Anonymous
03/27/2023 11:06
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?[/quote][/quote]
If you really want to know, here are some things that helped at our school (Langley).
1) A competent principal and AP who are good at recruiting quality teachers and holding teachers to a high standard.
2) Good preschool teachers, competent upper grades teachers.
3) Office staff who are good enough at their jobs.
4) Parents willing to enroll their kids and invest time and effort in recruiting and volunteering in various ways, fundraising and grants, hosting playdates, chaperoning field trips, basically doing whatever is needed. Anything you can do to increase the kids' and the teachers' quality of life, purchase needed items, recruit more kids, make a nice website, pretty much anything helps.
5) DCPS increasing the SPED weight in the UPSFF, and the $1 million "one star school" money.
None of this changes anything overnight, but over time, these efforts and investments compound and lead to better retention, better performance, and better offerings in general.[/quote]
Sorry but Langley scores are abysmal and have gotten worst, not better [/quote]
The PARCC scores are about as expected for the pandemic-- low but consistent with demographics. Personally I believe that better test scores are the long-term result of improving recruitment and retention, and Langley's total enrollment size and retention of younger kids has improved. Consistent with that, the K-2nd academic metrics have also improved, but aren't made publicly available.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?[/quote][/quote]
If you really want to know, here are some things that helped at our school (Langley).
1) A competent principal and AP who are good at recruiting quality teachers and holding teachers to a high standard.
2) Good preschool teachers, competent upper grades teachers.
3) Office staff who are good enough at their jobs.
4) Parents willing to enroll their kids and invest time and effort in recruiting and volunteering in various ways, fundraising and grants, hosting playdates, chaperoning field trips, basically doing whatever is needed. Anything you can do to increase the kids' and the teachers' quality of life, purchase needed items, recruit more kids, make a nice website, pretty much anything helps.
5) DCPS increasing the SPED weight in the UPSFF, and the $1 million "one star school" money.
None of this changes anything overnight, but over time, these efforts and investments compound and lead to better retention, better performance, and better offerings in general.[/quote]
Sorry but Langley scores are abysmal and have gotten worst, not better [/quote]
The PARCC scores are about as expected for the pandemic-- low but consistent with demographics. Personally I believe that better test scores are the long-term result of improving recruitment and retention, and Langley's total enrollment size and retention of younger kids has improved. Consistent with that, the K-2nd academic metrics have also improved, but aren't made publicly available.
Anonymous
03/27/2023 10:58
Subject: Re:Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
What are Langley's scores?
Anonymous
03/27/2023 10:31
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
[quote=Anonymous][quote][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?[/quote][/quote]
If you really want to know, here are some things that helped at our school (Langley).
1) A competent principal and AP who are good at recruiting quality teachers and holding teachers to a high standard.
2) Good preschool teachers, competent upper grades teachers.
3) Office staff who are good enough at their jobs.
4) Parents willing to enroll their kids and invest time and effort in recruiting and volunteering in various ways, fundraising and grants, hosting playdates, chaperoning field trips, basically doing whatever is needed. Anything you can do to increase the kids' and the teachers' quality of life, purchase needed items, recruit more kids, make a nice website, pretty much anything helps.
5) DCPS increasing the SPED weight in the UPSFF, and the $1 million "one star school" money.
None of this changes anything overnight, but over time, these efforts and investments compound and lead to better retention, better performance, and better offerings in general.[/quote]
Sorry but Langley scores are abysmal and have gotten worst, not better
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?[/quote][/quote]
If you really want to know, here are some things that helped at our school (Langley).
1) A competent principal and AP who are good at recruiting quality teachers and holding teachers to a high standard.
2) Good preschool teachers, competent upper grades teachers.
3) Office staff who are good enough at their jobs.
4) Parents willing to enroll their kids and invest time and effort in recruiting and volunteering in various ways, fundraising and grants, hosting playdates, chaperoning field trips, basically doing whatever is needed. Anything you can do to increase the kids' and the teachers' quality of life, purchase needed items, recruit more kids, make a nice website, pretty much anything helps.
5) DCPS increasing the SPED weight in the UPSFF, and the $1 million "one star school" money.
None of this changes anything overnight, but over time, these efforts and investments compound and lead to better retention, better performance, and better offerings in general.[/quote]
Sorry but Langley scores are abysmal and have gotten worst, not better
Anonymous
03/27/2023 08:45
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
[quote][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?[/quote][/quote]
If you really want to know, here are some things that helped at our school (Langley).
1) A competent principal and AP who are good at recruiting quality teachers and holding teachers to a high standard.
2) Good preschool teachers, competent upper grades teachers.
3) Office staff who are good enough at their jobs.
4) Parents willing to enroll their kids and invest time and effort in recruiting and volunteering in various ways, fundraising and grants, hosting playdates, chaperoning field trips, basically doing whatever is needed. Anything you can do to increase the kids' and the teachers' quality of life, purchase needed items, recruit more kids, make a nice website, pretty much anything helps.
5) DCPS increasing the SPED weight in the UPSFF, and the $1 million "one star school" money.
None of this changes anything overnight, but over time, these efforts and investments compound and lead to better retention, better performance, and better offerings in general.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?[/quote][/quote]
If you really want to know, here are some things that helped at our school (Langley).
1) A competent principal and AP who are good at recruiting quality teachers and holding teachers to a high standard.
2) Good preschool teachers, competent upper grades teachers.
3) Office staff who are good enough at their jobs.
4) Parents willing to enroll their kids and invest time and effort in recruiting and volunteering in various ways, fundraising and grants, hosting playdates, chaperoning field trips, basically doing whatever is needed. Anything you can do to increase the kids' and the teachers' quality of life, purchase needed items, recruit more kids, make a nice website, pretty much anything helps.
5) DCPS increasing the SPED weight in the UPSFF, and the $1 million "one star school" money.
None of this changes anything overnight, but over time, these efforts and investments compound and lead to better retention, better performance, and better offerings in general.
Anonymous
03/27/2023 08:27
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out. [/quote]
Then how did all those schools test scores "magically improve"? What led families to opt in to these schools?
Anonymous
03/26/2023 22:50
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change. [/quote]
LOL! You are so naive to think that DCPS would just magically turn around if more families sent their kids to their IB schools. DCPS is so corrupt, bureaucratic, and dysfunctional. All they care about is their equity BS with their race to the bottom. Lots of families in ward 3, who have options, have opted out.
Anonymous
03/26/2023 09:07
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions. [/quote]
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope. [/quote]
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation. [/quote]
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)[/quote]
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?[/quote]
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.[/quote]
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.[/quote]
That is what happens. [/quote]
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
[/quote]
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.[/quote]
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.[/quote]
Not if people broke this awful cycle of turning down their IB schools. Look at L-T the last few years; Hearst and Eaton before that. Scores are way up. Did the teachers magically figure out how to teach, or did the economic demos change.
Anonymous
03/26/2023 08:43
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
What school are your kids in?
Anonymous
03/25/2023 22:50
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.
That is what happens.
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.
Sure but the key is to what degree. My kid is not gifted but advance, scoring greater than 90% on all subjects on standardized testing. We only supplement 1 subject. He has enough of a high performing peer group in his class. And he is not the top kid in that group either.
Contrast that with a school where overwhelming majority are working below grade level and your kid is the only advance kid. You would need to supplement all subjects.
Anonymous
03/25/2023 17:08
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.
That is what happens.
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
You have to supplement at every DC elementary school, minus MAYBE a few in Ward 3. If you don’t think you need to, your child either isn’t advanced or you’re in denial.
Anonymous
03/25/2023 16:40
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.
That is what happens.
Yep, this exactly. Then what parents have to do is supplement outside of school. Then when the kid does well on PARCC, you think it’s the school but in reality it’s what is happening outside of school.
People can say all they want that test scores don’t matter but they matter a lot in the majority of kids because that absolutely will dictate at what level the teaching will be focused on. This gets more and more obvious as you get into the higher grades where the achievement gap widens more and more.
Anonymous
03/25/2023 05:39
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.
That is what happens.
Anonymous
03/24/2023 22:07
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.
I am describing what I observe happening. But my kids are still in the school.
Anonymous
03/24/2023 21:35
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Most ppl on DCUM are. It used to be that you could choose your school by avoiding high needs kids, but post-pandemic, every school is full of high needs kids.
Anonymous
03/24/2023 21:16
Subject: Comparing elementary schools on things that matter
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the things that matter to OP are: test scores, screen time, and outdoor time.
The only item that you are going to be able to find hard data on is test scores. The OSSE page is very helpful and breaks scores down by demographics, so you can see not just how students overall are doing, but also how students in your demographic group are doing, which might give you a better sense of how your child would do at the school. I know you didn't ask this, but I will throw this out there-- we moved from a school with overall ok test scores but scores that were poor relative to demographics, to a school with great overall test scores that were also great relative to demographics. Everyone at our first school told us that test scores don't mean anything. The education at my kids' new school is about twice as rigorous (in a good way), which I believe accounts for the test scores.
Screen time-- if you are at a school where all kids are assigned their own tablets, then expect more screen time than you are probably comfortable with. It will vary teacher-by-teacher but there will probably not be a policy imposing limits. If your school has the kids share computers, it will be harder to default to screens (but those schools might come with other issues).
Outdoor time-- There will be a general school policy, that probably won't vary too much by school, but again it will be very teacher-specific.
Good luck! I think these are all valid questions.
Thank you for that comment on test scores. We had a similar experience. I don’t find it worth my time to argue with the “test scores don’t matter” people in here, but there are definitely mistaken and full of cope.
It's amazing that there are so many intelligent people who think test scores are an indicator of school excellence vs a basic demographic correlation.
I can both believe that my kids' school is doing the best they can with a high-needs population and observe that if I want my kids to learn material that's appropriate to them, I'm going to have to teach them myself. (At which point their test scores will apparently be used as proof either that the school is doing a good job with kids like mine, or that test scores are just a 'basic demographic correlation'.)
So, you're just unwilling to have your child near students that have high needs?
Are you high needs? You clearly don't understand PP's post.
I read it. They said that they don't think the teacher will give their child what they need because of the high needs population around their child.