2013 Children At Risk school rankings are out (San Antonio, Alamo: campus, best)

[StanStelle]

The 2013 Children At Risk school rankings are out: San Antonio Rankings and Data Files | CHILDREN AT RISK.

[L210]

Interesting. I have never heard of this organization. I thought it was strange how Lee HS was ranked so high on another list. It seems to be in the right place on this one.

[Montirob]

Originally Posted by L210

Interesting. I have never heard of this organization. I thought it was strange how Lee HS was ranked so high on another list. It seems to be in the right place on this one.

Children at Risk has been doing this list for just a few years now (at least in SA), and I have tended to agree with most of their rankings.

Lee may be lower on this list because they separated out ISA (ranked #2). Other lists may combine them together since they kind of share a campus.

I've said it over and over: if Harlandale ISD (a poorer district by far) can have both of their "urban" high schools consistently ranked around the mid-point (a "C"), even above a few NEISD and NISD schools... then why does SAISD keep failing?

[zhugeliang1]

Churchill ranking that high, number 7?!?!? I am like totally done with the Children at Risk list as they don't know what they're doing.

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by zhugeliang1

Churchill ranking that high, number 7?!?!? I am like totally done with the Children at Risk list as they don't know what they're doing.

Look into the methodology. Churchill is obviously a good test taking school. Methodology (2013) | CHILDREN AT RISK

[smuboy86]

Originally Posted by zhugeliang1

Churchill ranking that high, number 7?!?!? I am like totally done with the Children at Risk list as they don't know what they're doing.

I don't know why you think churchill wouldn't be ranked that. It's a pretty strong school.

[pobre]

Originally Posted by Montirob

I've said it over and over: if Harlandale ISD (a poorer district by far) can have both of their "urban" high schools consistently ranked around the mid-point (a "C"), even above a few NEISD and NISD schools... then why does SAISD keep failing?

Because if you keep doing what you've always been doing, you'll keep getting what you've always been getting...

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Montirob

Children at Risk has been doing this list for just a few years now (at least in SA), and I have tended to agree with most of their rankings.

Lee may be lower on this list because they separated out ISA (ranked #2). Other lists may combine them together since they kind of share a campus.

I've said it over and over: if Harlandale ISD (a poorer district by far) can have both of their "urban" high schools consistently ranked around the mid-point (a "C"), even above a few NEISD and NISD schools... then why does SAISD keep failing?

SAISD is a much bigger district. That has an effect. They have the top middle school (YWLA) by this ranking and 3 others in the top 10. They have 4 elementary schools in the top 50 (other districts have more, but not Harlandale).

At the HS level, they have 1 in the top 20 and 3 more in the top 50. What this says is that while as a district SAISD is struggling, it has some significant standouts, as opposed to all being mid-point. There are a few bright As and Bs in the batch.

SAISD's Board has major problems, but there are a few bright lights. This, I believe, has less to do with SAISD and everything to do with the communities in which these schools exist. Our goal is to replicate the success at these few schools on other campuses, one school at a time.

Generally, I'm not a fan of rankings as I am not a strong believer in test scores mattering much. This organization is one of the few that factors in many variables, all of which have an effect on how a school performs.

[L210]

Originally Posted by Montirob

Lee may be lower on this list because they separated out ISA (ranked #2). Other lists may combine them together since they kind of share a campus.

Someone posted this which made it seem as if Lee was the 3rd best high school in NEISD behind Reagan and ISA.
NEISD News | NEISD ranked among best high schools

It might have gotten a silver metal for I don't know what, but its numbers put it at the bottom with Roosevelt.
North East Independent School District | Texas | Best High Schools | US News

[StanStelle]

Originally Posted by Montirob

Children at Risk has been doing this list for just a few years now (at least in SA), and I have tended to agree with most of their rankings.

Lee may be lower on this list because they separated out ISA (ranked #2). Other lists may combine them together since they kind of share a campus.

I've said it over and over: if Harlandale ISD (a poorer district by far) can have both of their "urban" high schools consistently ranked around the mid-point (a "C"), even above a few NEISD and NISD schools... then why does SAISD keep failing?

I believe a goal of this organization is to identify schools that go against the trend that poorer schools have lower performing students on standardized tests. That is why Economically Disadvantaged is the largest variable used in arriving at a score for the rankings: Methodology (2013) | CHILDREN AT RISK

If you look at the Full Details section, you'll see that Harlandale High is composed of 83% Economically Disadvantaged kids yet they score higher and thus their overall score floats them over some NEISD schools. In other words they are doing something right for a "poor" school. SAISD schools also have the high Economically Disadvantaged percentages, but their test scores are lower so their overall score keeps them lower in the rankings.

The affluent schools in NEISD and AHISD have relatively little Economically Disadvantaged percentages (10% and 15% respectively for Reagan HS and Alamo Heights HS) which would normally tend to pull them down in ranking except they score much higher on tests to offset this "disadvantage" and rise near the top. No surprise there - affluent areas tend to score higher. Again this organization's rankings are to pinpoint schools that are higher in ranking despite being poorer.