Average SAT Scores by High School (Boston, Cambridge: fit in, big house, to buy)

[brainbree]

These kinds of tables are completely useless. What's the deviation on a year-to-year basis w.r.t. the same school? How about controlling for socioeconomic status, etc. Without this information this is little more than elitist "dick measuring"

[mwj119]

Originally Posted by brainbree

These kinds of tables are completely useless. What's the deviation on a year-to-year basis w.r.t. the same school? How about controlling for socioeconomic status, etc. Without this information this is little more than elitist "dick measuring"

Yet school systems and metrics and averages are brought up every day on these threads. So, while standardized tests are garbage as an indicator of future success, they are a necessary evil when applying for college. So why not cut out all of the bullsh*t and look at which towns have the highest scores?

You might not like it, but it doesn't mean Joe and Mary who are relocating here from Virginia won't use some of these lists to gauge which areas feed into high performing districts.

[chicagoliz]

Originally Posted by brainbree

These kinds of tables are completely useless. What's the deviation on a year-to-year basis w.r.t. the same school? How about controlling for socioeconomic status, etc. Without this information this is little more than elitist "dick measuring"

These things are always next to useless. I once worked with a guy who had a daughter who was either in high school or about to go to high school. He was agonizing over whether he should pull her out of the (well-regarded) public high school and put her in this private high school because the SAT scores of the private high school was something like 100 points higher. I said to him that his daughter's score was likely to be the same, regardless of which school she went to, but he did not seem to accept this. It was all the more ridiculous because this guy was living paycheck to paycheck and constantly complaining about his wife spending money and worrying about making the mortgage.

[brainbree]

Originally Posted by mwj119

Yet school systems and metrics and averages are brought up every day on these threads. So, while standardized tests are garbage as an indicator of future success, they are a necessary evil when applying for college. So why not cut out all of the bullsh*t and look at which towns have the highest scores?

You might not like it, but it doesn't mean Joe and Mary who are relocating here from Virginia won't use some of these lists to gauge which areas feed into high performing districts.

The issue is that there's little strong evidence to suggest that there is any difference in quality of the schools. Most of the difference in "quality" can easily be attributed to the differences in demographics. Most of the literature on this stuff is consistent. This is not to say that all schools are equal in quality, of course, but rather to just say many of them (especially in Massachusetts) are indistinguishable from one another.

I think you're right though. The existence of these lists will lead to people trying to "game it", becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy (parental involvement is strongly correlated with academic achievement). The sad thing is that without granular data on this stuff, parents on the brink can't make good decisions. For those with limited resources, the trade-offs should be weighed pretty carefully (e.g. some schools are better at improving those who are more remedial, others are unlocking potential of already very intelligent students, etc.).

[mwj119]

Originally Posted by brainbree

The issue is that there's little strong evidence to suggest that there is any difference in quality of the schools. Most of the difference in "quality" can easily be attributed to the differences in demographics. Most of the literature on this stuff is consistent. This is not to say that all schools are equal in quality, of course, but rather to just say many of them (especially in Massachusetts) are indistinguishable from one another.

I think you're right though. The existence of these lists will lead to people trying to "game it", becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy (parental involvement is strongly correlated with academic achievement).

I don't think this list reflects school quality at all really. I agree with you. I do think that this list reflects other important indicators when families are considering a move.. Educational attainment within each town/of your neighbors, sociodemographic and the downstream effect it has on test scores, etc.

To be fair, my parents always tell me that they would have loved to see data like this when they were choosing towns to settle in. In retrospect, they think that moving into a town like Chelmsford/Wakefield would have suited us better than a town like Acton/Westford (as an example). Some people can flip this data on it's head, and use it to stay out of the cutthroat districts like AB/Lexington.

I just think it's interesting.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by mwj119

Massachusetts school districts with the highest SAT scores in 2016-17

Should they have separated Boston Latin and the other exam schools from the rest of the district? Especially in the context of giving info to people looking to relocate to the state: Boston's place on that ranking doesn't represent that a child can get just a good an education in the city as in the wealthier suburbs provided they can secure a spot in one of the better schools.

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by mwj119

Yup.

Is anyone else surprised to see a town like Peabody that low (relative to the rest of the state)? On the other end, really cool to see Framingham doing so well. And despite the millennial migration into the inner ring, it has yet to effect bottom line test scores. Look no further than Somerville. We are probably a decade away from that shift, but I'm sure this list will look pretty different by then.

Urban districts with socio-economic diversity will never be high on this list, Cambridge and Somerville are still very diverse, thankfully. It's also cultural, there are many highly educated parents in our Somerville school who think focusing on MCAS testing is actually detrimental to getting a good education because so much time is spent on test prep to keep those home values high. Quite a few of them are professors. Contrast this with the more professional/corporate households in the suburbs who tend to value test scores much more, but don't truly understand how the educational system works or just dont want their kids around "those kids" (veiled racism really) .

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by mwj119

Yet school systems and metrics and averages are brought up every day on these threads. So, while standardized tests are garbage as an indicator of future success, they are a necessary evil when applying for college. So why not cut out all of the bullsh*t and look at which towns have the highest scores?

People love measurements, so they take what they can get and that's the problem really - there isn't a better metric for measuring school quality that is readily available. While test scores matter for college, you can get an SAT tutor and provide all of the resources your kids needs and they will thrive in Waltham as well as in Lexington. The data on this is very consistent. Chasing top school districts is one of the top reasons why our society self-segregates in a time when we have the greatest inequality in our history - it's a really bad thing driven by bad information and your kids end up living in a bubble of privilege. We could sell our Somerville house and buy one 50-100% larger in Lexington but - hell no!

[miu]

My old high school came in fifth. And I think that my best SAT scores were Verbal 690 and 710 for Math. l love multiple choice tests!!

So IMO these tests are good for measuring knowledge, but also measures logical deductive thinking. After all, the correct answer is one of the choices.

[wolfgang239]

Originally Posted by semiurbanite

It's also cultural, there are many highly educated parents in our Somerville school who think focusing on MCAS testing is actually detrimental to getting a good education because so much time is spent on test prep to keep those home values high.

Strange to hear you say this given your historic deep analysis and reliance on controlled for income MCAS statistics.

Any source to prove that "professional/corporate households in the suburbs who tend to value test scores much more, but don't truly understand how the educational system works or just dont want their kids around "those kids" (veiled racism really)." or is that your typical conjecture? I find it hilarious too as my cousin just this year enrolled her first child here in Somerville. I made sure to ask her about fellow parents at Easter. No surprise, but a good mix of professionals (gasp, corporate too!), business, finance, legal. Zero professors. Come to think of it, I haven't met a single professor in Somerville, but I obviously don't hang out in that bubble of privilege you do.

Maybe some people enjoy living in the suburbs, and all of the unmeasured benefits wealthy or suburban school districts can provide? And racism? Really?