stokes, but here is some data that shows why Stokes is doing better than other well regarded schools.

- For economically disadvantaged kids scoring 3+ on ELA Stokes Brookland is 14 points higher than Janney and 18 points than Mann.

- For Black students there are a total of 6 ES in all of DC that have higher 3+ scores on the ELA portion. There are too many WOTP schools scoring lower to list, but Janney is 28 points lower.

- For Black students there are only 18 ES that have higher 3+ scores for math. Not as good there, but still 10 points above Janney.

So why would you call out Stokes and not Janney for achievement gaps? If I were a family of a Black child, I would think Stokes is a fine option.

A 3 is not considered on/above grade level in dcps. Only 4’s and 5’s are. Charters, however, include 3’s for some reason.

Who said it was? Did you read the prior comment for context? The PP stated Stokes has lots of 4s and 5s, but strangely questions why their 3+ scores seemed low. They suggested Stokes has a significant achievement gap based on the 3+ metric and parents should reconsider sending their kids there. I was just pointing out that the data doesn’t suggest an achievement gap and if it does many highly regarded schools don’t do as well.

Some people will try to trash charters at every turn for political purposes, but ignore similar or worse issues at DCPS schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting how Stokes is one of the few schools that has most kids getting 4+ on both tests yet underperforms for 3+ given its at risk percentage. That indicates a significant achievement gap: mostly 4s and 5s but also more 1s and 2s than one might expect. If I were considering the school I would want to know how it works with such a range of students.

Stokes is a small school that can lead to some variation in the data. Not sure if why you would pick out Stokes, but here is some data that shows why Stokes is doing better than other well regarded schools.

- For economically disadvantaged kids scoring 3+ on ELA Stokes Brookland is 14 points higher than Janney and 18 points than Mann.

- For Black students there are a total of 6 ES in all of DC that have higher 3+ scores on the ELA portion. There are too many WOTP schools scoring lower to list, but Janney is 28 points lower.

- For Black students there are only 18 ES that have higher 3+ scores for math. Not as good there, but still 10 points above Janney.

So why would you call out Stokes and not Janney for achievement gaps? If I were a family of a Black child, I would think Stokes is a fine option.

A 3 is not considered on/above grade level in dcps. Only 4’s and 5’s are. Charters, however, include 3’s for some reason.

Because 3s really actually are very, very close to grade level, and on the tests given in other states it would considered grade level. What they are doing is both reasonable and rational.

Low 3s are actually nowhere near grade level. The 3s range is so wide points-wise that saying a low 3 is "almost" on grade level is just completely untrue. In general, more of the 4 range is "almost" a 5 than the 3 range is "almost" on grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

I would argue teaching 3rd graders how to Quote evidence from a source in a written essay is not teaching to the test but important writing instruction. My 3rd grader would not naturally know how to do that without instruction. I don’t see anything wrong with a teacher knowing that the 3rd grade writing for Cape expects quoted evidence and teaching kids how to do that.

[Anonymous]

^^ Sorry, hit send too quickly. The cut offs between the 1-5 scores are fairly arbitrary, so I would completely agree that a kid within 10 or even 20 points of a 4 is "almost" on grade level and should be taught grade level content. Similarly, a kid within 10 or 20 points of a 5 I would normally "round up" into the most advanced ELA or math group (i.e., in 3rd grade only 5ish% of DC is getting ELA 5s -- top 10% is actually closer to "kids who are good at ELA;" the percentage typically goes up in higher grades as kids get more familiar with test-taking). BUT 3 is SUCH a broad range that low 3s are actually struggling fairly substantially with grade-level material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

I would argue teaching 3rd graders how to Quote evidence from a source in a written essay is not teaching to the test but important writing instruction. My 3rd grader would not naturally know how to do that without instruction. I don’t see anything wrong with a teacher knowing that the 3rd grade writing for Cape expects quoted evidence and teaching kids how to do that.

Agree with this. Some of the test-taking skills my kid was taught are actually writing skills. Yes, they are taught them for CAPE purposes, but I am glad someone taught my 3rd grader how to roughly structure a paragraph and an essay. It's not the only way, but it's a whole lot better than the no structure at all blob of info that she was writing previously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

PP here, I also want to add that spending a month teaching to the test takes away from quality teaching that could have been done in those 30 days.

Incorrect. You sound like a parent who doesn't even have kids at testing age yet.

At young ages, teaching to the test is valuable just like any teaching is valuable. Kids are learning how to look at an exam question, how to sort through multiple choice answers, how to type a response, how to manage time during an exam, etc. All skills they will need throughout their school years. These skills take time to learn, especially when a child is only in 3rd grade, when CAPE begins.

It’s only valuable because we make standardized testing valuable. In a world where college admissions are- well we’re dropping such requirements.

It’s an artificial barrier that does not indicate any true skill. I agree with the other teacher in the sense that it is wasteful. Unfortunately due to the reality of US politics and classism teaching to test is important.

Meant to say ‘well we were dropping such requirements.’

Except, this isn't true... Competitive schools are bringing back the SAT (e.g., Yale) *and* no schools are dropping tests entirely... SAT IIs, APs, IB exams, etc. All of those are standardized tests that are hugely important for kids to do well on. Then there's the LSAT and the bar exam if your kid wants to be a lawyer. Or the MCAT and the various medical board exams for doctors. Or the CPA exam. Or the GRE. Etc. Etc. Tests are important for life for most kids looking for white collar jobs. Teaching test taking skills is helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting how Stokes is one of the few schools that has most kids getting 4+ on both tests yet underperforms for 3+ given its at risk percentage. That indicates a significant achievement gap: mostly 4s and 5s but also more 1s and 2s than one might expect. If I were considering the school I would want to know how it works with such a range of students.

Stokes is a small school that can lead to some variation in the data. Not sure if why you would pick out Stokes, but here is some data that shows why Stokes is doing better than other well regarded schools.

- For economically disadvantaged kids scoring 3+ on ELA Stokes Brookland is 14 points higher than Janney and 18 points than Mann.

- For Black students there are a total of 6 ES in all of DC that have higher 3+ scores on the ELA portion. There are too many WOTP schools scoring lower to list, but Janney is 28 points lower.

- For Black students there are only 18 ES that have higher 3+ scores for math. Not as good there, but still 10 points above Janney.

So why would you call out Stokes and not Janney for achievement gaps? If I were a family of a Black child, I would think Stokes is a fine option.

A 3 is not considered on/above grade level in dcps. Only 4’s and 5’s are. Charters, however, include 3’s for some reason.

I'm at a charter and not sure what you mean. We get data on all kids for levels 1 to 5 on CAPE. Only 4s and 5s are considered proficient and on/above grade level. Only 4s and above are measured on the charter board report card (now called ASPIRE). On the other hand, the DC State Report Card includes both level 3 and level 4/5 performance when assessing DCPS and charters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

PP here, I also want to add that spending a month teaching to the test takes away from quality teaching that could have been done in those 30 days.

Incorrect. You sound like a parent who doesn't even have kids at testing age yet.

At young ages, teaching to the test is valuable just like any teaching is valuable. Kids are learning how to look at an exam question, how to sort through multiple choice answers, how to type a response, how to manage time during an exam, etc. All skills they will need throughout their school years. These skills take time to learn, especially when a child is only in 3rd grade, when CAPE begins.

It’s only valuable because we make standardized testing valuable. In a world where college admissions are- well we’re dropping such requirements.

It’s an artificial barrier that does not indicate any true skill. I agree with the other teacher in the sense that it is wasteful. Unfortunately due to the reality of US politics and classism teaching to test is important.

?? Colleges are reinstating testing requirements, not dropping them.

Learning how to analyze a question, make educated guesses, structure an argument, etc., are all skills needed in life, not just for standardized tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think smart kids with average teaching will score 4s. Smart kids with very good/effective teachers may score 5s. A high concentration of 5s shows you something about the teaching quality.

CAPE/PARCC is a weird test. My kid scored high on it only because his 3rd grade teacher spent a month teaching all the tricks -- like put a quote somewhere in your essay because the graders are looking for a quote, etc. I guess this has to do with teaching quality? But more like he had a good teacher who knew how to teach to the test.

Then that is a big red flag. I would look at other schools.

Our school does not teach to the test at all. Parents get communication that there is going to be testing coming up. School recommends kids get good nights rest and that’s it. Our kids do well.

Teaching to the test only gets you so far. It is not going to get you top scores especially higher up in the grades. This is true in ELA and especially true in math.

PP here, I also want to add that spending a month teaching to the test takes away from quality teaching that could have been done in those 30 days.

Incorrect. You sound like a parent who doesn't even have kids at testing age yet.

At young ages, teaching to the test is valuable just like any teaching is valuable. Kids are learning how to look at an exam question, how to sort through multiple choice answers, how to type a response, how to manage time during an exam, etc. All skills they will need throughout their school years. These skills take time to learn, especially when a child is only in 3rd grade, when CAPE begins.

Incorrect. My kid is in middle school.

No you don’t spend a month learning all that crap. That is just ridiculous. Maybe review in 1-# day, You don’t think kids know how to choose a,b, c or hit next? That kids have never used the computer before or did any app or took any test online before CAPE? I highly doubt that.

Do you know how many hours are in a month? 8 hour school day = 160 hours. So 160 hours to learn above?? Nope. Those hours are better spent actually learning content and NOT test taking skills.