Anonymous wrote:I have heard there is a lot of gang activity (primarily Korean) at Marshall. Is this true?

You mean Annandale which is false as well, troll harder

I have heard there is a lot of gang activity (primarily Korean) at Marshall. Is this true?

Marshall is a great choice for black kids.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/18/george-c-marshall-high-sc_n_1358044.html

From whatever the most recent report was on the standardized test for VA schools...I compiled the following info when trying to dig into where to send my Black children if we move to Fairfax. For now, doing private elementary.

Black Reading and Math Pass
Langley not enough students to report for reading? Math 80%
McLean 94% 67%
Yorktown 67 63
Woodson 82 80
Madison 92 78
Oakton 100 60
Marshall 93 87
Annandale 90 67
West Springfield 94 78
Wash Lee 83 66

Marshall stood out to me as the best for reading and math combined. Oakton (4% Black) had such a huge discrepancy between the two. I have no worries about what my kids reading/verbal skills will be coming from our household and they scored 97th percentile on the verbal portion of the IQ test the schools require to get apply. So if I focus on math, Marshall would be the place where Black students also seem to excel and had a higher percentage of us (7%).

Hope this is useful to someone looking for that specific info.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you would rather have a bunch of smart whites surrounded by dumber minorities? Why not pick a school with everyone smart despite race?

SATs/academic success are determined by SES not race.
A middle-class black or hispanic kid will perform on the same level as whites and higher than average for URM, because the URM on average have more low-income kids whose grades and scores are lower.

Really? No, SAT determines intelligence

"Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section."
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/04/why-should-sats-matter/the-sat-is-a-good-intelligence-test

It's also highly correlated with SES
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/sat-scores-and-family-income/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you would rather have a bunch of smart whites surrounded by dumber minorities? Why not pick a school with everyone smart despite race?

SATs/academic success are determined by SES not race.
A middle-class black or hispanic kid will perform on the same level as whites and higher than average for URM, because the URM on average have more low-income kids whose grades and scores are lower.

Really? No, SAT determines intelligence

"Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section."
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/04/why-should-sats-matter/the-sat-is-a-good-intelligence-test

It's also highly correlated with SES
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/sat-scores-and-family-income/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Sorry my article is newer. Only 20 points from SES. You should try better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you would rather have a bunch of smart whites surrounded by dumber minorities? Why not pick a school with everyone smart despite race?

SATs/academic success are determined by SES not race.
A middle-class black or hispanic kid will perform on the same level as whites and higher than average for URM, because the URM on average have more low-income kids whose grades and scores are lower.

Really? No, SAT determines intelligence

"Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section."
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/04/why-should-sats-matter/the-sat-is-a-good-intelligence-test

It's also highly correlated with SES
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/sat-scores-and-family-income/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

If your goal is to get your kid in the best school possible, buy the cheapest house in that school district. There is a high correlation between income and school results. Rich people are usually smart and give birth to smart kids.

This is why schools in McLean and Vienna do well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you would rather have a bunch of smart whites surrounded by dumber minorities? Why not pick a school with everyone smart despite race?

SATs/academic success are determined by SES not race.
A middle-class black or hispanic kid will perform on the same level as whites and higher than average for URM, because the URM on average have more low-income kids whose grades and scores are lower.

Really? No, SAT determines intelligence

"Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section."
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/04/why-should-sats-matter/the-sat-is-a-good-intelligence-test

Anonymous wrote:So you would rather have a bunch of smart whites surrounded by dumber minorities? Why not pick a school with everyone smart despite race?

SATs/academic success are determined by SES not race.
A middle-class black or hispanic kid will perform on the same level as whites and higher than average for URM, because the URM on average have more low-income kids whose grades and scores are lower.

TJ is 65%-70% Asian, depending on how you count. In addition, it only graduates about 5 black students per year, so the demographic numbers there are very skewed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Earlier this year, someone posted the schools by SAT scores of Caucasian kids only. It was really interesting to see how the rankings change when you are only looking at one demographic.

Translation: Interesting to see how the rankings change when you are looking at eliminating all minorities or people of color. After all, they bring the scores down.
What is wrong with you people?!

This is more a question of SES than race, but if I am white, I'll probably look at the white kids' scores.
If I am black and middle-class, I'll have several options to slice, dice and infer the information, but the white kids' test scores would still be a valid reference point for me.

So you would rather have a bunch of smart whites surrounded by dumber minorities? Why not pick a school with everyone smart despite race?

Anonymous wrote:I noticed that on all the lists attempted Falls Church High is ranked higher than Stuart. Is that really true? From the negative postings about Falls Church on this forum I thought it would be the opposite.

stuart is worse but being worse than bad is not good

Anonymous wrote:The best schools are the ones that have great overall scores despite more diverse student bodies. That's a sign of great teaching.

I think that is true if you are talking about socio-economic diversity as there are many college educated middle class parents of color in Fairfax - and their children benefit similarly to the white children of middle class college educated parents do.

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, it is threads like this that removes all questions from my mind as to why our HS students are having the emotional problems they are having. I am only surprised the problems are not yet more prevalent at the elementary and middle school levels. It is only a matter of time.

I was taught that, when someone starts off with the word "frankly," it's a pretty good indication that they are about to posture.

Case in point?