Reply to DC School Report Cards are up

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "DC School Report Cards are up"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote] So, the way this is weighed, white kids scoring quite a bit lower than expected/average on PARCC does pretty much nothing to the ranking of the school. Yu Ying getting a score in the 90's with a white kid score of 41. Even though it is 30% white. [/quote]
Maybe you understand this, but [b]just to clarify, it doesn’t mean the white kids’ score are objectively very low. It just means that they are lower compared to other white kids across the district.[/b] [b] The other population groups far exceed the scores for their relevant populations.[/b] And scores are just one factor in the mix.

[/quote]

This is important!  [/quote]

Agreed this is important.  Taking CMI, for example, to pick on just one school that's been mentioned--it doesn't mean that the white kids at the school are doing horribly.  It just means that they aren't doing as well as expected, relative to their counterparts at other schools.[/quote]

Sure. Since I have a white kid, though, this matters to me. I don't really want my kid at a school where the white kids are doing worse than average, do I? Just like any other subgroup may have the same feeling about a school which does not do well in their demographic.

But, I understood that already - I know white kids are still overall going to score fairly well. My point was that this star system is HEAVILY weighted toward the progress of disabled (for some reason more than any other group by far), and secondarily weighted by at risk etc.

FINE&gt; BUT, parents will simply read it as &quot;this is the average score of the school relative to every other school&quot;. So there is no strong emphasis. Maybe it should be called STAR Rankings for Underperforming Demographics in DCPS and Charter Schools. But it isn't.

The weighting also appears to have little to do with the population in the school of any one demographic - ie, if the school is largely white, shouldn't their underperformance (yes, relative to expectation) be quite a bit more apparent in the scoring?

I'd love to see Bowser take to the powerpoint and explain all this convoluted math to parents in DC in some kind of town halls.[/quote]

Bowser didn't develop the report cards. It's on Hanseul Kang to explain it.

To your broader point, I have to disagree. The slight over-weighting with students with disabilities compared to at-risk and racial/ethnic groups was proposed at the feedback meetings OSSE held and adopted. It didn't come out of thin air or without good reason. 
Among all groups in DC and nationally, students with disabilities are the most likely to fail to graduate or be employed. That is why they are weighed slightly more heavily in the student performance section.

Full disclosure - as the parent of a white, high school student with disabilities (who always got 4s on PARCC btw) I'm thrilled that. The city spends far too much money on special education not to put a spotlight on the data, and figure out what is, and isn't working.

And if white kids, without learning disabilities are not doing as well at your school as at others, you should absolutely talk to your principal about it, and consider whether you want to continue there. Would you rather not know how yoru kid is doing - regardless of how well SN students are or aren't doing?

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics