Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of mediocrity here. I am sure the Tier 3 schools are being put on warning.

What happens to the low to mid-Tier 2s?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they get points using another assessment? Their Prek3/2 scores are exceptional - but I don't see them earning points . Looks like only received points for grades 3 and 4. Strange. Such a small cohort. Seems as if their aPreK3s through second grade had received points , they may have been a Tier 1 school. Bet they will jump on the NWEA bandwagon !

It looks like if you have any PARCC testing grades, that's what gets you points toward the progress / proficiency score (e.g. LAMB uses something else for ECE but gets no points for it).

Maybe NWEA (or the other) only 'counts' if you don't have 2 yrs of PARCC?

Anonymous wrote:Did they get points using another assessment? Their Prek3/2 scores are exceptional - but I don't see them earning points . Looks like only received points for grades 3 and 4. Strange. Such a small cohort. Seems as if their aPreK3s through second grade had received points , they may have been a Tier 1 school. Bet they will jump on the NWEA bandwagon !

Anonymous wrote:I noticed a couple of schools did not receive points if they did not use NWEA as aPReK3-2 assessment --but used another PCSB approved assessment. Is NWEA the only test now approved by PCSB to measure 'growth and achievement in Prek 3-2. Our school would have been a Tier ! school if their PreK3-2 scores were counted.

Congratulations Sela but not fair for our school. Guess we better switch tests. Strange. Its all about the tests and testing isnt it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a link that gets into the weeds of the PMF methodology?

Each school has their own framework to determine their score. You can see the different factors and how they did in the school's report, but as far as I know, the rest is not disclosed.

Nope. Each school has a set of criteria based on their age range, they are the same criteria for all schools in that age range. You can see the possible points for each section here, in LAMB's report as an example:

http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Latin%20American%20Montessori%20Bilingual%20PCS_EC_PK3-8_2016.pdf

So for a full elementary program like LAMB, student progress (test score growth) is 35%, Student Achievement (test scores) is 25%, Gateway (how returning do, it seems like) is 10%, and school environment (reenrollment, attendance, teacher observations) is 30%.

There are some school specific criteria listed at the end, but they are not part of the overall score, just listed for reference sake. So all schools are ranked using the exact same criteria.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me how Sela is ranked in a tier when it has no PARCC score? I do not understand this at all and it seems to undermine the whole tier system since you are no longer comparing apples to apples. The other schools that are not tiered did not have PARCC scores. And, for example, this is the first year that CMI is tiered. I do not see how Sela got a ranking - this must be a mistake, and if so, it should be fixed because it is misleading. Not knowing the school at all - I know happy people there - but this makes no sense.

In 2014-15 DCPCSB developed a PMF approach for ECE (PK-3 to 2nd). The idea was that although students shouldn't take an assessment like PARCC there needed to be some accountability measures and standard metrics.

50% of the PMF ranking for a PK3-2nd school is based on student performance and 50% on school culture and some other factors.

Schools like Bridges that are growing one grade at a time and are planned to go to 5th, will not be ranked until their oldest students reach 4th. Sela is only going to 3nd at this point, and has students in their top grade, thus is ranked.

See page 2 at this link for Sela's scores. http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Sela%20PCS_EC_PK-2_2016.pdf

Anonymous wrote:I noticed a couple of schools did not receive points if they did not use NWEA as aPReK3-2 assessment --but used another PCSB approved assessment. Is NWEA the only test now approved by PCSB to measure 'growth and achievement in Prek 3-2. Our school would have been a Tier ! school if their PreK3-2 scores were counted.

Congratulations Sela but not fair for our school. Guess we better switch tests. Strange. Its all about the tests and testing isnt it?

Anonymous wrote:I want to give a shout out to DC Bilingual. No skin in the game because my kids are not there, but many DCUMers are hostile to the school and have suggested that it should not have been a feeder to DCI - primarily because it has a high population of low-income and at risk students. Shame on all of you who are such snobs. DC Bilingual looks awesome!

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me how Sela is ranked in a tier when it has no PARCC score? I do not understand this at all and it seems to undermine the whole tier system since you are no longer comparing apples to apples. The other schools that are not tiered did not have PARCC scores. And, for example, this is the first year that CMI is tiered. I do not see how Sela got a ranking - this must be a mistake, and if so, it should be fixed because it is misleading. Not knowing the school at all - I know happy people there - but this makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:Didn't know you could be ranked without taking PARCC.and only on Pre3-2 scores. Are they only a pre school? Congrats anyway Sela.