Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.
That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
Table A.8
The "Blair 1326" SAT score is the average for "White" students at Blair
The average SAT score for "Black or African American" at Blair is 1032
The average SAT score for "Hispanic/Latino" at Blair is 1037
The average SAT score for "Asian" at Blair is 1290
The average SAT score for "2 or more races" at Blair is 1324
Table A.6
The average SAT score for all Blair students who took the test is 1142.
What's interesting to me is that, with a few outliers, scores are pretty static across schools by race. Black kids do about as well at Blair as they do at most of the Ws, except Wootton where they do worse than expected and Whitman where they do very well, which I'm guessing is a function of wealth.
Anonymous wrote:
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
It's true the average SAT at Blair was 1326 for the largest cohort common to these schools. Using race as a proxy for SES we're able to do a more granular analysis and see how they really stack up.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.
That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
Table A.8
The "Blair 1326" SAT score is the average for "White" students at Blair
The average SAT score for "Black or African American" at Blair is 1032
The average SAT score for "Hispanic/Latino" at Blair is 1037
The average SAT score for "Asian" at Blair is 1290
The average SAT score for "2 or more races" at Blair is 1324
Table A.6
The average SAT score for all Blair students who took the test is 1142.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county
that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.
You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy
Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.
didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration
I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?
All I know is Blair SMCS trounces TJ in almost every single matchup so not sure these rankings are meaningful.
Not counting USNEWS rankings and public perception…. But all the unmeasurables like Blair parent pride and teen pregnancy most would buy that
Anonymous wrote:Great to see! I put more stock into US News than other random rankings where anyone can skew the data.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.
That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
Table A.8
The "Blair 1326" SAT score is the average for "White" students at Blair
The average SAT score for "Black or African American" at Blair is 1032
The average SAT score for "Hispanic/Latino" at Blair is 1037
The average SAT score for "Asian" at Blair is 1290
The average SAT score for "2 or more races" at Blair is 1324
/b]
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county
that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.
You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy
Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.
didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration
I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?
All I know is Blair SMCS trounces TJ in almost every single matchup so not sure these rankings are meaningful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.
That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.
That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county
that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.
You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy
Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.
didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration
I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?
It's not that they ranked the magnet programs per se; they just ranked the schools overall like they always do, then they picked out the schools that contained magnet programs and published a new list of just those schools, in their ranked order.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county
that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.
You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy
Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.
didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration
I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?
All I know is Blair SMCS trounces TJ in almost every single matchup so not sure these rankings are meaningful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.
That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.
Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf
Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.
Reply to your self all you want. You peer group avg means nothing when 99% of the school isn’t in that peer group. Sure a couple of very smart kids bused in from nicer parts of town do comparable to the schools full of smart kids from nicer parts of town. No one is disputing that. Problem is Blair isn’t filled with smart kids from the nicer parts of town, we are talking whole school averages sweetie.
DP.. if 99% of the group is not in a magnet, but the scores are reported as a whole of the school, then that means the magnet cohort doesn't put a huge dent in the score.
Regardless, if you look at that SAT scores by demographics within a school, and then look at the demographics of the magnet cohort, you can get a sense of which scores are skewed due to magnets and which aren't.
Having stated that, however, there are some in cluster students who are also in the magnet program in the school (like RM cluster students who are in the RMIB magnet), so that skews things, too. Those kids would be and should be part of the magnet AND nonmagnet group since they live in the cluster. It's not easy to slice and dice the numbers the way you want.
There are some really smart kids in the cluster (both RM and Blair), but those schools also have a fair amount of low income students who don't score as high. Just as you claim that magnet students skew the results, so, too, the low income students skew the results.
You'd have to take the low income student scores and those of the non-in cluster magnet students out of the equation to get an apples to apples comparison.
Otherwise, it's an apples to oranges comparison.
Not if they do not define the truly define and scale the demographics. That is like saying the top 5 kids at Kennedy did slightly better than the avg of all of Thomas Jefferson in Va and then defining those top 5 kids a demographic and then declaring Kennedy is a better school than TG. It is one line cherry picked and taken out of context with all other data points ignored.
To make that leap it would require ignoring the Top 5 and bottom 200 at TJ. It is a classic cherry pick argument especially considering that many if not most of the kids being claimed by the Blair booster are pulled from the schools being compared to exactly for their ability to do well on tests. Of course they are similar a similar demographic many of them are neighbors to the Walt Johnson, BCC, Churchill and Whitman kids
Yes, that would be true, but nobody does that so your point is moot.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county
that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.
You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy
Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.
didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration
I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?