DC CAPE SCORES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

From what I understand, the non-economically disadvantaged subgroup is not part of the file released by OSSE. EmpowerK12 will manually calculate it and update their dashboard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

Top 15 ELA:
Shepherd 93
Chisholm 93
Ludlow-Taylor 92
Stoddert 90
Hyde-Addison 90
Maury 88
EL Haynes 86
Payne 86
Oyster-Adams 85
Bancroft 85
Janney 85
Lafayette 84
Murch 84
SWS 83
Mundo Verde - Cook 82

Top 15 Math:
Hearst 93
Lewis 93
Shepherd 90
Lafayette 90
Ross 90
SWS 89
Brent 88
Watkins 97
Maury 87
Stoddert 87
Murch 85
Eaton 85
Garrison 85
Chisholm 81
Ludlow-Taylor 81

One thing I think is interesting about the above list is that lots of these schools are very diverse and so don't do as well "overall." But it seems to me that as a parent what you should care about is how your kid would do and this seems to give the best view of that for UMC families. It's actually encouraging to me that it suggests a diverse set of classmates is not a negative and could be a positive even looking only at test scores. (It semes like it's obviously a positive overall.) The other thing this makes very clear is that DCPSes do much better than Charters for ES when you compare like populations.

Totally agree with this. The longer I stay in the DC school system, the less helpful I think this data is for non-at-risk families except to make everyone lottery for the same schools, increasing segregation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very impressed with Latin (our kids are at other schools but we have plenty of friends there). It looked like all of their scores trended up since last year, too. No wonder their wait list looks the way it does.

+1

Latin has way, way more poor kids than a lot of these other schools too.

Does it though? Would love to see at-risk stats for Latin but they don't seem to publish them on their website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

Top 15 ELA:
Shepherd 93
Chisholm 93
Ludlow-Taylor 92
Stoddert 90
Hyde-Addison 90
Maury 88
EL Haynes 86
Payne 86
Oyster-Adams 85
Bancroft 85
Janney 85
Lafayette 84
Murch 84
SWS 83
Mundo Verde - Cook 82

Top 15 Math:
Hearst 93
Lewis 93
Shepherd 90
Lafayette 90
Ross 90
SWS 89
Brent 88
Watkins 97
Maury 87
Stoddert 87
Murch 85
Eaton 85
Garrison 85
Chisholm 81
Ludlow-Taylor 81

One thing I think is interesting about the above list is that lots of these schools are very diverse and so don't do as well "overall." But it seems to me that as a parent what you should care about is how your kid would do and this seems to give the best view of that for UMC families. It's actually encouraging to me that it suggests a diverse set of classmates is not a negative and could be a positive even looking only at test scores. (It semes like it's obviously a positive overall.) The other thing this makes very clear is that DCPSes do much better than Charters for ES when you compare like populations.

Plenty of non-economically disadvantaged kids going to elementary schools with <25% white students, but because of data suppression almost none of those schools show up on your list.

It's really not a great proxy at the elementary school level.

[Anonymous]

I would just like to note that all three of the high schools on the list above are teaching significant numbers of at risk kids

Washington Latin
23.4% Farms Rate

Banneker:
29% At Risk

McKinley:
38% At Risk

In fact, McKinley's success is especially impressive given its higher number of At Risk students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

Top 15 ELA:
Shepherd 93
Chisholm 93
Ludlow-Taylor 92
Stoddert 90
Hyde-Addison 90
Maury 88
EL Haynes 86
Payne 86
Oyster-Adams 85
Bancroft 85
Janney 85
Lafayette 84
Murch 84
SWS 83
Mundo Verde - Cook 82

Top 15 Math:
Hearst 93
Lewis 93
Shepherd 90
Lafayette 90
Ross 90
SWS 89
Brent 88
Watkins 97
Maury 87
Stoddert 87
Murch 85
Eaton 85
Garrison 85
Chisholm 81
Ludlow-Taylor 81

One thing I think is interesting about the above list is that lots of these schools are very diverse and so don't do as well "overall." But it seems to me that as a parent what you should care about is how your kid would do and this seems to give the best view of that for UMC families. It's actually encouraging to me that it suggests a diverse set of classmates is not a negative and could be a positive even looking only at test scores. (It semes like it's obviously a positive overall.) The other thing this makes very clear is that DCPSes do much better than Charters for ES when you compare like populations.

Totally agree with this. The longer I stay in the DC school system, the less helpful I think this data is for non-at-risk families except to make everyone lottery for the same schools, increasing segregation.

The longer I have kids in the system (elementary and middle), the more I think that CAPE is a very limited data point when comparing schools, whose curriculums vary pretty widely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would just like to note that all three of the high schools on the list above are teaching significant numbers of at risk kids

Washington Latin
23.4% Farms Rate

Banneker:
29% At Risk

McKinley:
38% At Risk

In fact, McKinley's success is especially impressive given its higher number of At Risk students.

It should, of course be noted that BASIS also gets excellent scores but doesn't divide them out by high school so it's not on the list for that reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

Top 15 ELA:
Shepherd 93
Chisholm 93
Ludlow-Taylor 92
Stoddert 90
Hyde-Addison 90
Maury 88
EL Haynes 86
Payne 86
Oyster-Adams 85
Bancroft 85
Janney 85
Lafayette 84
Murch 84
SWS 83
Mundo Verde - Cook 82

Top 15 Math:
Hearst 93
Lewis 93
Shepherd 90
Lafayette 90
Ross 90
SWS 89
Brent 88
Watkins 97
Maury 87
Stoddert 87
Murch 85
Eaton 85
Garrison 85
Chisholm 81
Ludlow-Taylor 81

One thing I think is interesting about the above list is that lots of these schools are very diverse and so don't do as well "overall." But it seems to me that as a parent what you should care about is how your kid would do and this seems to give the best view of that for UMC families. It's actually encouraging to me that it suggests a diverse set of classmates is not a negative and could be a positive even looking only at test scores. (It semes like it's obviously a positive overall.) The other thing this makes very clear is that DCPSes do much better than Charters for ES when you compare like populations.

Totally agree with this. The longer I stay in the DC school system, the less helpful I think this data is for non-at-risk families except to make everyone lottery for the same schools, increasing segregation.

The longer I have kids in the system (elementary and middle), the more I think that CAPE is a very limited data point when comparing schools, whose curriculums vary pretty widely.

There's no doubt that if DC students took a standardized test that any other students in the nation took it would be more helpful in terms of an apples to apples comparison state to state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

Top 15 ELA:
Shepherd 93
Chisholm 93
Ludlow-Taylor 92
Stoddert 90
Hyde-Addison 90
Maury 88
EL Haynes 86
Payne 86
Oyster-Adams 85
Bancroft 85
Janney 85
Lafayette 84
Murch 84
SWS 83
Mundo Verde - Cook 82

Top 15 Math:
Hearst 93
Lewis 93
Shepherd 90
Lafayette 90
Ross 90
SWS 89
Brent 88
Watkins 97
Maury 87
Stoddert 87
Murch 85
Eaton 85
Garrison 85
Chisholm 81
Ludlow-Taylor 81

One thing I think is interesting about the above list is that lots of these schools are very diverse and so don't do as well "overall." But it seems to me that as a parent what you should care about is how your kid would do and this seems to give the best view of that for UMC families. It's actually encouraging to me that it suggests a diverse set of classmates is not a negative and could be a positive even looking only at test scores. (It semes like it's obviously a positive overall.) The other thing this makes very clear is that DCPSes do much better than Charters for ES when you compare like populations.

Plenty of non-economically disadvantaged kids going to elementary schools with <25% white students, but because of data suppression almost none of those schools show up on your list.

It's really not a great proxy at the elementary school level.

I don't think your complaint is actually that it's not a good proxy (it is definitely under-inclusive, but not terribly over-inclusive), it's just that data suppression means lots of schools lack data for the proxy. I don't disagree. I wouldn't look at this list and draw negative conclusions about other schools where data isn't reported. Instead, I looks at Shepherd, Chisholm and Ludlow-Taylor and notice they aren't Mann and Key, which is interesting. None of the three are majority white and CERTAINLY not at the testing level. 2 of the 3 have 20%+ at risk populations in the testing grades. That's valuable information.

[Anonymous]

This year 5th grade at Latin 2nd street 16% at risk and Latin Cooper 20% at risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame the Empower Dashboard doesn't let you look at non-economically disadvantaged students (it says it does, but the graphs don't show), because that's actually what I'd like to see. Relying on white as an imperfect proxy, for all students in ES specifically, you get a VERY different list than the "top" list above... which really shows how much that list is just demographics driven.

Top 15 ELA:
Shepherd 93
Chisholm 93
Ludlow-Taylor 92
Stoddert 90
Hyde-Addison 90
Maury 88
EL Haynes 86
Payne 86
Oyster-Adams 85
Bancroft 85
Janney 85
Lafayette 84
Murch 84
SWS 83
Mundo Verde - Cook 82

Top 15 Math:
Hearst 93
Lewis 93
Shepherd 90
Lafayette 90
Ross 90
SWS 89
Brent 88
Watkins 97
Maury 87
Stoddert 87
Murch 85
Eaton 85
Garrison 85
Chisholm 81
Ludlow-Taylor 81

One thing I think is interesting about the above list is that lots of these schools are very diverse and so don't do as well "overall." But it seems to me that as a parent what you should care about is how your kid would do and this seems to give the best view of that for UMC families. It's actually encouraging to me that it suggests a diverse set of classmates is not a negative and could be a positive even looking only at test scores. (It semes like it's obviously a positive overall.) The other thing this makes very clear is that DCPSes do much better than Charters for ES when you compare like populations.

Plenty of non-economically disadvantaged kids going to elementary schools with <25% white students, but because of data suppression almost none of those schools show up on your list.

It's really not a great proxy at the elementary school level.

Also, you don't need to be 25%+ white to show up in the data. You need to have a white n of 10+ in the testing pool as a baseline, but even schools meeting that bar can be suppressed.

[Anonymous]

This year they released middle school Algebra and Geometry scores and its kind of weird Basis is excluded from (does not participate) those tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would just like to note that all three of the high schools on the list above are teaching significant numbers of at risk kids

Washington Latin
14%

Banneker:
29% At Risk

McKinley:
38% At Risk

In fact, McKinley's success is especially impressive given its higher number of At Risk students.

Finally found Latin's at risk rate. It's actually 14%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would just like to note that all three of the high schools on the list above are teaching significant numbers of at risk kids

Washington Latin
23.4% Farms Rate

Banneker:
29% At Risk

McKinley:
38% At Risk

In fact, McKinley's success is especially impressive given its higher number of At Risk students.

These are all great schools. It's important to note that at-risk city-wide is about 50%. Students with disabilities is 17% (higher in middle and high schools). These schools are doing a great job with the students that they have.

[Anonymous]

They are doing a great job, but Banneker and McKinley are also both application schools which means the entire student body including the at-risk population was selected to be there.