Any feedback on Macarthur?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly do not understand the people trashing MacArthur here.

Are you neighborhood people trying to keep kids away? I promise you, your best shot at making this a school that is palatable to you is to make it so attractive to Hardy families that it becomes stacked in bound only families like JR.

Are you JR/Deal families that want to maintain the image of supremacy (while also complaining about overcrowding)?

The best case scenario for the whole city but especially any family that has an existing path into either JR or Mac is to lift up Mac so that it is comparable to JR. They will not be exactly the same. Macarthur Blvd won't turn into Tenley at any rapid pace, JR will have established sports programs (which is not all upsides when your kid doesn't make the team) while Mac builds theirs out, etc etc but they will be comparable in terms of what I do believe is a legitimate concern of people on this forum--that an upper middle class kid can be in a cohort of kids getting a decent education that prepares them for college and life.

No one is trashing the school. But if you are going to make subjective or false statements, be ready to be countered with data. It’s all there.

That exactly the point - the data is NOT ALL THERE. Your data is based on the first two years of the school. The two years that did not have a dedicated Hardy feed and also that did not have a full enrollment, but only a few grades, and also did not have the campus fully constructed… Of COURSE IB parents with other options did not choose it in large numbers… only a couple dozen or so for those first first couple of years. But guess what? That is over now. The school is now pulling over 50% of Hardy graduates in just the first year of the dedicated feed and is on track to pull just as many this year and in the future.

So please, stop your masquerade about “not trashing” - it’s limp and lame. You clearly have an agenda against the success of this school. It’s weird, but it’s plain to see.

On the other hand, to counter, you also can’t make assumptions without data. Period.

You use what you have to compare and right now, it is from OSEE. If someone wants to provide accurate data now about MÁ stats, feel free. Highly doubt it has changed significantly.

Doubt it based on what? You just said there is limited data.

And despite your "Period.", you absolutely can make assumptions without data. You make inferences about the future from what information you have.

It makes a lot more sense to forecast Macarthur based on current Hardy than past Macarthur. It's stupid to claim that the only relevant data is data we all know to be only semi-relevant.

It is obvious that you don’t have a STEM background because if you did, you would understand statistics and you would know that there is no way things are going to change with any significance in 1-2 years from the data from OSSE where only 5% kids above grade level in ELA and <1% in math.

As to inferences about the future, you don’t have the factual data on how many high performing kids actually went to MA this year. It could be 0 especially since so many did not track to MA. So you can’t make accurate assumptions at all.

Try taking a course in statistics before you call anyone stupid.

Ha! I'll duel you in math anytime.

But I'm more intrigued on why you are so incensed by the idea that Macarthur is likely to end up with a decent cohort of smart kids.

Fine.

Solve this and post your time (you are not allowed to use AI, a calculator, another person, or anything other than your brain): I'll wait:

Starting with any positive integer n, the sequence n,n/2,3n+1,… eventually reaches 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly do not understand the people trashing MacArthur here.

Are you neighborhood people trying to keep kids away? I promise you, your best shot at making this a school that is palatable to you is to make it so attractive to Hardy families that it becomes stacked in bound only families like JR.

Are you JR/Deal families that want to maintain the image of supremacy (while also complaining about overcrowding)?

The best case scenario for the whole city but especially any family that has an existing path into either JR or Mac is to lift up Mac so that it is comparable to JR. They will not be exactly the same. Macarthur Blvd won't turn into Tenley at any rapid pace, JR will have established sports programs (which is not all upsides when your kid doesn't make the team) while Mac builds theirs out, etc etc but they will be comparable in terms of what I do believe is a legitimate concern of people on this forum--that an upper middle class kid can be in a cohort of kids getting a decent education that prepares them for college and life.

No one is trashing the school. But if you are going to make subjective or false statements, be ready to be countered with data. It’s all there.

That exactly the point - the data is NOT ALL THERE. Your data is based on the first two years of the school. The two years that did not have a dedicated Hardy feed and also that did not have a full enrollment, but only a few grades, and also did not have the campus fully constructed… Of COURSE IB parents with other options did not choose it in large numbers… only a couple dozen or so for those first first couple of years. But guess what? That is over now. The school is now pulling over 50% of Hardy graduates in just the first year of the dedicated feed and is on track to pull just as many this year and in the future.

So please, stop your masquerade about “not trashing” - it’s limp and lame. You clearly have an agenda against the success of this school. It’s weird, but it’s plain to see.

On the other hand, to counter, you also can’t make assumptions without data. Period.

You use what you have to compare and right now, it is from OSEE. If someone wants to provide accurate data now about MÁ stats, feel free. Highly doubt it has changed significantly.

Doubt it based on what? You just said there is limited data.

And despite your "Period.", you absolutely can make assumptions without data. You make inferences about the future from what information you have.

It makes a lot more sense to forecast Macarthur based on current Hardy than past Macarthur. It's stupid to claim that the only relevant data is data we all know to be only semi-relevant.

It is obvious that you don’t have a STEM background because if you did, you would understand statistics and you would know that there is no way things are going to change with any significance in 1-2 years from the data from OSSE where only 5% kids above grade level in ELA and <1% in math.

As to inferences about the future, you don’t have the factual data on how many high performing kids actually went to MA this year. It could be 0 especially since so many did not track to MA. So you can’t make accurate assumptions at all.

Try taking a course in statistics before you call anyone stupid.

Ha! I'll duel you in math anytime.

But I'm more intrigued on why you are so incensed by the idea that Macarthur is likely to end up with a decent cohort of smart kids.

Fine.

Solve this and post your time (you are not allowed to use AI, a calculator, another person, or anything other than your brain): I'll wait:

Starting with any positive integer n, the sequence n,n/2,3n+1,… eventually reaches 1.

Ooh, I love math puzzles. If not for a reduction from my real analysis professor, my PhD would be in math. (He told me to do a related field that pays more but allows me to study the same stuff.)

But your post is ill-formed. Do you mean “prove” instead of “solve”? And what is the sequence you’re depicting? I feel like it is still sufficiently unclear as to accept a host of possible fourth terms, and so on. Granted, I only looked at it for like 15 seconds, but a sequence should be discernible within that time.

Please try again. I like puzzles.

[Anonymous]

Me again. And I assume you mean “converges towards 1” not “reached 1.” If you actually mean it achieves the value one, as opposed to convergence, please state so.

[Anonymous]

Me again. Oh, you’re going for the Collatz Conjecture. You wrote it incorrectly, as far as my recollection of my coursework goes.

It is unproven. Don’t post stupid stuff like this here, as if you’re puffing out your chest. I’m further convinced you have little if any actual math/stats background.

(If I’m misremembering the conjecture, that’s egg on my face. But I think that’s what you’re going for.)

[Anonymous]

This thread really went off the rails.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread really went off the rails.

Somehow, this forum always does when talking about public high schools in DC. Which is a shame because there's a lot to learn, and many of the commonly held beliefs about them on this forum are false.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly do not understand the people trashing MacArthur here.

Are you neighborhood people trying to keep kids away? I promise you, your best shot at making this a school that is palatable to you is to make it so attractive to Hardy families that it becomes stacked in bound only families like JR.

Are you JR/Deal families that want to maintain the image of supremacy (while also complaining about overcrowding)?

The best case scenario for the whole city but especially any family that has an existing path into either JR or Mac is to lift up Mac so that it is comparable to JR. They will not be exactly the same. Macarthur Blvd won't turn into Tenley at any rapid pace, JR will have established sports programs (which is not all upsides when your kid doesn't make the team) while Mac builds theirs out, etc etc but they will be comparable in terms of what I do believe is a legitimate concern of people on this forum--that an upper middle class kid can be in a cohort of kids getting a decent education that prepares them for college and life.

No one is trashing the school. But if you are going to make subjective or false statements, be ready to be countered with data. It’s all there.

That exactly the point - the data is NOT ALL THERE. Your data is based on the first two years of the school. The two years that did not have a dedicated Hardy feed and also that did not have a full enrollment, but only a few grades, and also did not have the campus fully constructed… Of COURSE IB parents with other options did not choose it in large numbers… only a couple dozen or so for those first first couple of years. But guess what? That is over now. The school is now pulling over 50% of Hardy graduates in just the first year of the dedicated feed and is on track to pull just as many this year and in the future.

So please, stop your masquerade about “not trashing” - it’s limp and lame. You clearly have an agenda against the success of this school. It’s weird, but it’s plain to see.

On the other hand, to counter, you also can’t make assumptions without data. Period.

You use what you have to compare and right now, it is from OSEE. If someone wants to provide accurate data now about MÁ stats, feel free. Highly doubt it has changed significantly.

Doubt it based on what? You just said there is limited data.

And despite your "Period.", you absolutely can make assumptions without data. You make inferences about the future from what information you have.

It makes a lot more sense to forecast Macarthur based on current Hardy than past Macarthur. It's stupid to claim that the only relevant data is data we all know to be only semi-relevant.

It is obvious that you don’t have a STEM background because if you did, you would understand statistics and you would know that there is no way things are going to change with any significance in 1-2 years from the data from OSSE where only 5% kids above grade level in ELA and <1% in math.

As to inferences about the future, you don’t have the factual data on how many high performing kids actually went to MA this year. It could be 0 especially since so many did not track to MA. So you can’t make accurate assumptions at all.

Try taking a course in statistics before you call anyone stupid.

Ha! I'll duel you in math anytime.

But I'm more intrigued on why you are so incensed by the idea that Macarthur is likely to end up with a decent cohort of smart kids.

Fine.

Solve this and post your time (you are not allowed to use AI, a calculator, another person, or anything other than your brain): I'll wait:

Starting with any positive integer n, the sequence n,n/2,3n+1,… eventually reaches 1.

What is this sequence? So if n is 10, it's 10, 5, 31??? Or if n = 2, 2, 1, 7.

Not seeing the pattern. It's also approaching 1. Also not seeing the relationship to MacArthur students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly do not understand the people trashing MacArthur here.

Are you neighborhood people trying to keep kids away? I promise you, your best shot at making this a school that is palatable to you is to make it so attractive to Hardy families that it becomes stacked in bound only families like JR.

Are you JR/Deal families that want to maintain the image of supremacy (while also complaining about overcrowding)?

The best case scenario for the whole city but especially any family that has an existing path into either JR or Mac is to lift up Mac so that it is comparable to JR. They will not be exactly the same. Macarthur Blvd won't turn into Tenley at any rapid pace, JR will have established sports programs (which is not all upsides when your kid doesn't make the team) while Mac builds theirs out, etc etc but they will be comparable in terms of what I do believe is a legitimate concern of people on this forum--that an upper middle class kid can be in a cohort of kids getting a decent education that prepares them for college and life.

No one is trashing the school. But if you are going to make subjective or false statements, be ready to be countered with data. It’s all there.

That exactly the point - the data is NOT ALL THERE. Your data is based on the first two years of the school. The two years that did not have a dedicated Hardy feed and also that did not have a full enrollment, but only a few grades, and also did not have the campus fully constructed… Of COURSE IB parents with other options did not choose it in large numbers… only a couple dozen or so for those first first couple of years. But guess what? That is over now. The school is now pulling over 50% of Hardy graduates in just the first year of the dedicated feed and is on track to pull just as many this year and in the future.

So please, stop your masquerade about “not trashing” - it’s limp and lame. You clearly have an agenda against the success of this school. It’s weird, but it’s plain to see.

On the other hand, to counter, you also can’t make assumptions without data. Period.

You use what you have to compare and right now, it is from OSEE. If someone wants to provide accurate data now about MÁ stats, feel free. Highly doubt it has changed significantly.

Doubt it based on what? You just said there is limited data.

And despite your "Period.", you absolutely can make assumptions without data. You make inferences about the future from what information you have.

It makes a lot more sense to forecast Macarthur based on current Hardy than past Macarthur. It's stupid to claim that the only relevant data is data we all know to be only semi-relevant.

It is obvious that you don’t have a STEM background because if you did, you would understand statistics and you would know that there is no way things are going to change with any significance in 1-2 years from the data from OSSE where only 5% kids above grade level in ELA and <1% in math.

As to inferences about the future, you don’t have the factual data on how many high performing kids actually went to MA this year. It could be 0 especially since so many did not track to MA. So you can’t make accurate assumptions at all.

Try taking a course in statistics before you call anyone stupid.

Ha! I'll duel you in math anytime.

But I'm more intrigued on why you are so incensed by the idea that Macarthur is likely to end up with a decent cohort of smart kids.

Fine.

Solve this and post your time (you are not allowed to use AI, a calculator, another person, or anything other than your brain): I'll wait:

Starting with any positive integer n, the sequence n,n/2,3n+1,… eventually reaches 1.

Yikes, not only is this totally irrelevant to the thread, you entirely screwed up what you actually trying to post about (the Collatz conjecture). You didn't post the function correctly nor what you were asking people to do correctly (presumably prove this yet unproven conjecture; not "solve" it).

[Anonymous]

Ma’am, this is a Wendy’s.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, OP here but can we please stay on track? Thanks, I would really appreciate the feedback!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly do not understand the people trashing MacArthur here.

Are you neighborhood people trying to keep kids away? I promise you, your best shot at making this a school that is palatable to you is to make it so attractive to Hardy families that it becomes stacked in bound only families like JR.

Are you JR/Deal families that want to maintain the image of supremacy (while also complaining about overcrowding)?

The best case scenario for the whole city but especially any family that has an existing path into either JR or Mac is to lift up Mac so that it is comparable to JR. They will not be exactly the same. Macarthur Blvd won't turn into Tenley at any rapid pace, JR will have established sports programs (which is not all upsides when your kid doesn't make the team) while Mac builds theirs out, etc etc but they will be comparable in terms of what I do believe is a legitimate concern of people on this forum--that an upper middle class kid can be in a cohort of kids getting a decent education that prepares them for college and life.

No one is trashing the school. But if you are going to make subjective or false statements, be ready to be countered with data. It’s all there.

That exactly the point - the data is NOT ALL THERE. Your data is based on the first two years of the school. The two years that did not have a dedicated Hardy feed and also that did not have a full enrollment, but only a few grades, and also did not have the campus fully constructed… Of COURSE IB parents with other options did not choose it in large numbers… only a couple dozen or so for those first first couple of years. But guess what? That is over now. The school is now pulling over 50% of Hardy graduates in just the first year of the dedicated feed and is on track to pull just as many this year and in the future.

So please, stop your masquerade about “not trashing” - it’s limp and lame. You clearly have an agenda against the success of this school. It’s weird, but it’s plain to see.

On the other hand, to counter, you also can’t make assumptions without data. Period.

You use what you have to compare and right now, it is from OSEE. If someone wants to provide accurate data now about MÁ stats, feel free. Highly doubt it has changed significantly.

Doubt it based on what? You just said there is limited data.

And despite your "Period.", you absolutely can make assumptions without data. You make inferences about the future from what information you have.

It makes a lot more sense to forecast Macarthur based on current Hardy than past Macarthur. It's stupid to claim that the only relevant data is data we all know to be only semi-relevant.

It is obvious that you don’t have a STEM background because if you did, you would understand statistics and you would know that there is no way things are going to change with any significance in 1-2 years from the data from OSSE where only 5% kids above grade level in ELA and <1% in math.

As to inferences about the future, you don’t have the factual data on how many high performing kids actually went to MA this year. It could be 0 especially since so many did not track to MA. So you can’t make accurate assumptions at all.

Try taking a course in statistics before you call anyone stupid.

Ha! I'll duel you in math anytime.

But I'm more intrigued on why you are so incensed by the idea that Macarthur is likely to end up with a decent cohort of smart kids.

Fine.

Solve this and post your time (you are not allowed to use AI, a calculator, another person, or anything other than your brain): I'll wait:

Starting with any positive integer n, the sequence n,n/2,3n+1,… eventually reaches 1.

Yikes, not only is this totally irrelevant to the thread, you entirely screwed up what you actually trying to post about (the Collatz conjecture). You didn't post the function correctly nor what you were asking people to do correctly (presumably prove this yet unproven conjecture; not "solve" it).

LOL, this is peak DCUM. If you want a laugh, visit the basketball forum to see these same people comment on sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is mostly a numbers issue. Deal is a lot larger than Hardy.

Nope, not just numbers but also percentages. Deal much higher esp in math.

Even if 1/2 Hardy kids go to MA, most will not be high performers and small numbers that it won’t make a dent in the stats.

You’re just wrong. Over half of Hardy students chose MacArthur this year. I’m sorry that your doomsday predictions won’t come true. Perhaps you will need to find a new hobby

You obviously are full of BS and don’t know the data. I in contrast have looked at the data. Data doesn’t lie.

High performing kids above grade level.

Hardy 180 8th graders. If 90 went to MA
ELA 22% = 20 kids
Math 5% = 5 kids

Number above won’t make a dent in a school with over 600 kids or however many currently.

Deal 480 8th graders
ELA 41% = 197 kids
Math 19% = 91 kids

It has always been Deal that had significantly higher numbers and percentages of high performers and contributed the bulk of these cohort of kids to JR, not Hardy.

Your numbers are wrong.

For Hardy, 5s are 35% and 11%. So, correcting...
If 90 went to MA
ELA 35% = 32 kids
Math 11% = 10 kids

-- You are assuming all Deal 9th graders go to J-R? Wut?

-- You fail to count the non-Hardy high-scoring students going to Macarthur that are not from Hardy. Surely there are a few.

-- Future 9th graders at Macarthur don't need to 'make a dent' in the full 600 students at the school. The makeup of the current Sr and Jr classes is pretty irrelevant to them. What matters for them is the 200 students in their grade, with some impact from the grade ahead and behind.

Not sure where you are getting your data but mine is from DC report card.

If yours is a legitimate source and more recent then you also know the numbers at Deal and MA which you have not shared.

No, not really any significant high scoring, above grade level kids at MA, 5% in ELA and <1% in math.

I recognize your writing style. You seem to show up on all high-school focused threads. Every time your thesis is that there are no high performing students at any schools other than Walls and Jackson Reed.

I'm not sure what your angle is. Did your kids move? Are you angry that they got shut out of Walls? Are they years out from school but you are angry at the subjective admission standards?

Regardless, you have been proven incorrect over and over again. There are high scoring students at many schools in DC, not just at your chosen two. Please stop making us prove it over and over again. Ultimately, this is a good thing. Please try to find a way to accept it.

PS: If you want to argue data you really should look at the data directly on the spreadsheets you can find on the DCPS websites not get whatever DC Report Card line you're reading off of without quoting the actual test scores reflected.

Uh, no one on here said there is only high scoring students at Walls and JR.

Not sure where you are making this stuff up.

Feel free to post here the link where one can easily access data of all schools and compare ….

If you're saying you know data, you know where to find it.
Google the score you're looking for.

CAPE scores are here for 2025:
https://osse.dc.gov/assessmentresults2025
and here for earlier years (PARCC / CAPE):
https://dcps.dc.gov/publication/dcps-data-set-parcc

SAT scores are here for earlier years:
https://dcps.dc.gov/publication/dcps-data-set-sat

And I don't see them for 2025. Anyone have them?

The point is that you actually need to analyze the data not just look at a "report card."
That's a lazy cheat.

You have it backwards. The links above to CAPE is just raw data. The spreadsheet is also not very good. Headings are cut off, etc..

The DC school report actually analyzes the data for you.

I have not weighed in on this thread, but to the anti-MHS poster who is now saying school report actually analyzes data for you…you have revealed that you don’t actually have any serious research training. Even humanities majors know to always go to the primary source. And it doesn’t take a statistician to remind you that “analysis” of data can always highlight false storylines while suppressing the real action.

Have you even looked at the link and data? I have and the presentation is terrible and lacking. You can’t even make out the column heading to know what the data below is representing. So you don’t even know what the data is representing let alone what school.

So far, I don’t see anyone here attempting to analyze it because it is not very transparent.

I would also point out that the poster who presented the current Hardy data did not provide links of evidence or legitimate source.

The DC report card presents clear percentages and breakdowns of CAPE scores overall and by different subgroups for each and every school. What exactly is the false storyline here that you are alluding to?

[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:It is mostly a numbers issue. Deal is a lot larger than Hardy.

Nope, not just numbers but also percentages. Deal much higher esp in math.

Even if 1/2 Hardy kids go to MA, most will not be high performers and small numbers that it won’t make a dent in the stats.

You’re just wrong. Over half of Hardy students chose MacArthur this year. I’m sorry that your doomsday predictions won’t come true. Perhaps you will need to find a new hobby

You obviously are full of BS and don’t know the data. I in contrast have looked at the data. Data doesn’t lie.

High performing kids above grade level.

Hardy 180 8th graders. If 90 went to MA
ELA 22% = 20 kids
Math 5% = 5 kids

Number above won’t make a dent in a school with over 600 kids or however many currently.

Deal 480 8th graders
ELA 41% = 197 kids
Math 19% = 91 kids

It has always been Deal that had significantly higher numbers and percentages of high performers and contributed the bulk of these cohort of kids to JR, not Hardy.

Your numbers are wrong.

For Hardy, 5s are 35% and 11%. So, correcting...
If 90 went to MA
ELA 35% = 32 kids
Math 11% = 10 kids

-- You are assuming all Deal 9th graders go to J-R? Wut?

-- You fail to count the non-Hardy high-scoring students going to Macarthur that are not from Hardy. Surely there are a few.

-- Future 9th graders at Macarthur don't need to 'make a dent' in the full 600 students at the school. The makeup of the current Sr and Jr classes is pretty irrelevant to them. What matters for them is the 200 students in their grade, with some impact from the grade ahead and behind.

Not sure where you are getting your data but mine is from DC report card.

If yours is a legitimate source and more recent then you also know the numbers at Deal and MA which you have not shared.

No, not really any significant high scoring, above grade level kids at MA, 5% in ELA and <1% in math.

I recognize your writing style. You seem to show up on all high-school focused threads. Every time your thesis is that there are no high performing students at any schools other than Walls and Jackson Reed.

I'm not sure what your angle is. Did your kids move? Are you angry that they got shut out of Walls? Are they years out from school but you are angry at the subjective admission standards?

Regardless, you have been proven incorrect over and over again. There are high scoring students at many schools in DC, not just at your chosen two. Please stop making us prove it over and over again. Ultimately, this is a good thing. Please try to find a way to accept it.

PS: If you want to argue data you really should look at the data directly on the spreadsheets you can find on the DCPS websites not get whatever DC Report Card line you're reading off of without quoting the actual test scores reflected.

Uh, no one on here said there is only high scoring students at Walls and JR.

Not sure where you are making this stuff up.

Feel free to post here the link where one can easily access data of all schools and compare ….

If you're saying you know data, you know where to find it.
Google the score you're looking for.

CAPE scores are here for 2025:
https://osse.dc.gov/assessmentresults2025
and here for earlier years (PARCC / CAPE):
https://dcps.dc.gov/publication/dcps-data-set-parcc

SAT scores are here for earlier years:
https://dcps.dc.gov/publication/dcps-data-set-sat

And I don't see them for 2025. Anyone have them?

The point is that you actually need to analyze the data not just look at a "report card."
That's a lazy cheat.

You have it backwards. The links above to CAPE is just raw data. The spreadsheet is also not very good. Headings are cut off, etc..

The DC school report actually analyzes the data for you.

I have not weighed in on this thread, but to the anti-MHS poster who is now saying school report actually analyzes data for you…you have revealed that you don’t actually have any serious research training. Even humanities majors know to always go to the primary source. And it doesn’t take a statistician to remind you that “analysis” of data can always highlight false storylines while suppressing the real action.

Have you even looked at the link and data? I have and the presentation is terrible and lacking. You can’t even make out the column heading to know what the data below is representing. So you don’t even know what the data is representing let alone what school.

So far, I don’t see anyone here attempting to analyze it because it is not very transparent.

I would also point out that the poster who presented the current Hardy data did not provide links of evidence or legitimate source.

The DC report card presents clear percentages and breakdowns of CAPE scores overall and by different subgroups for each and every school. What exactly is the false storyline here that you are alluding to?

I don't care which data you are using. Using recent historical data as a predictor of future outcomes is a reasonable approach in developed contexts.

But when you know the circumstances of the recent past (esp. 2023-2024) are substantially different than the near future (eg. 2026-2027), then it's just dumb to insist that the data is highly relevant. Analysis includes more than referencing data. You also have to think critically.

[Anonymous]

I think I need to close this thread unless we can stay on topic please!!

[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:It is mostly a numbers issue. Deal is a lot larger than Hardy.

Nope, not just numbers but also percentages. Deal much higher esp in math.

Even if 1/2 Hardy kids go to MA, most will not be high performers and small numbers that it won’t make a dent in the stats.

You’re just wrong. Over half of Hardy students chose MacArthur this year. I’m sorry that your doomsday predictions won’t come true. Perhaps you will need to find a new hobby

You obviously are full of BS and don’t know the data. I in contrast have looked at the data. Data doesn’t lie.

High performing kids above grade level.

Hardy 180 8th graders. If 90 went to MA
ELA 22% = 20 kids
Math 5% = 5 kids

Number above won’t make a dent in a school with over 600 kids or however many currently.

Deal 480 8th graders
ELA 41% = 197 kids
Math 19% = 91 kids

It has always been Deal that had significantly higher numbers and percentages of high performers and contributed the bulk of these cohort of kids to JR, not Hardy.

Your numbers are wrong.

For Hardy, 5s are 35% and 11%. So, correcting...
If 90 went to MA
ELA 35% = 32 kids
Math 11% = 10 kids

-- You are assuming all Deal 9th graders go to J-R? Wut?

-- You fail to count the non-Hardy high-scoring students going to Macarthur that are not from Hardy. Surely there are a few.

-- Future 9th graders at Macarthur don't need to 'make a dent' in the full 600 students at the school. The makeup of the current Sr and Jr classes is pretty irrelevant to them. What matters for them is the 200 students in their grade, with some impact from the grade ahead and behind.

Not sure where you are getting your data but mine is from DC report card.

If yours is a legitimate source and more recent then you also know the numbers at Deal and MA which you have not shared.

No, not really any significant high scoring, above grade level kids at MA, 5% in ELA and <1% in math.

I recognize your writing style. You seem to show up on all high-school focused threads. Every time your thesis is that there are no high performing students at any schools other than Walls and Jackson Reed.

I'm not sure what your angle is. Did your kids move? Are you angry that they got shut out of Walls? Are they years out from school but you are angry at the subjective admission standards?

Regardless, you have been proven incorrect over and over again. There are high scoring students at many schools in DC, not just at your chosen two. Please stop making us prove it over and over again. Ultimately, this is a good thing. Please try to find a way to accept it.

PS: If you want to argue data you really should look at the data directly on the spreadsheets you can find on the DCPS websites not get whatever DC Report Card line you're reading off of without quoting the actual test scores reflected.

Uh, no one on here said there is only high scoring students at Walls and JR.

Not sure where you are making this stuff up.

Feel free to post here the link where one can easily access data of all schools and compare ….

If you're saying you know data, you know where to find it.
Google the score you're looking for.

CAPE scores are here for 2025:
https://osse.dc.gov/assessmentresults2025
and here for earlier years (PARCC / CAPE):
https://dcps.dc.gov/publication/dcps-data-set-parcc

SAT scores are here for earlier years:
https://dcps.dc.gov/publication/dcps-data-set-sat

And I don't see them for 2025. Anyone have them?

The point is that you actually need to analyze the data not just look at a "report card."
That's a lazy cheat.

You have it backwards. The links above to CAPE is just raw data. The spreadsheet is also not very good. Headings are cut off, etc..

The DC school report actually analyzes the data for you.

I have not weighed in on this thread, but to the anti-MHS poster who is now saying school report actually analyzes data for you…you have revealed that you don’t actually have any serious research training. Even humanities majors know to always go to the primary source. And it doesn’t take a statistician to remind you that “analysis” of data can always highlight false storylines while suppressing the real action.

Have you even looked at the link and data? I have and the presentation is terrible and lacking. You can’t even make out the column heading to know what the data below is representing. So you don’t even know what the data is representing let alone what school.

So far, I don’t see anyone here attempting to analyze it because it is not very transparent.

I would also point out that the poster who presented the current Hardy data did not provide links of evidence or legitimate source.

The DC report card presents clear percentages and breakdowns of CAPE scores overall and by different subgroups for each and every school. What exactly is the false storyline here that you are alluding to?

Umm, yeah, I have a lot experience working with DC education data. I was the person who posted some basic analyses of Hardy data many years ago. Maybe 2015 or so. The CSV files still suck, but they suck less now. And back then, the relevant data were scattered across different websites and agencies. Difficulty is not an excuse for laziness. And an inability to perform some basic statistical inference is not an excuse to use someone else’s ill-fitting narratives.