Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Where do we find the data for teacher attrition rate? Not to start further debate, but I'm curious about CM's rate. TIA!
look at their annual report. link was provided above. CM's attrition rate, by the way, is 8%. But the number is misleading because they only reported having 12 teachers, one of whom left. 1/12=8%.
Anonymous wrote:Where do we find the data for teacher attrition rate? Not to start further debate, but I'm curious about CM's rate. TIA!
Anonymous wrote:I remember a long previous thread about the low quality Spanish instruction at MV (spelling mistakes, poor use of accents and grammar mistakes by professors). I have also heard these concerns from several native Spanish speakers. As a bilingual school should the quality of Spanish instruction also be a consideration?
Anonymous wrote:
This is not correct. For 2013 IT reported that 61.9% of first graders are on grade level for reading. MV reported that 82% are on grade level for reading. MV also measured math, which IT did not measure, which I find interesting.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MV parent here that is happy but think IT's teaching model is excellent and think most children would do well at IT with a great teacher. Not sure what OP is trying to accomplish but after reading quite a few of these "lets rank which school is superior or has xyz problems" is getting tiring.
OP here, I am trying to find facts instead of feelings to get a well rounded picture of two Charters that are highly regarded on this forum. I cited facts and in no way disparaged either school. Why is it okay to rattle of facts about JKLM schools and their scores and other DCPS scores but when this information is presented for charters it is tiring or problematic?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MV parent here that is happy but think IT's teaching model is excellent and think most children would do well at IT with a great teacher. Not sure what OP is trying to accomplish but after reading quite a few of these "lets rank which school is superior or has xyz problems" is getting tiring.
OP here, I am trying to find facts instead of feelings to get a well rounded picture of two Charters that are highly regarded on this forum. I cited facts and in no way disparaged either school. Why is it okay to rattle of facts about JKLM schools and their scores and other DCPS scores but when this information is presented for charters it is tiring or problematic?
Anonymous wrote:MV parent here that is happy but think IT's teaching model is excellent and think most children would do well at IT with a great teacher. Not sure what OP is trying to accomplish but after reading quite a few of these "lets rank which school is superior or has xyz problems" is getting tiring.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MV parent here that is happy but think IT's teaching model is excellent and think most children would do well at IT with a great teacher. Not sure what OP is trying to accomplish but after reading quite a few of these "lets rank which school is superior or has xyz problems" is getting tiring.
OP here, I am trying to find facts instead of feelings to get a well rounded picture of two Charters that are highly regarded on this forum. I cited facts and in no way disparaged either school. Why is it okay to rattle of facts about JKLM schools and their scores and other DCPS scores but when this information is presented for charters it is tiring or problematic?
Because you are not comparing apples to apples. You are comparing a language immersion school with a experimental teaching demonstration school. Both have their strengths and everyone has agreed both are good schools. It is very odd that you're trying rank them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MV parent here that is happy but think IT's teaching model is excellent and think most children would do well at IT with a great teacher. Not sure what OP is trying to accomplish but after reading quite a few of these "lets rank which school is superior or has xyz problems" is getting tiring.
OP here, I am trying to find facts instead of feelings to get a well rounded picture of two Charters that are highly regarded on this forum. I cited facts and in no way disparaged either school. Why is it okay to rattle of facts about JKLM schools and their scores and other DCPS scores but when this information is presented for charters it is tiring or problematic?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look at the PMF reports, annual reports and budget. Review each school's assessment tools that they use and the corresponding efficacy reports. Also look at the report cards on my school dc site. Also compare MV and IT with other schools using the same resources. I was surprised at the results but stats trump "feelings" for me.
IT has higher 2013 scores than Mundo Verde comparing the lower grades. Not only did IT have higher criteria (they set their targets at 70% whereas Mundo Verde set theres at 60%), IT had more than 99% proficency in lower grades whereas Mundo Verde had 95%.
I don't know what you're looking at, but from what I see IT is ahead. I don't put much stake in these reports but sense you brought it up I thought I'd double check.
This is not correct. For 2013 IT reported that 61.9% of first graders are on grade level for reading. MV reported that 82% are on grade level for reading. MV also measured math, which IT did not measure, which I find interesting. The numbers you cite regard overall student growth. At any rate just because you or other posters don't find statistics beneficial or important does not mean that the information is not beneficial to others. I find it extremely helpful especially when all we hear about both schools is how great they are and how great their models are but there are no absolute facts to look at. This is important to me also when trying to decide between neighborhood DCPS which has gobs of data and untested/unproven charters.
Anonymous wrote:MV parent here that is happy but think IT's teaching model is excellent and think most children would do well at IT with a great teacher. Not sure what OP is trying to accomplish but after reading quite a few of these "lets rank which school is superior or has xyz problems" is getting tiring.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look at the PMF reports, annual reports and budget. Review each school's assessment tools that they use and the corresponding efficacy reports. Also look at the report cards on my school dc site. Also compare MV and IT with other schools using the same resources. I was surprised at the results but stats trump "feelings" for me.
IT has higher 2013 scores than Mundo Verde comparing the lower grades. Not only did IT have higher criteria (they set their targets at 70% whereas Mundo Verde set theres at 60%), IT had more than 99% proficency in lower grades whereas Mundo Verde had 95%.
I don't know what you're looking at, but from what I see IT is ahead. I don't put much stake in these reports but sense you brought it up I thought I'd double check.