Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You misinterpret the data about SAT scores. SAT scores are not reflective of quality of school teaching, nor are they linked to community or school average income level (as reflected by FARMS rate).
SAT scores *are* highly correlated to the family income of the student. The wealthier your family, the more likely you are to do well on the SAT. This is because wealthy families generally access private tutoring for SAT/ACT and class support. Particularly in HS, many students are getting tutors to make up for poor classroom teaching. Wealthy families also access more enrichment activities, etc., for their kids.
They're much more highly correlated to the educational attainment of the parents. When this is added into the mix, SES influence drops almost to zero. I'd bet if you were able to add parental IQ, educational attainment would in turn become much less relevant.
OP I agree that there is at least a grain in truth in this. Then why are we trying to move kids around again if the actual impact is almost entirely related to the parents and not the school again.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You misinterpret the data about SAT scores. SAT scores are not reflective of quality of school teaching, nor are they linked to community or school average income level (as reflected by FARMS rate).
SAT scores *are* highly correlated to the family income of the student. The wealthier your family, the more likely you are to do well on the SAT. This is because wealthy families generally access private tutoring for SAT/ACT and class support. Particularly in HS, many students are getting tutors to make up for poor classroom teaching. Wealthy families also access more enrichment activities, etc., for their kids.
They're much more highly correlated to the educational attainment of the parents. When this is added into the mix, SES influence drops almost to zero. I'd bet if you were able to add parental IQ, educational attainment would in turn become much less relevant.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't think this is all that meaningful. When I realize scores for typically non-FARMS cohorts at schools like Blair are 70 points higher than any W this non-sense kind of falls apart.
The county had Blair's SAT average for the largest common cohort at 1326 whereas the highest W was 1270 or so. Someone complained that it was the 30 magnet students in that cohort skewing the results but but when they removed those scores the average SAT score was still 1290 something. Perhaps, someday these parents will realize diversity is not a problem.
you won't convince W parents
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't think this is all that meaningful. When I realize scores for typically non-FARMS cohorts at schools like Blair are 70 points higher than any W this non-sense kind of falls apart.
The county had Blair's SAT average for the largest common cohort at 1326 whereas the highest W was 1270 or so. Someone complained that it was the 30 magnet students in that cohort skewing the results but but when they removed those scores the average SAT score was still 1290 something. Perhaps, someday these parents will realize diversity is not a problem.
Anonymous wrote:I don't think this is all that meaningful. When I realize scores for typically non-FARMS cohorts at schools like Blair are 70 points higher than any W this non-sense kind of falls apart.
Anonymous wrote:You misinterpret the data about SAT scores. SAT scores are not reflective of quality of school teaching, nor are they linked to community or school average income level (as reflected by FARMS rate).
SAT scores *are* highly correlated to the family income of the student. The wealthier your family, the more likely you are to do well on the SAT. This is because wealthy families generally access private tutoring for SAT/ACT and class support. Particularly in HS, many students are getting tutors to make up for poor classroom teaching. Wealthy families also access more enrichment activities, etc., for their kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Give it a rest, OP.
When your kid applies to college, they use their own, individual SAT score. They don't apply to college with their high school's average SAT score.
Ok really slowly so you can understand
Would you rather have your kid grow up and be around kids who score 900 on SATs or 1400 on SATs get it
It's about the environment, you want an environment with a higher performing cohort
Why do I want this?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Give it a rest, OP.
When your kid applies to college, they use their own, individual SAT score. They don't apply to college with their high school's average SAT score.
Ok really slowly so you can understand
Would you rather have your kid grow up and be around kids who score 900 on SATs or 1400 on SATs get it
It's about the environment, you want an environment with a higher performing cohort
Anonymous wrote:Give it a rest, OP.
When your kid applies to college, they use their own, individual SAT score. They don't apply to college with their high school's average SAT score.