PARCC Scores for Grades 3-8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Yup, the scores in third worry me. Maybe I have a skewed/unrealistic view, but shouldn't most kids (ie 75 percent plus) be performing at or above grade level? What gives? Again, maybe I am way off base; grew up in an environment where being above grade level was the norm.

PARCC is brand new ans on computer. Even MoCo looks like bad when you look at raw scores. Give it time.

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's my perspective:

My kid scored very well in 3rd grade, at 4 in English and 5 in math. Overall, he was in 97% percentile for the city and 99th percentile for his school. His school fared badly, with low 20s scores for math and English. However, my kid's own test scores showed me that despite the small numbers of high performing kids at his Title 1 schools, he is still learning and is comparable with his peers WOTP. So, I'm giving kudos to his teachers who have clearly succeeding in differentiated learning and engaging my child while also teaching a classroom with kids in poverty who do not have the advantage my kid has.

This is awesome. Not trying to be snarky-- asking sincerely-- do you supplement at home (workbooks, Kumon, etc), or is this primarily from what he was taught at school? I am asking because we are at a school full of affluent white kids and they seem to be achieving only around 50-60% proficiency, which just seems odd, and I'm wondering how schools achieve these results for some kids, in environments that are probably more challenging for teachers to manage.

[Anonymous]

I am asking because we are at a school full of affluent white kids and they seem to be achieving only around 50-60% proficiency, which just seems odd

In a sane world, this would not seem odd. This would just seem like Larla I needs some advanced instruction, and Larla 2 needs some help catching up. In a sane world, their affluence, and whiteness would not be an issue.

But we live in this one. This one sometimes makes me beat my head against the wall. The tests are fucked up. They weren't even created by educators. Some schools do a lot of prep. Some do not. But when you're basically just writing off kids for being poor and not doing well on the tests.... I just can't.

My child went from a heavy duty test prep eotp dcps. (Not that hard, given that information to guess which one)--to a fluffy charter this year. Thank god. We also went from being one of the 70% high SES in the class to being about the only high SES in the class. Here's a newsflash: the kids, they did not get dumber. They did not get less vital, or interesting, or important.

[Anonymous]

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

"A plurality?" Define it with a number or stfu.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am asking because we are at a school full of affluent white kids and they seem to be achieving only around 50-60% proficiency, which just seems odd

In a sane world, this would not seem odd. This would just seem like Larla I needs some advanced instruction, and Larla 2 needs some help catching up. In a sane world, their affluence, and whiteness would not be an issue.

But we live in this one. This one sometimes makes me beat my head against the wall. The tests are fucked up. They weren't even created by educators. Some schools do a lot of prep. Some do not. But when you're basically just writing off kids for being poor and not doing well on the tests.... I just can't.

My child went from a heavy duty test prep eotp dcps. (Not that hard, given that information to guess which one)--to a fluffy charter this year. Thank god. We also went from being one of the 70% high SES in the class to being about the only high SES in the class. Here's a newsflash: the kids, they did not get dumber. They did not get less vital, or interesting, or important.

is there an eotp dcps school
That is famous for being heavy on test prep?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Yup, the scores in third worry me. Maybe I have a skewed/unrealistic view, but shouldn't most kids (ie 75 percent plus) be performing at or above grade level? What gives? Again, maybe I am way off base; grew up in an environment where being above grade level was the norm.

PARCC is brand new ans on computer. Even MoCo looks like bad when you look at raw scores. Give it time.

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

No most got about 60%, but they got 90% with DCCAS. Doesn't that in itself tell you something about PARCC
Or DCCAS? Also, those kids WOTP are 95% white and rich, it's expected for them to do well - in fact, they should be getting a lot better than they did on PARCC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Yup, the scores in third worry me. Maybe I have a skewed/unrealistic view, but shouldn't most kids (ie 75 percent plus) be performing at or above grade level? What gives? Again, maybe I am way off base; grew up in an environment where being above grade level was the norm.

PARCC is brand new ans on computer. Even MoCo looks like bad when you look at raw scores. Give it time.

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

No most got about 60%, but they got 90% with DCCAS. Doesn't that in itself tell you something about PARCC
Or DCCAS? Also, those kids WOTP are 95% white and rich, it's expected for them to do well - in fact, they should be getting a lot better than they did on PARCC.

Um, no. That is not correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Yup, the scores in third worry me. Maybe I have a skewed/unrealistic view, but shouldn't most kids (ie 75 percent plus) be performing at or above grade level? What gives? Again, maybe I am way off base; grew up in an environment where being above grade level was the norm.

PARCC is brand new ans on computer. Even MoCo looks like bad when you look at raw scores. Give it time.

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

No most got about 60%, but they got 90% with DCCAS. Doesn't that in itself tell you something about PARCC
Or DCCAS? Also, those kids WOTP are 95% white and rich, it's expected for them to do well - in fact, they should be getting a lot better than they did on PARCC.

Um, no. That is not correct.

Sorry, 78% white and 98% rich.

[Anonymous]

See? Totally different! Some of them are asian. Duh

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:See? Totally different! Some of them are asian. Duh

Then they definitely should be doing better on PARCC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's my perspective:

My kid scored very well in 3rd grade, at 4 in English and 5 in math. Overall, he was in 97% percentile for the city and 99th percentile for his school. His school fared badly, with low 20s scores for math and English. However, my kid's own test scores showed me that despite the small numbers of high performing kids at his Title 1 schools, he is still learning and is comparable with his peers WOTP. So, I'm giving kudos to his teachers who have clearly succeeding in differentiated learning and engaging my child while also teaching a classroom with kids in poverty who do not have the advantage my kid has.

This is awesome. Not trying to be snarky-- asking sincerely-- do you supplement at home (workbooks, Kumon, etc), or is this primarily from what he was taught at school? I am asking because we are at a school full of affluent white kids and they seem to be achieving only around 50-60% proficiency, which just seems odd, and I'm wondering how schools achieve these results for some kids, in environments that are probably more challenging for teachers to manage.

PP here. You may be mixing apples and oranges. Only about 20% of the kids in my kid's school tested at 4 or 5. One of those 20% was my kid, who scored in the 97th percentile for the city (99th percentile for his school). So, I'm blessed with a kid who is scoring well at tests, and seems to be at a school that is differentiating well and keeping him engaged, despite the fact that 80% of the kids in his grade are scoring below proficient.

Given the poor test scores of DC as a whole, if 60% of your child's class is scoring at 4 or 5, that actually may be pretty good, and that probably means that those kids are in the 90th percentile for the city. I honestly believe that it's going to be hard to get ANY school up to 100% of the kids at proficient. ...Kids learn at different rates, and even WOTP schools have a range of abilities. The city I grew up before I moved to DC in was largely white and affluent, and still there was a range of abilities in the classroom. My friend's child's school is nearly all white, and she struggles with reading. So, education is always going to be kid-dependent.

Do I supplement at home? I don't know how to answer that. Does reading to him and his siblings every night, limiting screen time, and playing lots of family games count as supplementing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's my perspective:

My kid scored very well in 3rd grade, at 4 in English and 5 in math. Overall, he was in 97% percentile for the city and 99th percentile for his school. His school fared badly, with low 20s scores for math and English. However, my kid's own test scores showed me that despite the small numbers of high performing kids at his Title 1 schools, he is still learning and is comparable with his peers WOTP. So, I'm giving kudos to his teachers who have clearly succeeding in differentiated learning and engaging my child while also teaching a classroom with kids in poverty who do not have the advantage my kid has.

This is awesome. Not trying to be snarky-- asking sincerely-- do you supplement at home (workbooks, Kumon, etc), or is this primarily from what he was taught at school? I am asking because we are at a school full of affluent white kids and they seem to be achieving only around 50-60% proficiency, which just seems odd, and I'm wondering how schools achieve these results for some kids, in environments that are probably more challenging for teachers to manage.

PP here. You may be mixing apples and oranges. Only about 20% of the kids in my kid's school tested at 4 or 5. One of those 20% was my kid, who scored in the 97th percentile for the city (99th percentile for his school). So, I'm blessed with a kid who is scoring well at tests, and seems to be at a school that is differentiating well and keeping him engaged, despite the fact that 80% of the kids in his grade are scoring below proficient.

Given the poor test scores of DC as a whole, if 60% of your child's class is scoring at 4 or 5, that actually may be pretty good, and that probably means that those kids are in the 90th percentile for the city. I honestly believe that it's going to be hard to get ANY school up to 100% of the kids at proficient. ...Kids learn at different rates, and even WOTP schools have a range of abilities. The city I grew up before I moved to DC in was largely white and affluent, and still there was a range of abilities in the classroom. My friend's child's school is nearly all white, and she struggles with reading. So, education is always going to be kid-dependent.

Do I supplement at home? I don't know how to answer that. Does reading to him and his siblings every night, limiting screen time, and playing lots of family games count as supplementing?

^^^ Good response and totally agree with the approach. It's not "supplementing" as PP suggests but totally appropriate and beneficial. I genuinely wonder about the impact of screen time and notably video games either on mobile or game centers. Plenty of affluent kids fit that mold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Yup, the scores in third worry me. Maybe I have a skewed/unrealistic view, but shouldn't most kids (ie 75 percent plus) be performing at or above grade level? What gives? Again, maybe I am way off base; grew up in an environment where being above grade level was the norm.

PARCC is brand new ans on computer. Even MoCo looks like bad when you look at raw scores. Give it time.

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

No most got about 60%, but they got 90% with DCCAS. Doesn't that in itself tell you something about PARCC
Or DCCAS? Also, those kids WOTP are 95% white and rich, it's expected for them to do well - in fact, they should be getting a lot better than they did on PARCC.

Um, no. That is not correct.

Sorry, 78% white and 98% rich.

Still incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Yup, the scores in third worry me. Maybe I have a skewed/unrealistic view, but shouldn't most kids (ie 75 percent plus) be performing at or above grade level? What gives? Again, maybe I am way off base; grew up in an environment where being above grade level was the norm.

PARCC is brand new ans on computer. Even MoCo looks like bad when you look at raw scores. Give it time.

You're not making sense. Most WOTP schools had a plurality of students who tested at 4 and 5.

No most got about 60%, but they got 90% with DCCAS. Doesn't that in itself tell you something about PARCC
Or DCCAS? Also, those kids WOTP are 95% white and rich, it's expected for them to do well - in fact, they should be getting a lot better than they did on PARCC.

Um, no. That is not correct.

Sorry, 78% white and 98% rich.

Still incorrect.

Nope those are indeed the numbers for Janney and close to a few others.