Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lists such as these are certainly suspect. Without a doubt, schools toward the top of the list are better than schools toward the bottom. But as others have commented, 20 - 30 - 40 point differences are often immaterial. I have first hand experience with five of these schools, and of the five, I'd rather have my kids go to one that's more than 100 points below another.
How can discrepancies in lists of "the best" be accounted for? Obviously, NJ Monthly's rankings of its "bests" is not my ranking. Nor it is Newsweek's ranking. Take West Orange High School for example.
Earlier this year, Newsweek Magazine rated it as one of the top high schools in the nation! News and Announcements - West Orange High School Ranked Top Public... Surely NJ Monthly must rate it at or near the top, right? Is it in the list of NJ's top ten? No. How about the top 10%? No. Indeed, NJ Monthly rates it as #128, not even in the top third of all public NJ high schools! Looks like NJ Monthly doesn't think it's the "best."
Like most lists of this type, results can be manipulated by the criteria used to create the list. Obviously, what constitutes "best" for Newsweek doesn't mean much to the writers at NJ Monthly and vice versa. What constitutes "best" for you?
i'm a bit surprised that they don't give credit for "availability of AP courses", but - if you did, a school can skew their rankings by making a lot of APs "available" in theory, but not actually enrolling students in those courses.
the bottom line is, if you, as a school, are getting 1/3 of your students to take at least 1 AP and also score at least a 3 on the test, that's a positive for your school. bottom line is, any way you do it has flaws. the important thing is to not just look at the data and judge. you have to dig deeper - as we are all doing here, to truly asses if school 156 is better than school 187. it could turn out that each have their ranking for very different reasons.
and still - NJ people are not realizing, school 215 is not a bad school. it's still far far better than school 25 in PA or school 47 in NY (arbitrary pick, but you get the point).
Take a look at post 35. I broke the numbers down further after finding their exact scoring data that they put on their site. I also included ASK and HSPA results for the heck of it. Just to further prove the point I added Haddon Twp. High School to the mix which is a top 100 school located in South Jersey with the same DFG as Kingsway. When you look at that data it really becomes obvious that there are some issues there.
I did need to retract my statement on AP tests as the methodology they actually used was far more sound then what they described in the text they provided. SAT scores can still be an issue as they only use the average score of the students who took the test and give no weight to how many actually took it.
It turns out that in the case of Kingsway they are severely penalizing the school for having larger class sizes and a higher faculty to student ratio (only thing the data shows they are "deficient" in), despite the fact the schools performance is virtually equal to that of a Top 100 school. If anything the actual data reinforces the fact that Gloucester City has no business ranking in the top 200, let alone above a school like Kingsway.
well, not all colleges require the SAT. so it could be wrong to penalize a school for some students that didn't take it. if the student didn't take the SAT because they aren't going to college, a school is already being dinged for that student not going to college. but - a school should gain points for getting more students to take the test and try to advance themselves.
Lists such as these are certainly suspect. Without a doubt, schools toward the top of the list are better than schools toward the bottom. But as others have commented, 20 - 30 - 40 point differences are often immaterial. I have first hand experience with five of these schools, and of the five, I'd rather have my kids go to one that's more than 100 points below another.
How can discrepancies in lists of "the best" be accounted for? Obviously, NJ Monthly's rankings of its "bests" is not my ranking. Nor it is Newsweek's ranking. Take West Orange High School for example.
Earlier this year, Newsweek Magazine rated it as one of the top high schools in the nation! News and Announcements - West Orange High School Ranked Top Public... Surely NJ Monthly must rate it at or near the top, right? Is it in the list of NJ's top ten? No. How about the top 10%? No. Indeed, NJ Monthly rates it as #128, not even in the top third of all public NJ high schools! Looks like NJ Monthly doesn't think it's the "best."
Like most lists of this type, results can be manipulated by the criteria used to create the list. Obviously, what constitutes "best" for Newsweek doesn't mean much to the writers at NJ Monthly and vice versa. What constitutes "best" for you?
Excellent points and "best" is certainly subjective and different for everyone. My issue with these types of lists and publishing the "best" is that it becomes a marketing point based on false assumptions. Remember back in 2005 when Money Magazine ranked Moorestown as the "best" town in America? Property values in Moorestown shot up as the town rode that wave and they still cling to the "best" title 5 years later.
In the case of these rankings by NJ Monthly school districts and towns use the rankings as marketing to show how good the schools are. Take a look at Gloucester City High School's information and the only thing they will tell you is what sports league they are in and that they are ranked 194 out of 3xx schools according to NJ Monthly.
So while I and many others may not put much stock in these rankings, other people certainly do and they can have real impacts both positive and negative. Just take something as simple as someone looking to buy a house. If they are concerned about school district, they will most likely consult this list to help them make a decision. Maybe someone who would've considered buying my house in Kingsway's district would reconsider because the school isn't "good" according to NJ Monthly.
IMO a magazine or other source that publishes these types of lists has a responsibility to minimize the question marks and as I think I've illustrated there are some big question marks on how they compiled the rankings. Maybe a tier based system that doesn't assign a rank to each school individually is a better way to go, list a top 50, a bottom 50 and leave the rest unranked. Most people don't seem to argue with the top or bottom of the list.
their responsibility is to define the criteria they use, and then use it. to me, it looks like they've done that. you disagree with some of their criteria. that's fine. anyone who looks at the list on the surface and uses it as the bible is an idiot anyways. you probably don't want them buying in your town.
their responsibility is to define the criteria they use, and then use it. to me, it looks like they've done that. you disagree with some of their criteria. that's fine. anyone who looks at the list on the surface and uses it as the bible is an idiot anyways. you probably don't want them buying in your town.
lol, very true. They do state what their criteria is and what the actual data was. What they fail to explain is the formula they used to score the data. It is what it is and all my belly aching isn't going to change it. I just always tend to find these lists fascinating. On the surface my local school's rank really didn't matter to me. It was only when I saw that Gloucester City was ranked higher that it got me wondering.
lol, very true. They do state what their criteria is and what the actual data was. What they fail to explain is the formula they used to score the data. It is what it is and all my belly aching isn't going to change it. I just always tend to find these lists fascinating. On the surface my local school's rank really didn't matter to me. It was only when I saw that Gloucester City was ranked higher that it got me wondering.
i like colleges with the "selectivity" ranking. franklin and marshall got national attention trying to game this system from US News by purposely declining students with 1500-1600 on their SATs. They figured, students of that profile were applying to F&M as a safety school. Declining acceptance to students of that profile raises F&M's "selectivity" ranking.
Also - there's a ranking related to alumni involvement. figuring, more alumni that donate to the school means that the alumni network is stronger, thus, raising the ranking of the college. well, i worked in my school's fundraising department (was one of the best paying on campus jobs!) and we knew that if 95% of alumni gave rather than 90%, that was better. so we would try to get alumni to give even $5. it didn't matter that it barely was worth it once they paid us and the administration of the development group. they counted towards a higher percentage of alumni giving - thus, raising the rank!
stats can be manipulated. these lists are a good starting point, but they don't tell the full story.
Also - there's a ranking related to alumni involvement. figuring, more alumni that donate to the school means that the alumni network is stronger, thus, raising the ranking of the college. well, i worked in my school's fundraising department (was one of the best paying on campus jobs!) and we knew that if 95% of alumni gave rather than 90%, that was better. so we would try to get alumni to give even $5. it didn't matter that it barely was worth it once they paid us and the administration of the development group. they counted towards a higher percentage of alumni giving - thus, raising the rank!
lol, you just reminded about the last letter that I got from BC. The endowment is down to $1.75 billion and they need the almuni's help. Given it really is pretty low per student versus other competing schools, but it never ceases to amaze me when I get a letter or call from them asking me for money because they only have $1.75 billion in the kitty.
school can exceed the NJ state averages in every testing category and still score in the bottom 2/3rds and lower than a school that is way under par.
It's not obvious at all.
It's quite possible for the mean to be well below the median.This is more or less what happens with crime numbers (though in the opposite direction) -- the median crime rate for any given town is much lower than the average.
This is often the case when you have "bad" numbers in more densely populated areas.
Quote:
Certainly a couple ticks above Kingsway, but what other factors drives Haddon Twp. to be ranked a full 100+ places higher on the list?
Just how different are the 99 or so schools in between ?
Quote:
So, looking at the data it seems class size and faculty ratio is a far larger component of the score than actual performance.
If you have two towns whose SAT scores are close, those other numbers will be a tie breaker.
Quote:
Looking at these objectively, I will state that Kingsway and Haddon Twp. are roughly equal with the edge to Haddon Twp., but not 119 places worth of an edge.
A "place" isn't a meaningful unit of measurement. As I pointed out, the difference between the top and bottom of that range might not be all that great. Question: if you ranked them by SAT scores alone, how wide would the inter-quartile range be ? I suspect you'd get something like 1400-1450.
Quote:
Gloucester City has no right to even be listed in the top 200, let alone above a school like Kingsway.
As I pointed out, it would actually gain a few rank points if the list were by SAT score alone, so the way I see it your objection is largely based on a false premise.
Quote:
I stand by my statement that the list is complete BS.
One of the problems with the list is that no doubt the authors approached the problem in much the same way you did -- they use their preconceived ideas to validate their method rather than the other way around.
So while I and many others may not put much stock in these rankings, other people certainly do and they can have real impacts both positive and negative. Just take something as simple as someone looking to buy a house. If they are concerned about school district, they will most likely consult this list to help them make a decision. Maybe someone who would've considered buying my house in Kingsway's district would reconsider because the school isn't "good" according to NJ Monthly.
In my opinion, the primary effect is that it re-enforces existing prejudices about poorer towns.
The main problem I have with the methods things like NJ monthly use is that there is no attempt to establish a baseline.
It is simply assumed that the students are getting those SAT scores because of something the school did, when in fact many of the factors that predict their SAT scores are determined long before the student sets foot in a high school. There is a very good reason that no defense or explanation for this assumption is offered -- it's because it's indefensible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
