School ratings and rankings - how important are they? (Philadelphia: houses, top schools)

[pprattle]

I have been pouring over this forum for months, reading everything I can about the different school districts in Montgomery and Chester counties (NJ is not practical for us b/c of family and work proximity). I have looked at about every rating and ranking site there is and read every parent review. I am still left with a question. Just how important are these test results? What will it mean to my children if they are educated in a district that is ranked lower on the lists?

I made up a little chart to compare figures side by side. How does T/E get such good results? Does it come at a price? If we go to Colonial, are my children going to fare that much worse? How come one school does so much better than another? I am overwhelmed by the decision!

Any thoughts? I'd love to hear from parents that made the move to one of the "top schools." Was it worth it? Because of location, we are looking at either T/E or Great Valley. My children are elementary school age gifted and special needs (mild).

Tredyffrin/Easttown-Conestoga
Math SAT: 596
Verbal SAT: 583
Reading Proficieny: 94.90%
Math Proficiency: 90.90%

Great Valley
Math SAT: 536
Verbal SAT: 538
Reading Proficieny: 87.50%
Math Proficiency: 80.70%

Colonial
Math SAT: 527
Verbal SAT: 504
Reading Proficieny: 68.90%
Math Proficiency: 71.00%

Thanks in advance.

[renlouis]

I live in one of the top-ranked school districts in Texas and our local high schools get amazing test results. We are looking at the suburbs in Philadelphia also (move for husband's job) and I'll tell you why I am not overly impressed by high test scores. In my experience (In addition to being a mom of 2, I'm also a psychologist who has worked with many families in our school district - so my experience is not just my own, but what I have heard from others), the high scores come at a high price. That price is in quality of life for your child and family. Extremely high test scores come from 1) "teaching to the test", 2) lots and lots of practice (=lots and lots of homework), and 3) pressure with a capital P on the kids. Here's why I have a problem with those three things. 1) when kids are "taught to the test" - ALL of the focus in their classrooms is on covering what will be on the test. If there is something else that that teacher thinks would be interesting for the kids to learn - there is NO TIME. The kids don't learn to love learning or to initiate learning on their own because it's all driven by time - "gotta get everything covered before the test". Individual teachers performance is evaluated by how well their students do on the test. Alot of pressure on the teacher, which flows downhill to the students. I know many teachers in our district who don't like their jobs anymore because there is so much pressure for high test scores. I also know teachers who have quit for this reason. 2) Kids in our district are overwhelmed by crazy amounts of homework - it's not unusual for a middle or high school student to have 3-4 hours of homework on an average evening. There is a subtle pressure (pre- and AP classes are weighted higher than "regular classes", so your A in a regular class is worth a middle B in a pre-AP class, as far as class rankings go) to take pre-AP and AP classes which pile it on even more - . We could not put up our Christmas tree as a family this year because my 7th grade daughter was so swamped with homework and required school activities leading up to Christmas. I pulled her out of band because of this. (And she is not taking all pre-AP classes) 3) Pressure - it is both subtle and overt, as covered in #1 and #2. I could go on and on about the negative things that come with being in a super high-achieving district. I won't even go into the pressures on kids in extracurriculars such as band, once they get in high school (for instance, our marching band sometimes practiced until 9:30 or 10 pm - and they eventually won the state band competition, but at what cost???)

So...........when looking at schools I am keeping in mind that those schools with super-high test scores may be doing things WRONG as well as doing things right. Life is full of trade-offs and I'm glad that when we move I will get a chance to pick another district that isn't geared toward getting the HIGHEST test scores, or winning states in all the extracurriculars. I want more of a balance for my kids this time.

[thesixth]

Also remember that with standardized testing, socioeconomic background has an impact on scores received. I.E. if your parents are from a higher income bracket, the child's test scores are usually higher.
T/E and Great Valley are probably more homogenous in terms of higher income level and/or education level of parents than Colonial which may have an lower avg income or education level for the community.

[orrmobl]

T/E also has great programs for kids with learning disablilites. While I won't deny there is pressure in some high performing districts, I like to think there are also great opportunities as well. Conestoga High is one of only 2 high schools in the top 100 in the country. I think there is more going on at the school than just teaching to the test. There are a ton of extracurricular activities as well...and motivated parents certainly help as well.

I've heard Radnor High is a pressure cooker; I've read that some parents in T/E schools shell out big bucks for SAT tutors, but I don't think all of them do or that the pressure there is like what is going on at Radnor or Lower Merion...

Great Valley is a few steps down so if you are really that worried about T/E, it would be a great choice, as would Unionville-Chadds Ford, Downingtown, Strath Haven, Rose Tree Media, West Chester.

[sbhubbell]

I think it totally depends on your kid which is the best environment for them. Some kids can't handle the kind of pressure that exists in high test score schools. Some (like me) thrive under that kind of pressure and need high standards and high competition as motivators. Also the same school can be a totally different experience for two kids with different personalities in the same family.

So my attitude is, you can't possibly really know what's best until you move and try it, you can only do what you think is best. So for me, top test scores mean a lot. Until I see otherwise from my kid, I want them in an environment where they are surrounded by the brightest and best. They don't have to be like me...they don't have to be super elite educated intellectuals...but I want them to at least be given the opportunity to acheive academically, especially since in theory they are genetically more likely to be academics than jocks or artists.

Of course, at the first sign of distress from too much pressure, I will reevaluate!

[JHG722]

Originally Posted by orrmobl

T/E also has great programs for kids with learning disablilites. While I won't deny there is pressure in some high performing districts, I like to think there are also great opportunities as well. Conestoga High is one of only 2 high schools in the top 100 in the country. I think there is more going on at the school than just teaching to the test. There are a ton of extracurricular activities as well...and motivated parents certainly help as well.

I've heard Radnor High is a pressure cooker; I've read that some parents in T/E schools shell out big bucks for SAT tutors, but I don't think all of them do or that the pressure there is like what is going on at Radnor or Lower Merion...

Great Valley is a few steps down so if you are really that worried about T/E, it would be a great choice, as would Unionville-Chadds Ford, Downingtown, Strath Haven, Rose Tree Media, West Chester.

I never experienced any pressure at LM, and as far as 'teaching the test', that was never the case in my experience at LM. I have friends in all levels of the intellectual spectrum from LM: From Penn/Yale/Northwestern to college dropout/no college with everything in between. Radnor is much worse in this respect.

[pprattle]

OK - thanks for the input. I haven't really thought seriously about the Wallingford/Strathmore/Media region, probably because it's beyond the radius of where my extended family has settled. But it sounds like that area would suit us -- more liberal, open to newcomers, houses with character, a walkable downtown, private yards, good schools. Are there any cons to the area/school district I should be aware of?

Also, in the T/E - GV school district, can anyone recommend nice developments to drive through to scope out the area. We're probably looking in the $450k+- price range.

We may end up staying where we are - Colonial. I can imagine the SD will continue to get stronger with the influx of new people to the area.

[sbhubbell]

No cons as far as school district goes for Wallingford/Swathmore or Media. Both great districts, I grew up in Media. As far as TE or Great Valley goes...there's a nice development I like that I think is zoned to GV called Malvern Hunt, near the Exton Mall. I don't really know the names of too many specific developments, but there are lots of nice ones. There's one at the intersection of 401 and Phoenixville Pike that looks nice, that would be really close to the GV High School. For TE there are several nice developments down 252 heading towards Newtown Square, I can't remember the names or the roads, but in the area of Aronomink golf course. My memory sucks, I went to private school and used to know people that lived ALL over the main line.

[rocafeller05]

Since your talking about a general area what are the Aston area schools like? Good rankings?

[sbhubbell]

I would advise against Aston. Higher crime, lower income, not as good schools.