GreatSchools rating

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like in FCPS, getting an equity score of 4 is on the higher end.

Langley test scores 9, equity 7, overall 8
West Springfield test scores 9, equity 6, overall 8

Marshall test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7
McLean test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7

Chantilly test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Lake Braddock test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Robinson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Woodson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6

Oakton test scores 8, equity 3, overall 6
Madison test scores 8, equity 2, overall 6

Centreville test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
Fairfax test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
South County test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5

South Lakes test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4
Westfield test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4

Edison test scores 5, equity 3, overall 4
Hayfield test scores 5, equity 2, overall 4

Annandale test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4
Falls Church test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4

Herndon test scores 4, equity 2, overall 3
West Potomac test scores 4, equity 1, overall 3

Lee test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3
Stuart test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3

Mount Vernon test scores 2, equity 2, overall 2

But look further at Langley.
They have no measurable at risk population, but great schools gave them the highest equity score in the county and I think the entire area.

That is a .major reason why they are flawed.

If Langley has no measurable .minority or esol population they should not have received the highest score for equity. They should have the lowest score for having the least diversity.

This. Where is the diversity scale? That needs to be added.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like in FCPS, getting an equity score of 4 is on the higher end.

Langley test scores 9, equity 7, overall 8
West Springfield test scores 9, equity 6, overall 8

Marshall test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7
McLean test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7

Chantilly test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Lake Braddock test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Robinson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Woodson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6

Oakton test scores 8, equity 3, overall 6
Madison test scores 8, equity 2, overall 6

Centreville test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
Fairfax test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
South County test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5

South Lakes test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4
Westfield test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4

Edison test scores 5, equity 3, overall 4
Hayfield test scores 5, equity 2, overall 4

Annandale test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4
Falls Church test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4

Herndon test scores 4, equity 2, overall 3
West Potomac test scores 4, equity 1, overall 3

Lee test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3
Stuart test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3

Mount Vernon test scores 2, equity 2, overall 2

But look further at Langley.
They have no measurable at risk population, but great schools gave them the highest equity score in the county and I think the entire area.

That is a .major reason why they are flawed.

If Langley has no measurable .minority or esol population they should not have received the highest score for equity. They should have the lowest score for having the least diversity.

This. Where is the diversity scale? That needs to be added.

Great Schools is trying to measure performance, but they use a flawed algorithm applied crudely to all public schools. You want them to add a "diversity scale' that is based solely on demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the use of GS ratings is an obvious violation of the fair housing act. Zillow, redfin, etc. definitely face some risk in using this on their listings.

My guess? Since there is a small to nill chance anyone would actually enforce this law because of the current political party in power, these businesses are leaving things as-is.

?
GS was used on these sites prior to the current administration.

That doesn't make it okay.

You should be more specific as to how you think this violates the Fair Housing Act. I'm sure Redfin and Zillow have lawyers who scrutinize what's posted on their listings.

The methodology change essentially creates a way to capture schools that are racially and ethnically homogeneous in a fairly obvious manner. It's akin to asking a realtor what schools have almost all white kids? That's against the law.

It's old method was plausible in that it basically just pulled testing data, but it didn't do the Langley trick of excluding data from homogeneous schools from applying to the rating.

Apart from the fact that you haven't tied this to any statute or regulation, I don't think the analogy is very compelling.

We live in an age of greater transparency and data access. You apparently don't want the data made available, because you think it leads to greater segregation, rather than to additional efforts to close the achievement gap. That's debatable as a matter of policy (i.e., it could do both), but surely not the basis for a legal claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like in FCPS, getting an equity score of 4 is on the higher end.

Langley test scores 9, equity 7, overall 8
West Springfield test scores 9, equity 6, overall 8

Marshall test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7
McLean test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7

Chantilly test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Lake Braddock test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Robinson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Woodson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6

Oakton test scores 8, equity 3, overall 6
Madison test scores 8, equity 2, overall 6

Centreville test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
Fairfax test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
South County test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5

South Lakes test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4
Westfield test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4

Edison test scores 5, equity 3, overall 4
Hayfield test scores 5, equity 2, overall 4

Annandale test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4
Falls Church test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4

Herndon test scores 4, equity 2, overall 3
West Potomac test scores 4, equity 1, overall 3

Lee test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3
Stuart test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3

Mount Vernon test scores 2, equity 2, overall 2

But look further at Langley.
They have no measurable at risk population, but great schools gave them the highest equity score in the county and I think the entire area.

That is a .major reason why they are flawed.

If Langley has no measurable .minority or esol population they should not have received the highest score for equity. They should have the lowest score for having the least diversity.

This. Where is the diversity scale? That needs to be added.

Great Schools is trying to measure performance, but they use a flawed algorithm applied crudely to all public schools. You want them to add a "diversity scale' that is based solely on demographics.

I think performance should include percentage of students who are poor. You shouldn't get the same accolades for increasing scores of just a couple of poor kids verses having 30% poor kids at the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like in FCPS, getting an equity score of 4 is on the higher end.

Langley test scores 9, equity 7, overall 8
West Springfield test scores 9, equity 6, overall 8

Marshall test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7
McLean test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7

Chantilly test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Lake Braddock test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Robinson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Woodson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6

Oakton test scores 8, equity 3, overall 6
Madison test scores 8, equity 2, overall 6

Centreville test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
Fairfax test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
South County test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5

South Lakes test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4
Westfield test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4

Edison test scores 5, equity 3, overall 4
Hayfield test scores 5, equity 2, overall 4

Annandale test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4
Falls Church test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4

Herndon test scores 4, equity 2, overall 3
West Potomac test scores 4, equity 1, overall 3

Lee test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3
Stuart test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3

Mount Vernon test scores 2, equity 2, overall 2

But look further at Langley.
They have no measurable at risk population, but great schools gave them the highest equity score in the county and I think the entire area.

That is a .major reason why they are flawed.

If Langley has no measurable .minority or esol population they should not have received the highest score for equity. They should have the lowest score for having the least diversity.

This. Where is the diversity scale? That needs to be added.

Great Schools is trying to measure performance, but they use a flawed algorithm applied crudely to all public schools. You want them to add a "diversity scale' that is based solely on demographics.

I think performance should include percentage of students who are poor. You shouldn't get the same accolades for increasing scores of just a couple of poor kids verses having 30% poor kids at the school.

Could reward school that do better with their poor kids or, conversely, anchor the soft bigotry of lower expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the use of GS ratings is an obvious violation of the fair housing act. Zillow, redfin, etc. definitely face some risk in using this on their listings.

My guess? Since there is a small to nill chance anyone would actually enforce this law because of the current political party in power, these businesses are leaving things as-is.

?
GS was used on these sites prior to the current administration.

That doesn't make it okay.

You should be more specific as to how you think this violates the Fair Housing Act. I'm sure Redfin and Zillow have lawyers who scrutinize what's posted on their listings.

The methodology change essentially creates a way to capture schools that are racially and ethnically homogeneous in a fairly obvious manner. It's akin to asking a realtor what schools have almost all white kids? That's against the law.

It's old method was plausible in that it basically just pulled testing data, but it didn't do the Langley trick of excluding data from homogeneous schools from applying to the rating.

Apart from the fact that you haven't tied this to any statute or regulation, I don't think the analogy is very compelling.

We live in an age of greater transparency and data access. You apparently don't want the data made available, because you think it leads to greater segregation, rather than to additional efforts to close the achievement gap. That's debatable as a matter of policy (i.e., it could do both), but surely not the basis for a legal claim.

Not PP, but if it's an issue of data, the scores should be and are accessible as raw data through each state's DOE. There is literally nothing other than racism behind tying benchmark scores to real estate websites and then rewarding the schools without any diversity/without at-risk populations with higher GS scores. That's not giving you any more information about whether a school is "good" or not, it's highlighting the schools where students are homogeneously wealthy, and English language native speakers. I absolutely think it's doing exactly what realtors have been legally prohibited from doing by the Fair Housing Act.

That said, nothing is going to be done to stop this given who we have at HUD, in the White House, and on the Supreme Court. History will be our judge, though, and we will be found lacking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the use of GS ratings is an obvious violation of the fair housing act. Zillow, redfin, etc. definitely face some risk in using this on their listings.

My guess? Since there is a small to nill chance anyone would actually enforce this law because of the current political party in power, these businesses are leaving things as-is.

?
GS was used on these sites prior to the current administration.

That doesn't make it okay.

You should be more specific as to how you think this violates the Fair Housing Act. I'm sure Redfin and Zillow have lawyers who scrutinize what's posted on their listings.

The methodology change essentially creates a way to capture schools that are racially and ethnically homogeneous in a fairly obvious manner. It's akin to asking a realtor what schools have almost all white kids? That's against the law.

It's old method was plausible in that it basically just pulled testing data, but it didn't do the Langley trick of excluding data from homogeneous schools from applying to the rating.

Apart from the fact that you haven't tied this to any statute or regulation, I don't think the analogy is very compelling.

We live in an age of greater transparency and data access. You apparently don't want the data made available, because you think it leads to greater segregation, rather than to additional efforts to close the achievement gap. That's debatable as a matter of policy (i.e., it could do both), but surely not the basis for a legal claim.

Not PP, but if it's an issue of data, the scores should be and are accessible as raw data through each state's DOE. There is literally nothing other than racism behind tying benchmark scores to real estate websites and then rewarding the schools without any diversity/without at-risk populations with higher GS scores. That's not giving you any more information about whether a school is "good" or not, it's highlighting the schools where students are homogeneously wealthy, and English language native speakers. I absolutely think it's doing exactly what realtors have been legally prohibited from doing by the Fair Housing Act.

That said, nothing is going to be done to stop this given who we have at HUD, in the White House, and on the Supreme Court. History will be our judge, though, and we will be found lacking.

Will history find those in the prior Administration who bypassed such considerations entirely by sending their kids to elite privates like Sidwell and St. A's lacking as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like in FCPS, getting an equity score of 4 is on the higher end.

Langley test scores 9, equity 7, overall 8
West Springfield test scores 9, equity 6, overall 8

Marshall test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7
McLean test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7

Chantilly test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Lake Braddock test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Robinson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Woodson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6

Oakton test scores 8, equity 3, overall 6
Madison test scores 8, equity 2, overall 6

Centreville test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
Fairfax test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
South County test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5

South Lakes test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4
Westfield test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4

Edison test scores 5, equity 3, overall 4
Hayfield test scores 5, equity 2, overall 4

Annandale test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4
Falls Church test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4

Herndon test scores 4, equity 2, overall 3
West Potomac test scores 4, equity 1, overall 3

Lee test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3
Stuart test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3

Mount Vernon test scores 2, equity 2, overall 2

But look further at Langley.
They have no measurable at risk population, but great schools gave them the highest equity score in the county and I think the entire area.

That is a .major reason why they are flawed.

If Langley has no measurable .minority or esol population they should not have received the highest score for equity. They should have the lowest score for having the least diversity.

This. Where is the diversity scale? That needs to be added.

But the importance of diversity is subjective and the only way to measure it amounts to quotas. Diversity is not inherently virtuous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like in FCPS, getting an equity score of 4 is on the higher end.

Langley test scores 9, equity 7, overall 8
West Springfield test scores 9, equity 6, overall 8

Marshall test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7
McLean test scores 9, equity 4, overall 7

Chantilly test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Lake Braddock test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Robinson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6
Woodson test scores 8, equity 4, overall 6

Oakton test scores 8, equity 3, overall 6
Madison test scores 8, equity 2, overall 6

Centreville test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
Fairfax test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5
South County test scores 6, equity 3, overall 5

South Lakes test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4
Westfield test scores 6, equity 2, overall 4

Edison test scores 5, equity 3, overall 4
Hayfield test scores 5, equity 2, overall 4

Annandale test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4
Falls Church test scores 4, equity 3, overall 4

Herndon test scores 4, equity 2, overall 3
West Potomac test scores 4, equity 1, overall 3

Lee test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3
Stuart test scores 3, equity 2, overall 3

Mount Vernon test scores 2, equity 2, overall 2

But look further at Langley.
They have no measurable at risk population, but great schools gave them the highest equity score in the county and I think the entire area.

That is a .major reason why they are flawed.

If Langley has no measurable .minority or esol population they should not have received the highest score for equity. They should have the lowest score for having the least diversity.

This. Where is the diversity scale? That needs to be added.

Great Schools is trying to measure performance, but they use a flawed algorithm applied crudely to all public schools. You want them to add a "diversity scale' that is based solely on demographics.

I think performance should include percentage of students who are poor. You shouldn't get the same accolades for increasing scores of just a couple of poor kids verses having 30% poor kids at the school.

Could reward school that do better with their poor kids or, conversely, anchor the soft bigotry of lower expectations.

Agreed but it is harder to do better with poor kids if you have 30% of them verses 1%. They shouldn't be treated the same. It should be on a sliding scale or something.

[Anonymous]

It seems like sticking to the prior GS approach of just assigning scores based on the overall test scores sends the clearest signal as to the performance of students at a particular school. It's objective information, and it encourages schools with higher scores to maintain their excellence while encouraging those with lower scores to raise their game. Wasn't that the original intent behind GS?

The additional "equity" component seems to backfire more often than scale. At a rich school district like Langley, you get credit because your minority students typically come from wealthy families. On the other hand, if many of your minority students live in low-income apartments, as at West Potomac, you get penalized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like sticking to the prior GS approach of just assigning scores based on the overall test scores sends the clearest signal as to the performance of students at a particular school. It's objective information, and it encourages schools with higher scores to maintain their excellence while encouraging those with lower scores to raise their game. Wasn't that the original intent behind GS?

The additional "equity" component seems to backfire more often than scale. At a rich school district like Langley, you get credit because your minority students typically come from wealthy families. On the other hand, if many of your minority students live in low-income apartments, as at West Potomac, you get penalized.

You get credit because they don't count minority's students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the use of GS ratings is an obvious violation of the fair housing act. Zillow, redfin, etc. definitely face some risk in using this on their listings.

My guess? Since there is a small to nill chance anyone would actually enforce this law because of the current political party in power, these businesses are leaving things as-is.

?
GS was used on these sites prior to the current administration.

That doesn't make it okay.

You should be more specific as to how you think this violates the Fair Housing Act. I'm sure Redfin and Zillow have lawyers who scrutinize what's posted on their listings.

The methodology change essentially creates a way to capture schools that are racially and ethnically homogeneous in a fairly obvious manner. It's akin to asking a realtor what schools have almost all white kids? That's against the law.

It's old method was plausible in that it basically just pulled testing data, but it didn't do the Langley trick of excluding data from homogeneous schools from applying to the rating.

Apart from the fact that you haven't tied this to any statute or regulation, I don't think the analogy is very compelling.

We live in an age of greater transparency and data access. You apparently don't want the data made available, because you think it leads to greater segregation, rather than to additional efforts to close the achievement gap. That's debatable as a matter of policy (i.e., it could do both), but surely not the basis for a legal claim.

Not PP, but if it's an issue of data, the scores should be and are accessible as raw data through each state's DOE. There is literally nothing other than racism behind tying benchmark scores to real estate websites and then rewarding the schools without any diversity/without at-risk populations with higher GS scores. That's not giving you any more information about whether a school is "good" or not, it's highlighting the schools where students are homogeneously wealthy, and English language native speakers. I absolutely think it's doing exactly what realtors have been legally prohibited from doing by the Fair Housing Act.

That said, nothing is going to be done to stop this given who we have at HUD, in the White House, and on the Supreme Court. History will be our judge, though, and we will be found lacking.

Will history find those in the prior Administration who bypassed such considerations entirely by sending their kids to elite privates like Sidwell and St. A's lacking as well?

Perhaps, but that's another issue. Public schools that use public money should be held to a different (higher) standard than private schools. As far as I know the ONLY president who used DC public schools, at least since desegregation, was Jimmy Carter.

[Anonymous]

The secret service has input into to security of where president’s kids.

[Anonymous]

I found their new scoring system very confusing and inaccurate. I double checked my suspicion with our old neighborhood in California, and it confirmed my suspicion of blatant bias in their new scoring system. We moved from a 95% hispanic neighborhood with very low school performance scores to VA, and ALL of those schools on GS site are scoring 9s. I guess they score equally poor and uneducated higher than a more diverse community like NOVA.

[Anonymous]

I just found this thread because I saw Woodson's score drop from 9 (maybe 8?) down to 6. I'm really surprised and think this "equity score" thing is really gaming the system. People assume it's an objective standard based on test scores but it's no longer that. Like a pp said, it seems to really "punish" schools that have minority/poor students. I have to wonder how this will impact real estate searches in the upcoming spring market.