[Stylo]

In Connecticut, without a county level government, and with performance largely attributed to economic status - it seems most schools performance is directly correlated with level of average income within the town, and level of economic diversity.

That said, can anyone name any towns or cities that have schools that significantly under or over-perform in relation to their economic standing and break this rule?

[FutureTown]

Significantly? I don't think I can. But, best bang for the buck? I believe that would be East Granby. High graduation rate. Above average test scores, and HHI and house prices are nothing like the well known affluent Hartford County towns like Avon or Farmington.

[Wilton2ParkAve]

Fairfield and Greenwich SAT (and other standardized test) scores are meaningfully below comparable income communities. Greenwich may be explained by higher rates of private schooling for achieving students which reduces the quality of the public school student body.

[kidyankee764]

I've always been surprised that the Shepaug district ranks so average given the wealth in the area.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

Fairfield and Greenwich SAT (and other standardized test) scores are meaningfully below comparable income communities. Greenwich may be explained by higher rates of private schooling for achieving students which reduces the quality of the public school student body.

You really can't go by SAT scores. SAT's are compulsory tests so not every student is required to take them. In towns like Fairfield where there is a wide socio-economic range students that would not take SAT's if they lived in another town are likely to be pushed to take them. This can skew the results. A better way to compare students is the Connecticut Academic Performance Test results. All students take these tests so it is a much better measure. Jay

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

Fairfield and Greenwich SAT (and other standardized test) scores are meaningfully below comparable income communities. Greenwich may be explained by higher rates of private schooling for achieving students which reduces the quality of the public school student body.

I think they are affected by more economic diversity, more extremes in wealth.

[seymourct]

I think you'll see some interesting movement in Seymour district in the next few years,regardless of income, as a new method of assessing each individual student's learning curve has been adopted. Up until last year, teachers were teaching and testing to have classes reach the grade level expectations only, never really finding time to see if any student can outperform that expectation. That is now changed. They not only are looking to identify low level learners and bring them up, they are now looking for areas and subjects that some students excell in. My daughter participated in the piloted new assessments last spring, which has had a full roll out now for every student every grade on their own learning growth curve chart.
I'm quite happily surprised to see where my daughter is on her trajectory. It's a really good thing.

[CTartist&musician]

Originally Posted by Stylo

In Connecticut, without a county level government, and with performance largely attributed to economic status - it seems most schools performance is directly correlated with level of average income within the town, and level of economic diversity.

That said, can anyone name any towns or cities that have schools that significantly under or over-perform in relation to their economic standing and break this rule?

I would not say that Trumbull significantly over performs for our income level but we get a big "bang for our buck" seeing that all our schools are top notch and our incomes are much less than lower Fairfield County. We also have I believe about 15% minorities in our schools which the wealthier towns do not have and our schools are still right up there.

I would also like to point something out. The lower income residents live in the southern part of Trumbull and while the southern schools were good (a "B" "B-" level) they were not as good as the schools in the wealthier parts of town. After our new young FS Tim Herbst got in he did something which at the time was controversial at the time. The people in the wealthier parts of town did not like it because they thought that their schools would get worse. They mixed and balanced the schools. A great thing happened as a result. The great schools stayed "A" schools and the "B" schools WENT UP to an "A" and got better. Both his parents were Trumbull school teachers who I am thinking advised him on this but I am not sure about that.

[hvexpatinct]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

I've always been surprised that the Shepaug district ranks so average given the wealth in the area.

The bigger story with region 12 is the income disparity in the towns. The ultra wealthy are either much older or sending their kids to the Gunnery/Rumsey Hall/Washington Montessori. Many of those who use the public schools are not particularly wealthy and may in fact be struggling significantly to pay the bills. Also, enrollment in the schools has crashed. I think they are projected to have fewer than 12 kids in kindergarten for 2015.

[Stylo]

Trumbull is exactly where I would expect it as a middle to upper middle class FFC town. The high school is currently ranked at #37 according to 2012-2013 test scores. Higher than Shelton and Stratford, but below Brookfield, Newtown, and Monroe.

Best-value-to-scores-ratio to me are towns like Orange, Madison, Farmington, Avon, Newtown, Old Lyme - significantly less expensive than similarly performing lower FFC towns. That said, commute options are also limited so it's all relative. They are all solidly upper middle class and homogenous economically so it's not a surprise.