2022-2023 PARCC Data Released

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I did try to model this a little bit, using OSSE's SY 21-22 PARCC spreadsheet.

It seems like, system-wide, 152 8th graders took the Geometry PARCC and 130 passed. 1014 8th graders took the Algebra I PARCC and 293 passed. 4015 8th graders took the 8th grade math PARCC and 299 passed. I'm not sure if a student in 8th can take more than one math PARCC test in a single year. Anyway, so that produces a 16% pass rate of kids passing the math PARCC that they took-- among kids that took a math PARCC at all. 822 out of 5181 kids. I think 5181 is about equal to all the 8th graders, bearing in mind some take the MSAA. So yes, that isn't very good.

However, the kids who take Geometry and Algebra I classes are above the 8th grade math level, even if they don't do well on the PARCC that they do take. So if I add in the kids who got 3s on Geometry and Algebra I PARCC, then I'm adding +303 kids for Algebra I and +20 for Geometry. So that's 1145 kids out of 5181 bringing it up to 22%. So yes, again, not super good.

Of course, then there's the 8th graders who already took Algebra I in 6th or 7th grade, so they might in Algebra II in 8th grade, or even beyond it, but there's no middle school PARCC for Algebra II. I think that's about 50 kids, although maybe some of them are in Geometry, hard to say. Anyway, so all of that puts the percentage of 8th graders who could be considered to be on grade level or passing the math PARCC at about 20-25%. Interesting.

I think you meant 722 out of 5181 (130+293+299) and 1045 out of 5181 (throwing in the 3s in Alg 1 and Geo). The more concerning number is 299 out of 4015 taking 8th grade math and passing. Something is broken.

Well, I'm not sure... I used 399 as the figure for 8th grade math even though that's "All" for "Grades of Enrollment", but maybe I was wrong to do so... where did you get the 299 number from?

I agree the scores are terrible, big-picture, I'm just offering this analysis as an example of how it's a bit complicated to interpret.

I see where you got the 299 (all grades number). But yes, I did this exercise last year and while it is a bit complicated, your overall conclusions are still correct -- 20-25% pass math PARCC. I don't know what is the proficiency rate for other school systems but 20-25% seems a bit (very?) low. While they may be different tests, the NAEP math proficiency for DC is 16% (8th graders). So either NAEP is missing the overachievers or PARCC is somewhat more rosy than the actual picture.

It's interesting that NAEP is so different! Yes, 20-25% is pretty low, but it's hard to compare with other big-city school districts because others tend to include their suburbs to a greater extent than DC does, because of state lines. So I dunno.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

It's not just a few smart kids, it's almost two entire grades. Nobody's denying that performance is poor. Do you think we data nerds like the PARCC? We hate it, because there's so little data and it's so easily misinterpreted!

A previous PP insinuated that the highschool scores aren't that bad when someone commented about 9/10 kids being below grade level, and said it's probably not that bad, probably 6/10 basically because of on/above grade level kids not being a part of the PARCC math in highschool. The lack of accounting for multiple other factors (e.g. truancy which is a significant issue in highschool) didn't make sense along with inventing an arbitrary number that implied overall DC highschool kids are somehow magically better at math in highschool than in middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

It's not just a few smart kids, it's almost two entire grades. Nobody's denying that performance is poor. Do you think we data nerds like the PARCC? We hate it, because there's so little data and it's so easily misinterpreted!

A previous PP insinuated that the highschool scores aren't that bad when someone commented about 9/10 kids being below grade level, and said it's probably not that bad, probably 6/10 basically because of on/above grade level kids not being a part of the PARCC math in highschool. The lack of accounting for multiple other factors (e.g. truancy which is a significant issue in highschool) didn't make sense along with inventing an arbitrary number that implied overall DC highschool kids are somehow magically better at math in highschool than in middle school.

Well, you'd also have to account for kids dropping out of school entirely and they are more likely to be low performers. And, is a 12th grader finally passing Algebra I really on "grade level"? Truancy is just the one factor. 6/10 was a wild guess that didn't pan out, it's probably 8/10 or 7.5/10.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

It's not just a few smart kids, it's almost two entire grades. Nobody's denying that performance is poor. Do you think we data nerds like the PARCC? We hate it, because there's so little data and it's so easily misinterpreted!

A previous PP insinuated that the highschool scores aren't that bad when someone commented about 9/10 kids being below grade level, and said it's probably not that bad, probably 6/10 basically because of on/above grade level kids not being a part of the PARCC math in highschool. The lack of accounting for multiple other factors (e.g. truancy which is a significant issue in highschool) didn't make sense along with inventing an arbitrary number that implied overall DC highschool kids are somehow magically better at math in highschool than in middle school.

Well, you'd also have to account for kids dropping out of school entirely and they are more likely to be low performers. And, is a 12th grader finally passing Algebra I really on "grade level"? Truancy is just the one factor. 6/10 was a wild guess that didn't pan out, it's probably 8/10 or 7.5/10.

Yes, exactly. So we can stop debating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

DCPS works for kids who are smart, from stable homes, and who attend school. DCPS is not working for kids who don’t attend school and live in unstable homes… no school district does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

DCPS works for kids who are smart, from stable homes, and who attend school. DCPS is not working for kids who don’t attend school and live in unstable homes… no school district does.

Is this a "status quo" response? What is the city doing for those kids who don't attend school to get them in school? Especially considering the sad data of rising juvenile violent crime? I'm glad the city implemented a curfew, but now that the school year is starting, the city should also consider seriously working to reduce truancy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I did try to model this a little bit, using OSSE's SY 21-22 PARCC spreadsheet.

It seems like, system-wide, 152 8th graders took the Geometry PARCC and 130 passed. 1014 8th graders took the Algebra I PARCC and 293 passed. 4015 8th graders took the 8th grade math PARCC and 299 passed. I'm not sure if a student in 8th can take more than one math PARCC test in a single year. Anyway, so that produces a 16% pass rate of kids passing the math PARCC that they took-- among kids that took a math PARCC at all. 822 out of 5181 kids. I think 5181 is about equal to all the 8th graders, bearing in mind some take the MSAA. So yes, that isn't very good.

However, the kids who take Geometry and Algebra I classes are above the 8th grade math level, even if they don't do well on the PARCC that they do take. So if I add in the kids who got 3s on Geometry and Algebra I PARCC, then I'm adding +303 kids for Algebra I and +20 for Geometry. So that's 1145 kids out of 5181 bringing it up to 22%. So yes, again, not super good.

Of course, then there's the 8th graders who already took Algebra I in 6th or 7th grade, so they might in Algebra II in 8th grade, or even beyond it, but there's no middle school PARCC for Algebra II. I think that's about 50 kids, although maybe some of them are in Geometry, hard to say. Anyway, so all of that puts the percentage of 8th graders who could be considered to be on grade level or passing the math PARCC at about 20-25%. Interesting.

I think you meant 722 out of 5181 (130+293+299) and 1045 out of 5181 (throwing in the 3s in Alg 1 and Geo). The more concerning number is 299 out of 4015 taking 8th grade math and passing. Something is broken.

Well, I'm not sure... I used 399 as the figure for 8th grade math even though that's "All" for "Grades of Enrollment", but maybe I was wrong to do so... where did you get the 299 number from?

I agree the scores are terrible, big-picture, I'm just offering this analysis as an example of how it's a bit complicated to interpret.

I see where you got the 299 (all grades number). But yes, I did this exercise last year and while it is a bit complicated, your overall conclusions are still correct -- 20-25% pass math PARCC. I don't know what is the proficiency rate for other school systems but 20-25% seems a bit (very?) low. While they may be different tests, the NAEP math proficiency for DC is 16% (8th graders). So either NAEP is missing the overachievers or PARCC is somewhat more rosy than the actual picture.

It's interesting that NAEP is so different! Yes, 20-25% is pretty low, but it's hard to compare with other big-city school districts because others tend to include their suburbs to a greater extent than DC does, because of state lines. So I dunno.

The NAEP v/s State level assessments comparisons are interesting. MA (the best) is at 32% proficient for state level assessment and 47% for NAEP whereas MD is at ~33% for both state-level and NAEP for 2019. DC is ~25% in both PARCC and NAEP for 2019 but the levels are different this year.

[Anonymous]

Slide 15 really drives home the impact of closing the schools for a year. It will be half a decade of more before we get back to 2019 levels in both ELA and math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Slide 15 really drives home the impact of closing the schools for a year. It will be half a decade of more before we get back to 2019 levels in both ELA and math.

+1 and I still remember the parents (in this forum and elsewhere) who implied you were a crappy parent if your kid wasn't fine in virtual school while saying their kid did better being in virtual school!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

DCPS works for kids who are smart, from stable homes, and who attend school. DCPS is not working for kids who don’t attend school and live in unstable homes… no school district does.

Is this a "status quo" response? What is the city doing for those kids who don't attend school to get them in school? Especially considering the sad data of rising juvenile violent crime? I'm glad the city implemented a curfew, but now that the school year is starting, the city should also consider seriously working to reduce truancy.

The response is what it is. Is it how it should be, no. There are larger social problems. The government (DHS) was well aware that there would be a large increase in crime once the pandemic started to wind down. The government reacted by squashing the report instead of releasing it and letting local governments prepare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LEA results embargoed until tomorrow Individual reports in Sept

Well, it says "Public data files will be posted by 2pm on Thursday, August 24th" so I guess we have that to look forward to.

Did that data come out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What an embarrassment. 9/10 HS students can't even meet the baseline math expectations?

This is not true. My 10th grader didn’t take PARCC because he is was in AP stats. and got a 5 on his AP test. There are plenty of kids who are advanced in math and don’t take PARCC. Your numbers are wrong.

Thinking that perhaps you could learn a thing or two from your 10th grader who took AP stats.

Wow so rude. Look at the PARCC spreadsheets on the OSSE website and you'll see that lots of kids don't take any math PARCC test at all. They only test certain classes. I wish we had more comprehensive data and I'm sad that we don't, but it's simply not true that 9/10 kids are failing math. It's more like 6/10.

But the attrition level at highschool also may have to do with kids simply not showing up for school. I don't make assumptions that it's just the smart kids dropping PARCC in highschool.

Nonetheless, looking at the trajectory from elemetary school and middle school, it's probably closer to 8/10 or worse. It middle school, it's already 8/10 score 3 or below with most kids taking the test.

Well yes, teenagers can be like that. But really, it's not an assumption that PARCC only tests Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry. That is just how it is. It's not an assumption. You can look at the OSSE spreadsheet if you want to see precisely how many and what grade level kids took each test. Also, control for grade level. If a 9th grader, say, took Algebra I in 8th grade, so takes Algebra II in 9th but has an off day and only gets a 3, that's not great, but it's also not the case that they're below their grade level. They would only be below grade level if they got a 3 in Algebra I, not Algebra II. See?

Nonetheless, the below grade level results are 8/10 in middle school, so where the PP gets to 6/10 on grade level in highschool, nope don't buy that whatsoever. It's likely the same optimistically or worse, realistically, if test participation rates were as high as they are in lower grades.

Again, like I said, students can take the PARCC for a class higher than their grade level. So someone can do not-great on the PARCC test that they take and still be above their actual grade level. I made up the 6/10 thing as an estimate, and I don't expect anyone to believe it or not believe it, but do try to understand that the middle school PARCC is also complex to interpret.

Seriously? You just pulled "the 6/10 thing" from your a**? You are just sounding more and more uninformed.

Please have your 10th grader do an intervention and explain statistics to you.

For one thing, why do you assume that better students are more likely not to take the PARCC exam than poor students? Bad students are often truants. They are a lot more likely to miss the PARCC exam.

The PARCC data is a lot better than any other data that we have, and it definitely shows that DC schools are generally performing poorly.

NP. PP above is in complete denial of how bad kids in DCPS are performing in high school. Whoever relayed the data about middle school is correct and high school, it’s going to be worst.

Saying a few smart kids are not taking it to justify how poorly the kids in DCPS are performing is just enabling the status quo and giv8ng our leaders a pass when they need to be more accountable.

THIS!

DCPS works for kids who are smart, from stable homes, and who attend school. DCPS is not working for kids who don’t attend school and live in unstable homes… no school district does.

Is this a "status quo" response? What is the city doing for those kids who don't attend school to get them in school? Especially considering the sad data of rising juvenile violent crime? I'm glad the city implemented a curfew, but now that the school year is starting, the city should also consider seriously working to reduce truancy.

The response is what it is. Is it how it should be, no. There are larger social problems. The government (DHS) was well aware that there would be a large increase in crime once the pandemic started to wind down. The government reacted by squashing the report instead of releasing it and letting local governments prepare.

I'm talking specifically about DC where statistically, crime is currently increasing vs. other cities that also saw a rise in crime and it's currently decreasing, and in DC, a considerable amount of the rising crime is being committed by teenage kids or younger. There are specific DC issues that could be discussed in the DC forum, but still, it matters because DC kids not being where they should be is causing multiple issues including awful school scores (along with stolen cars).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LEA results embargoed until tomorrow Individual reports in Sept

Well, it says "Public data files will be posted by 2pm on Thursday, August 24th" so I guess we have that to look forward to.

Did that data come out?

nope. Not yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LEA results embargoed until tomorrow Individual reports in Sept

Well, it says "Public data files will be posted by 2pm on Thursday, August 24th" so I guess we have that to look forward to.

Did that data come out?

nope. Not yet.

Maybe it's a big file to upload?
But 2pm has come and gone

[Anonymous]

So if you take Algebra I in 7th grade, which PARCC do you take? The 7th grade math PARCC, or the Algebra I PARCC?