DP. SES is socioeconomic status. So yes, SES by definition is not based solely in income.

Either share what criteria YOU include in SES or stop posting on the thread.

Anonymous wrote:

I would also suggest expanding your definition of low SES. It isn't the same as FARMs.

Are you just being argumentative or do you have a different definition for socioeconomic status beyond income/asset level than the rest of the population? If you do by all means share what criteria you use to define low SES.

DP. SES is socioeconomic status. So yes, SES by definition is not based solely in income.

I would also suggest expanding your definition of low SES. It isn't the same as FARMs.

Are you just being argumentative or do you have a different definition for socioeconomic status beyond income/asset level than the rest of the population? If you do by all means share what criteria you use to define low SES.

Anonymous wrote:

Looks like there is a strong correlation between a school's average score and it's SES.

I would refine your definition of correlation.

These are % of passing students not average scores. A school with a bunch of kids scoring a 5 is not pulling up the average to hide kids who score a 2.

The scores may show that low SES students have a very high propensity to fail the test. Therefore a school with a high percentage of FARMS student could not reach the top tanks. The scores do not show that high SES students have a high propensity to pass the test regardless of which school they attend.

There are many schools that do not have a high percentage of FARMS kids with high failure rates. This is not correlating with SES at all. You can't dismiss or chalk up school performance to solely being a factor of SES.

UMC kids can and do do poorly when parents assume they will do just fine because they are UMC kids.

It would be VERY interesting to see the grades aligned with PARCC scores by schools. For the high Algebra rate failures, it certainly appears that some middle schools are putting kids in Algebra 1 that do not have the skills to succeed in that class.

I would also suggest expanding your definition of low SES. It isn't the same as FARMs.

Anonymous wrote:

If PARCC aligned with SES, Whitman wouldn't be among the lowest in the county!

Whitman is in the high group for ELA 80s, 56 for Algebra 1.

Weird because GS gives Whitman a 4 and their ratings in MD are based on their PARCC performance.

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Algebra 1 for middle school it gets even stranger. Algebra 1 in middle school should be kids working at grade level. The kids who are struggling should be in Math 8 not Algebra 1. If you look at where the schools fell in % of students that showed proficiency is really bad. The schools on the bottom list do not all have more than 50% FARMS kids. Many schools in the middle have FARMS rate that are pretty low.

Where is Silver Creek? This school outscored the Ws in Algebra 1.

Top Schools - over 85%
Silver Creek 93.2
Cabin John 92.7
Westland 92.7
Pyle 91.3
Hoover 87.9
Takoma Park 89.9
Frost 86.6

Middle 84.9-50
North Bethesda 84.5
Lakelands 76.6
Julius West 72.3
Rosa Parks 71.7
Rocky Hills 69
Tilden 65.4
Kingsview 54.3
Hallie Wells 52
Poole 60.9
Martin Luther King 57.6

Bottom - lower than 50% pass
Parkland 39.9
Silver Spring International 46
Clemente 43.5
Eastern 43
Briggs Chaney 42.4
Baker 46.7
Ridgeview 45.5
Newport Middle 37.9
Forest Oak 35.3
Francis Scott Key 29.3
Gaithersburg 21.3
Montgomery Middle 18.3
Neelsville 12.2
White Oak 18.3
Sligo 39.3
Banneker 20.8
Argule 31.4
Loiderman 20.3

What do the middle school geometry scores look like? Those scores can give a glimpse of how well the advanced cohort is doing at each school. Algebra I scores will include those on grade level as well as advanced 7th graders. Geometry will only show those working at an advanced level.

Looks like there is a strong correlation between a school's average score and it's SES.

I would refine your definition of correlation.

These are % of passing students not average scores. A school with a bunch of kids scoring a 5 is not pulling up the average to hide kids who score a 2.

The scores may show that low SES students have a very high propensity to fail the test. Therefore a school with a high percentage of FARMS student could not reach the top tanks. The scores do not show that high SES students have a high propensity to pass the test regardless of which school they attend.

There are many schools that do not have a high percentage of FARMS kids with high failure rates. This is not correlating with SES at all. You can't dismiss or chalk up school performance to solely being a factor of SES.

UMC kids can and do do poorly when parents assume they will do just fine because they are UMC kids.

It would be VERY interesting to see the grades aligned with PARCC scores by schools. For the high Algebra rate failures, it certainly appears that some middle schools are putting kids in Algebra 1 that do not have the skills to succeed in that class.

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Algebra 1 for middle school it gets even stranger. Algebra 1 in middle school should be kids working at grade level. The kids who are struggling should be in Math 8 not Algebra 1. If you look at where the schools fell in % of students that showed proficiency is really bad. The schools on the bottom list do not all have more than 50% FARMS kids. Many schools in the middle have FARMS rate that are pretty low.

Where is Silver Creek? This school outscored the Ws in Algebra 1.

Top Schools - over 85%
Silver Creek 93.2
Cabin John 92.7
Westland 92.7
Pyle 91.3
Hoover 87.9
Takoma Park 89.9
Frost 86.6

Middle 84.9-50
North Bethesda 84.5
Lakelands 76.6
Julius West 72.3
Rosa Parks 71.7
Rocky Hills 69
Tilden 65.4
Kingsview 54.3
Hallie Wells 52
Poole 60.9
Martin Luther King 57.6

Bottom - lower than 50% pass
Parkland 39.9
Silver Spring International 46
Clemente 43.5
Eastern 43
Briggs Chaney 42.4
Baker 46.7
Ridgeview 45.5
Newport Middle 37.9
Forest Oak 35.3
Francis Scott Key 29.3
Gaithersburg 21.3
Montgomery Middle 18.3
Neelsville 12.2
White Oak 18.3
Sligo 39.3
Banneker 20.8
Argule 31.4
Loiderman 20.3

Looks like there is a strong correlation between a school's average score and it's SES.

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Algebra 1 for middle school it gets even stranger. Algebra 1 in middle school should be kids working at grade level. The kids who are struggling should be in Math 8 not Algebra 1. If you look at where the schools fell in % of students that showed proficiency is really bad. The schools on the bottom list do not all have more than 50% FARMS kids. Many schools in the middle have FARMS rate that are pretty low.

Where is Silver Creek? This school outscored the Ws in Algebra 1.

Silver Creek is the new B-CC middle school in Kensington. It opened this past year with only 6th and 7th graders. So all the kids at Silver Creek who took the Algebra test this year were above-grade-level 7th graders. No 8th graders.

If PARCC aligned with SES, Whitman wouldn't be among the lowest in the county!

Whitman is in the high group for ELA 80s, 56 for Algebra 1.

If you look at Algebra 1 for middle school it gets even stranger. Algebra 1 in middle school should be kids working at grade level. The kids who are struggling should be in Math 8 not Algebra 1. If you look at where the schools fell in % of students that showed proficiency is really bad. The schools on the bottom list do not all have more than 50% FARMS kids. Many schools in the middle have FARMS rate that are pretty low.

Where is Silver Creek? This school outscored the Ws in Algebra 1.

Top Schools - over 85%
Silver Creek 93.2
Cabin John 92.7
Westland 92.7
Pyle 91.3
Hoover 87.9
Takoma Park 89.9
Frost 86.6

Middle 84.9-50
North Bethesda 84.5
Lakelands 76.6
Julius West 72.3
Rosa Parks 71.7
Rocky Hills 69
Tilden 65.4
Kingsview 54.3
Hallie Wells 52
Poole 60.9
Martin Luther King 57.6

Bottom - lower than 50% pass
Parkland 39.9
Silver Spring International 46
Clemente 43.5
Eastern 43
Briggs Chaney 42.4
Baker 46.7
Ridgeview 45.5
Newport Middle 37.9
Forest Oak 35.3
Francis Scott Key 29.3
Gaithersburg 21.3
Montgomery Middle 18.3
Neelsville 12.2
White Oak 18.3
Sligo 39.3
Banneker 20.8
Argule 31.4
Loiderman 20.3

If PARCC aligned with SES, Whitman wouldn't be among the lowest in the county!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/k-12/bs-md-maryland-parcc-scores-20180828-htmlstory.html

You can look up schools here. I just looked up Rachel Carson/Quince Orchard which is an area that we are considering.

It doesn't make sense why the % of kids failing to reach proficiency is so high. RC is in the 60s (E 57-69 and M 52-70)but the FARMS rate is very low. QO is 64 for English and 13 for Algebra. NW which has many more FARMS students is almost identical.

Piney Branch is in the 40s BUT there are at least 4 times more FARMS students at PB. Blair is 54 for English and 5.0 for Algebra but again there are lots of FARMS students.

My understanding is that the Algebra scores are jacked because they are only looking at kids who take Algebra in HS. I think the "on grade level" curriculum currently has students taking Algebra in 8th grade, and many take it in 7th. They are not counted in a HS's Algebra pass rate. I'm not sure exactly how it works, just that the kids taking algebra in middle school mess up the numbers in some way.

To get a more accurate picture on algebra, you need to look at the scores for middle schools. Kids working on grade level take algebra in 8th grade.If you go to the middle school’s results page, you need to click on the tab saying high school scores, and there will be a drop down list for algebra I, geometry, and sometimes algebra II.

Anonymous wrote:

A school's PARCC average simply reflects the area's SES. Schools with high FARMs rates have a higher deviation in their scores. The OP's premise is wrong.

OMG look at the data and pull your head out of the sand.

The data shows that across all schools students are failing at percentages higher than the FARMS rate. Rachel Carson, despite having almost no FARMS students is not doing much better than Piney Branch which has many FARMS students.

I think you would've also failed math. You can't just look at FARMs rate for this.

To address the issue of variation between 3, 4, 5th scores, they are different groups of kids. If your school has 100 kids in each grade, then a 10% change is 10 kids. If your school has less than 100 kids per grade (and many in the county do) it takes even fewer kids to swing the % fairly substantially.

You can, however, look at (mostly) the same kids over time. I pulled our school's 3rd grade ELA for 2017 and 4th grade ELA for 2018. The number scoring 5 on 3rd grade ELA was 15 in 2017. The number scoring 5 on 4th grade ELA in 2018 was 37. Those are more or less the same kids. On the other hand, math "5's" went from 24 to 16. Math "4's" went from 57 to 66.

In the end, there's always going to be arguments about what's actually being measured by a standardized test. There was a mom who posted about moving from out of state and having a kid get a 1 on his first PARCC because he'd never taken a standardized test on a computer. He got some training in how to use the computer for the test, and passed the following year. Some kids are going to be more comfortable and experienced with computers. Does that improve their score? Does that make them feel more confident and competent while they're taking the test, or let them finish faster so they are less likely to phone it in at the end? In the end, there's only so much one test can tell you about a kid or a school.