Reply to October waitlist data is up.

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "October waitlist data is up."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]11:54 here -- I think I see it:

https://osse.dc.gov/page/2017-18-parcc-results-and-resources

Go to the link above and you can see separate spreadsheets for ELA and Math PARCC data for every school. You can look by grade or overall. Overall, Noyes had 15.2% level 4/5 on ELA. CMI had 30.2%. If you look just at grade 3, Noyes was 26.1% and CMI was 21.1%.

CMI's scores vacillate a lot -- as low as 17.1% for ELA proficiency in 6th grade to 47.2% in 4th. Could be a variety of reasons for that. Math scores look better for CMI.

TLDR: you can drill down on the data from the link earlier in this post, but I think the posted I quoted above is cherry picking ELA on one specific year, which doesn't give you a fair picture of anything.[/quote]

Well the PMF scores are now out. Let's look at the growth scores (supposed to be the best indicator right?).

CMI
Overall score: 55.4%
Growth in ELA: 45.3%
Growth in Math: 40.3%

COMPARE WITH SIMILAR SCHOOL
ITS 
Overall score: 74.6%
Growth in ELA: 57.3%
Growth in Math: 52.1%

COMPARE WITH A SCHOOL DCUM DOESN'T LOOK AT
Meridian
Overall score: 59.4%
Growth in ELA: 60.9%
Growth in Math: 57.9%

COMPARE WITH ANOTHER SCHOOL DCUM DOESN'T LOOK AT
Center City Congress Heights
Overall score: 62.7%
Growth in ELA: 50.6%
Growth in Math: 55.5%

COMPARE WITH ANOTHER SCHOOL DCUM DOESN'T LOOK AT
 Hope - Lamond
 Overall score: 62.8%
 Growth in ELA: 54.6%
 Growth in Math: 49.7%[/quote]

While ITS and CMI are similar in most demographic categories, there is one important exception -- CMI has 28,7 special ed students vs 16,4 for ITS.  Actually, CMI's percentage of special ed students is about twice the average of the other District Schools.  That being the case, it's unlikely it could ever have scores to match WOTP schools, which you said you wanted to use as your comparison but wisely didn't, or even ITS which is otherwise its closest match.  That's not to say that the scores couldn't and shouldn't be better than they are,  but you clearly don't comprehend that many of the CMI parents, including some of the neighbors you enjoy laughing at, have no doubt selected this school especially because of it's focus on special ed, and keep their children there for that very reason.  I doubt they appreciate your very peculiar sense of humor or your arrogance in assuming you know what's better for their kids than they do.[/quote]

NP.

You can't assume that students with special needs are the ones bringing down CMI's scores, so to speak. In fact, the above numbers relate to student growth, not achievement. CMI, if it has a better approach to teaching students with disabilities than anyone else, should be able to keep pace when comparing growth scores (students moving from level 1 PARCC to 2 counts as much or more as moving from 4 to 5).

If CMI is really no better at educating students with disabilities than other schools, what is their raison d'etre? And if that is their 'focus', why haven't they applied for SN lottery preference like Bridges?[/quote]

You might try looking at Bridges PARCC and PMF  scores.  Bridges has 34.8% special ed and is a Tier 3 school.[/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