Best suburb to live in while working in the Illinois Medical District area in Chicago (Aurora: sale, credit)

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by chet everett

I think the Daily Herald was/is unnecessarily alarmist in their coverage of the data about the percentage of students that perform well on the ACT as a measure of college preparedness.

It doesn't seem that the Daily Herald is being alarmist given the following data points from Illinois 2006 Higher Ed statistics:

• 58.9% of four-year college students earn their Bachelor's degree within 6 years.
• 24.9% of Associates degree seeking students earn their degree within 3 years.

When you cite "district wide" numbers this is misleading. Look at district wide data for D299 (Chicago) and then try to explain the results of Northside, Payton, Whitney Young or the kids Lincoln Park High in the International Baccalaureate Program.

It's significantly less misleading when a district only has one high school, as Elmhurst does. How many high schools does CPS have?

You did need not experience just a huge surge in kids getting to a school under prepared, you also can have a dramatic fall off in the well prepared and even middle performing kids because of shifts of demographics (another topic I am well equipped to discuss should you care to).

What kind of a demographic shift did Elmhurst have that resulted in York going from better than Hinsdale to slightly above the suburban average?

Couple that fall off with resources that did not keep pace with other towns and you have a perfect storm that caused results to suffer.

That doesn't make sense. Elmhurst's school district spent more per student over the same time period in the Unit Districts chart than the other three Unit School Districts which had higher college readiness percentages.
Attachment 18021

Any school that has a cadre of 25 National Merit award winners is not the academic wasteland you seem to want to believe: http://www.lwvelmhurst.org/observerschool102207.pdf (broken link) {I'll save you the trouble and point out that are several other schools (including Hinsdale Central & LT in the OP's original targeted towns) that had more

Speaks for itself.

[chet everett]

Some aspects of Elmhurst fit very well with the profile of post-war "Levittown" boom.
Apparently you did not read the link that I posted, prefering to have your stockpile against D205 allow me to review:
Massive growth saw a huge spike in boomers and then massive structural changes that were undertaken in 1974 (when the Unit district itself was formed) shook the district.
In the face of the "baby bust" as boomers and their kids moved away D205 closed seven schools. The closing of those schools resulted in many attendance boundaries being redrawn and further alienated the shrinking student population and their parents. The massive structure of York High itself (built as sixteen separate additions over 50 years) had much deferred maintenance. Coupled with the loss in attendance that resulted from the earlier 'budding off' of other schools within the political boundaries of York Township and the peculiar redistricting of portions of Oak Brook that lie in York Township to Downers Grove North or Hinsdale Central meant there was less "raw talent" in the district than in earlier times. This created a negative feedback loop, as fewer top students attended there were more parents reluctant to send their kids to York. This lack of support among parents of school age children, coupled with somewhat natural lack of support that comes when a town ages and is left with retirees on fixed incomes led to the defeat of several referenda that would have done much to strengthen the buildings, staff and curriculum of D205.

Adding to these problem was the growth of Immacualte Conception High School and later by Montini High School -- the depressed yet still cavernous state of the York facilities and the relatively low tuition of the Catholic schools drew parents who wanted a more personal experience for their kids -- again drawing kids disproportionately from the upper reaches due to the selective nature of parochial schools.

Into this unstable mix stir the influx of Hispanics into DuPage County who came looking for homes closer to where they had grown accustomed to working at low wage jobs. While many of these folks were better off than the Hispanics settling in Chicago or Aurora they still had the disadvantage of language and strained a Unit District struggling to meet the growing mandates for special education and other issues like ADA.
It gets worse -- while at one time Elmhurst was home to many teachers, some of whom worked in D205, but many others who merely sent their own kids there, the very clout of those teachers convinced the Illinois Legislature to authorize several rounds of generous "teacher early retirement buyouts". In addition to the lose of talent and parental/community support that went with these retirements a large percentage of these now retired teachers do what a lot of retirees do -- they moved away. Many of the folks that bought homes from these retirees didn't care a whole lot about the schools AS LONG as they were safer than the areas they were leaving behind on the EAST SIDE of the expressways ('safer' in this case IS a code word for "less AfricanAmerican"). Yes Virginia, white flight HURTS the place that people flee TOWARD as well as the places left behind...

When one looks AT JUST THE UNIT DISTRICTS THAT YOU AND THE DAILY HERALD focus on it ought to be crystal clear that THOSE districts faced entirely different challenges than D205. White flight into Wheaton-Warrenville? I think not. Boom/bust cycle in Lisle? Nope, it is still growing. Ditto for Aurora/Naperville. Frankly the success of Unit Districts is highly questionable -- yes, they tend to be adminstratively less expensive, with just one school board/superintendent, but the success is also harder to come by, at least based on the empirical evidence of Unit Districts that includes the less than stellar Westmont and, as your own chart shows, Lisle Unit districts, lets not forget the huge notorious U299 of Chicago and the similarly challenged U46 of Elgin.

In this context it may be seen as a rare achievement that D205 has as much success as it has AND that D203 & D204 in Naperville/ Aurora are not bigger train wrecks...

Your obsession with the alarmist statements of the Daily Herald toward the time spent working toward degrees is not all indicative of any unique problem at any one high school -- doesn't it make more sense to say that MOST high schools probably ought to do more to prepare ALL students to complete college OR PERHAPS colleges ought to do more to ensure that students do not spend an excessive amount of time working on a degree. Of course the latter assumes that it would be in the interest of colleges to encourage students to spend AS LITTLE money/time at their institutions. I see a major problem there...

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Coupled with the loss in attendance that resulted from the earlier 'budding off' of other schools within the political boundaries of York Township and the peculiar redistricting of portions of Oak Brook that lie in York Township to Downers Grove North or Hinsdale Central meant there was less "raw talent" in the district than in earlier times. This created a negative feedback loop, as fewer top students attended there were more parents reluctant to send their kids to York.

Into this unstable mix stir the influx of Hispanics into DuPage County who came looking for homes closer to where they had grown accustomed to working at low wage jobs. While many of these folks were better off than the Hispanics settling in Chicago or Aurora they still had the disadvantage of language and strained a Unit District struggling to meet the growing mandates for special education and other issues like ADA.
It gets worse -- while at one time Elmhurst was home to many teachers, some of whom worked in D205, but many others who merely sent their own kids there, the very clout of those teachers convinced the Illinois Legislature to authorize several rounds of generous "teacher early retirement buyouts". In addition to the lose of talent and parental/community support that went with these retirements a large percentage of these now retired teachers do what a lot of retirees do -- they moved away. Many of the folks that bought homes from these retirees didn't care a whole lot about the schools AS LONG as they were safer than the areas they were leaving behind on the EAST SIDE of the expressways ('safer' in this case IS a code word for "less AfricanAmerican"). Yes Virginia, white flight HURTS the place that people flee TOWARD as well as the places left behind...

Frankly the success of Unit Districts is highly questionable -- yes, they tend to be adminstratively less expensive, with just one school board/superintendent, but the success is also harder to come by, at least based on the empirical evidence of Unit Districts that includes the less than stellar Westmont and, as your own chart shows, Lisle Unit districts, lets not forget the huge notorious U299 of Chicago and the similarly challenged U46 of Elgin.

In this context it may be seen as a rare achievement that D205 has as much success as it has AND that D203 &D204 in Naperville/ Aurora are not bigger train wrecks...

The advantage that Unit districts do have, as you can see with Naperville D203, Indian Prairie D204, and Wheaton D200 (the latter of which is far more demographically diverse and more academically successful than Elmhurst D205 --- Wheaton D200's demographics include 16.9% low-income and 5.7% limited-English-proficient, whereas Elmhurst D205's demographics are 5.1% low-income and 2.6% limited-English proficient), is that they are far more able to effectively articulate their curriculum vertically. They have full control over where, academically, their students are by the time they enter high school. Separate K-8 and high school districts disadvantage those high schools because their is no articulation. They get what they get, and have minimal involvement in the K-8 districts' students' academic preparation levels.

I do have to say... I didn't see all of what you posted included in the 'Welcome to Elmhurst District 205 link.'

Some of the information you've provided is surprising because that's the first time I've seen Elmhurst characterized as a town where families of higher achieving students actively sought to remove their kids from the public schools.

The lack of resources stance is also puzzling because according to your link, Elmhurst voters have passed 5 out of 6 school district referendums since 1987 - several years before the students studied in the DH series even entered kindergarten.

Your obsession with the alarmist statements of the Daily Herald toward the time spent working toward degrees is not all indicative of any unique problem at any one high school -- doesn't it make more sense to say that MOST high schools probably ought to do more to prepare ALL students to complete college OR PERHAPS colleges ought to do more to ensure that students do not spend an excessive amount of time working on a degree. Of course the latter assumes that it would be in the interest of colleges to encourage students to spend AS LITTLE money/time at their institutions. I see a major problem there...

College readiness is important information for students and parents who will need to take out student/parent loans to pay for a college education, which is increasing in cost every year.

The information on what percentage of college students complete their Bachelor's and Associate's degrees within 6 years and 3 years, respectively, comes from The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, not the Daily Herald. The fact that the percentages of students who complete their degrees -- even within lengthier than traditional time parameters that add 50% more time for degree completion -- is less than 60% and 25%, respectively, makes it more important than ever for families to scrutinize high schools' college readiness percentages.

As far as colleges and universities prolonging graduation times to possibly increase revenue, that is not true in a climate in which we demographically have several years of the highest numbers of graduating high school senior college applicants ever seen. If anything, college deans have called in students who are taking a long time to graduate and telling them they have to finish their degree or leave. They need the facilities for the regular influx of admitted students. Their housing, facility, etc., resources are not limitless.

Yes, I do believe that all high schools need to do more to adequately prepare students who wish to pursue a college education. Until that happens, for families of children who intend to go to college, comparing college readiness percentages is an important factor that we have to consider.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

...The advantage that Unit districts do have, ... is that they are far more able to effectively articulate their curriculum vertically. They have full control over where, academically, their students are by the time they enter high school. Separate K-8 and high school districts disadvantage those high schools because their is no articulation. They get what they get, and have minimal involvement in the K-8 districts' students' academic preparation levels.

Simply untrue. In successful districts that do not have a Unit District there IS significant coordination with feeder districts. The results in Illinois are clear on this -- in non-unit districts from New Trier to Stevenson to Glenbrook to Maine South to Hinsdale Central there there is no doubt that success, no matter how you measure it, is greater than in any Unit District. The coordination is both planned / overt, with both the elementary and high school districts eager to match expectations in regular meetings and more subtle with the 'competition' of the various parent organizations at neighboring feeder districts providing suggestions "up" to the school board/administration. Frankly having sat through Unit District School Board meetings it is a wonder that everyone does not collapse in tears of insanity -- you literally will have to face an angry gaggle of moms that are complaining that too many kindergartners are eating boogers and the next agenda item is a note of appreciation to some major corporation that donated an old electron microscope for the kids in AP Physics. THAT is coordination! (the secret to why some unit districts succeed is in the other thread).

Any parent that is even involved peripherally in their child's education would not stand for lack of coordination. It just is not acceptable. The property tax link is a strong incentive for any concerned parent to make sure that EVERY district that they pay into, regardless of usage, is aligned. It is frankly EASIER for a board that can focus more resources (Asst Superintend, Department Heads) on FEWER schools for SHORTER lengths of time to make this coordinated decisions and work hand-in-hand with other stakeholders...

I do have to say... I didn't see all of what you posted included in the 'Welcome to Elmhurst District 205 link.'

Apology accepted. I don't expect every other interested party to be as well informed about the history that gets schools to where they are now, but when information is available it is good to avail one's self of it. The history of many DuPage schools in less than pleasant. Many towns still have "scars" from fights that happened decades ago. I can literally tell you of families that turned their backs on each other for changes that came out of school redistricting fights. Due to the long career and low mobility that is characteristic of teachers hardly any campus has a teacher older than about 40 who could not tell the same tales of other schools. School board members never last all that long, but the decisions they make have implications that last for decades. Those impacts are often felt beyond the school. In towns like Westmont and Lisle there is no doubt that their economic fate was very much cast by decisions to form Unit Districts long before many of the PARENTS of current students were born...

Some of the information you've provided is surprising because that's the first time I've seen Elmhurst characterized as a town where families of higher achieving students actively sought to remove their kids from the public schools.

It is not just "grudge factor" -- the same sort of thing happens to a lesser extent even now. Ask any parent that has a high performing kid in not just scholastic matters but sports or music -- they shop districts to try and give their kids a leg up. When some of the important families decided the grass was greener down in Hinsdale Central it was a huge shift.
The impact of this can be extreme especially when, even in large schools, there were almost "dynasties" of families that consistently performed at top levels in class, sports and sometimes both. This "prominent family" effect was more pronounced when the norm was also much bigger families. Lots of Irish and Italian families from Elmhurst had those really big 6+ kids that are pretty uncommon these days. Heck even more "Protestant" Wheaton had fewer of those families... Though the County seat has been Wheaton since way back when they raided the courthouse from Naperville, the "seat of Power" in DuPage was ELMHURST. Turn back the clock to when Knuepfer lost his grip on the County Board and that was like the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem for the Choosen People...

The lack of resources stance is also puzzling because according to your link, Elmhurst voters have passed 5 out of 6 school district referendums since 1987 - several years before the students studied in the DH series even entered kindergarten.

I must again object to any suggestion that the Daily Herald series be characterized as a "study" of students -- it is a flawed and imprecise compilation of statistics. Frankly any District that participated should not have, further due to the ammunition it gives cranks it will make it harder for any unbiased source to ever get even that minimal level of cooperation. A main reason I called the series less than useless (see other thread). That said I do have an explanation that I believe is ugly but accurate -- I hate to throw 'em under the bus, but when I'm talking "resources" I ain't just talking money -- it was staff. The teachers that were around when Elmhurst was at its peak aren't just legends, many of them were incredibly talented. Elmhurst had a pipeline (through Elmhurst College) to the east coast schools and actively recruited incredible talent from education schools across the country. I personally knew a "vocational arts" (shop) teacher that went to Cornell on the GI Bill -- this guy was superior to the kind of person that works at Google or Intel today -- he loved kids and got students that thought they'd turn a lathe to push themselves and earn masters degrees in engineering a IIT or UIUC and develop the cell phone! You cannot believe the talent that they had. I literally think New Trier copied York's recruiting tactics for years. The exodus that happened when these guys retired could not have happened in a more dramatic way -- within about 5 years people that were "All Stars" at the top of their game were replaced by cheap newbies from a pool of kids in education schools that was nothing like the men that went to college on the GI Bill. The seasoning process for administrators is just brutal. Way way too many of them were "learning on the job". Those referenda paid largely to shore up the physical plant -- the talent is so much slower to replace...

College readiness is important information for students and parents who will need to take out student/parent loans to pay for a college education, which is increasing in cost every year.

Completely agree. A noble cause. A great, if quixotic quest. (see other thread)

The information on what percentage of college students complete their Bachelor's and Associate's degrees within 6 years and 3 years, respectively, comes from The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, not the Daily Herald. The fact that the percentages of students who complete their degrees -- even within lengthier than traditional time parameters that add 50% more time for degree completion -- is less than 60% and 25%, respectively, makes it more important than ever for families to scrutinize high schools' college readiness percentages.

BUZZZT -- don't you see the problem? You are trying to correlated info from a COMPLETELY UNRELEATED STUDY to the pile of number the Daily Herald served up. No can do. If McDonalds releases their quarterly sales numbers as showing a rise in profits and the Surgeon General releases a study that says more kids are chubby there is SIMPLY NO DATA TO suggest that McDonald is MAKING the kids fat! -- It might be Wendys. Or it might be forums on the 'net Or it might be pharmaceuticals in the water or maybe even side effects of the Blue Eyed Devils' Plot to give all the dark skins babies AIDS ...

As far as colleges and universities prolonging graduation times to possibly increase revenue,...Their housing, facility, etc., resources are not limitless.

Really, you think? Have you SEEN the size of the private schools endowments Did you notice how Blago was bending over backward to throw money at NIU after their tragedy? Did you notice how like marionettes the pranksters at Malcom X made their administrators dance? Who is really in charge?

Yes, I do believe that all high schools need to do more to adequately prepare students who wish to pursue a college education. Until that happens, for families of children who intend to go to college, comparing college readiness percentages is an important factor that we have to consider.

Right on my brother. Now go try and find some data that is useful. Believe me if there was a simple universal factor that would say "student x at high school y will be better prepared than student w at school z" the world would embrace it. Just does not exist. You are left with some kinda-sorta lumped together data that kinda sorta says that MAYBE your housing dollar/taxes is better HERE than THERE, but maybe not. Taking it to the other thread...

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The results in Illinois are clear on this -- in non-unit districts from New Trier to Stevenson to Glenbrook to Maine South to Hinsdale Central there there is no doubt that success, no matter how you measure it, is greater than in any Unit District.

This contradicts Naperville's Unit district performing second only to Stevenson in the DH's comparison and outperforming Maine Township D207. Among the DuPage County school districts included in the DH's study, three unit districts - Naperville, Wheaton, and Indian Prairie outperformed the 5 high school districts for which data was available. In fact, they outperformed an overwhelming majority of the unit/high school districts included in the DH study across parts of six counties.

Apology accepted. I don't expect every other interested party to be as well informed about the history that gets schools to where they are now, but when information is available it is good to avail one's self of it.

That wasn't an apology. I was commenting on how the information about the 'Levittown' effect and the bright flight out of Elmhurst's public schools that you described in your post wasn't included in Elmhurst D205's welcome page.

Ask any parent that has a high performing kid in not just scholastic matters but sports or music -- they shop districts to try and give their kids a leg up. When some of the important families decided the grass was greener down in Hinsdale Central it was a huge shift.

This is why families who prioritize education, who are in a position to move, would 'shift' to Lyons Township HS instead of York given those two choices - which was the point in my recommendation to the OP.

I must again object to any suggestion that the Daily Herald series be characterized as a "study" of students -- it is a flawed and imprecise compilation of statistics. Frankly any District that participated should not have, further due to the ammunition it gives cranks it will make it harder for any unbiased source to ever get even that minimal level of cooperation.

What are you talking about? The DH study consisted of information that is publicly available and accessed either through public school districts' published information or via FOIA requests.

All the included districts were compared on the same terms. It is what it is. College readiness percentages, spending per student, and debt load (which affects property tax bills) are some of the most important data points coming out of the DH's comparisons. These are all information points that families look at when comparing communities. If you don't like the information it contains, don't use it.

A main reason I called the series less than useless (see other thread). That said I do have an explanation that I believe is ugly but accurate -- I hate to throw 'em under the bus, but when I'm talking "resources" I ain't just talking money -- it was staff. The teachers that were around when Elmhurst was at its peak aren't just legends, many of them were incredibly talented. Elmhurst had a pipeline (through Elmhurst College) to the east coast schools and actively recruited incredible talent from education schools across the country. I personally knew a "vocational arts" (shop) teacher that went to Cornell on the GI Bill -- this guy was superior to the kind of person that works at Google or Intel today -- he loved kids and got students that thought they'd turn a lathe to push themselves and earn masters degrees in engineering a IIT or UIUC and develop the cell phone! You cannot believe the talent that they had. I literally think New Trier copied York's recruiting tactics for years. The exodus that happened when these guys retired could not have happened in a more dramatic way -- within about 5 years people that were "All Stars" at the top of their game were replaced by cheap newbies from a pool of kids in education schools that was nothing like the men that went to college on the GI Bill. The seasoning process for administrators is just brutal. Way way too many of them were "learning on the job". Those referenda paid largely to shore up the physical plant -- the talent is so much slower to replace...

Wouldn't you think all of that would contribute to the DH results? Apparently, it has. This explains, though doesn't change, the outcome - York is a slightly above average suburban high school, for all of the reasons you've mentioned.

BUZZZT -- don't you see the problem? You are trying to correlated info from a COMPLETELY UNRELEATED STUDY to the pile of number the Daily Herald served up. No can do. If McDonalds releases their quarterly sales numbers as showing a rise in profits and the Surgeon General releases a study that says more kids are chubby there is SIMPLY NO DATA TO suggest that McDonald is MAKING the kids fat! -- It might be Wendys. Or it might be forums on the 'net Or it might be pharmaceuticals in the water or maybe even side effects of the Blue Eyed Devils' Plot to give all the dark skins babies AIDS ...

I'm not correlating anything. I'm evaluating one data point - school district college readiness percentages - within the context of a broader point of information - overall percentages of college degree completion. It would be foolish for parents to disregard school districts' college readiness percentages and just hope that their kid isn't one of the 40% of four-year college students who don't earn their Bachelor's degree or one of the 75% of Associate's degree seeking students who don't earn their degree.

[chet everett]

To borrow from a famous President, "there you go again".

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

his contradicts Naperville's Unit district performing second only to Stevenson in the DH's comparison and outperforming Maine Township D207. Among the DuPage County school districts ... Naperville, Wheaton, and Indian Prairie outperformed the 5 high school districts for which data was available.

Please read what I posted, not what you want to believe:

Originally Posted by chet everett

The results in Illinois are clear on this -- in non-unit districts from New Trier to Stevenson to Glenbrook to Maine South to Hinsdale Central there is no doubt that success, no matter how you measure it, is greater than in any Unit District.

Glenbrook and its feeder districts (27,28,30,34) New Trier (feeders 36,37,38,39) Maine South (which would come from elementary D64), Hinsdale Central (from Butler 53 and Hinsdale 181 and some other minor additions) don't show up in the data from Daily Herald -- if they did they'd BLOW AWAY those Unit District's high schools. Stevenson is HEAD AND SHOULDERS more successful than any unit district -- that is in the Daily Herald data...

And about that data:

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

College readiness percentages, spending per student, and debt load (which affects property tax bills) are some of the most important data points coming out of the DH's comparisons. These are all information points that families look at when comparing communities.

Let's be frank, I know that the people who work in the various school district offices are absolutely reluctant to send data out to anyone, as it almost always gets misrepresented, (AS I BELIEVE YOU ARE DOING).

I am sure that schools do make internal calculations as to their own debt load; this data is somewhat important to the ability to borrow. It is not at all a direct measure of what the property tax rate will be and I can honestly say that I have NEVER in 40+ years of real estate transactions heard ANY family ask about it nor do I think that ANY one that is not a chief school business officer or outside bond counsel understand the significance it might have on a district...


Despite what you say about this data being "freely available" this is CLEARLY NOT THE CASE. Either the Daily Herald sloppily did not select the data from the districts/schools I listed OR the districts WISELY found there to be no compelling case to grant a FOIA request (which is understandable given the negativity it seems to engender) OR the Daily Herald did some "cherry picking" to sensationalize the outcome. What do YOU think the explanation is?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Glenbrook and its feeder districts (27,28,30,34) New Trier (feeders 36,37,38,39) Maine South (which would come from elementary D64), Hinsdale Central (from Butler 53 and Hinsdale 181 and some other minor additions) don't show up in the data from Daily Herald -- if they did they'd BLOW AWAY those Unit District's high schools. Stevenson is HEAD AND SHOULDERS more successful than any unit district -- that is in the Daily Herald data...

Let's look at the DH data and average ACT composite scores...

Naperville D203 - 51% ready for college - ACT 25.1
Stevenson D125 - 53% ready for college - ACT 25.3

Is Stevenson better? I think so, particularly when factors besides college readiness are concerned. But, is Stevenson 'head and shoulders' above Naperville D203? No.

Hinsdale Central's college readiness data was not included in DH's series, but let's look at their ACT composite score - 25.4 - slightly better than Naperville D203, but certainly not enough to 'blow away' Naperville's high schools.

New Trier's ACT composite blows away every other suburban public high school. No argument there.

But, ...Maine South? ...Maybe you should check the ISBE data on that.

Let's be frank, I know that the people who work in the various school district offices are absolutely reluctant to send data out to anyone, as it almost always gets misrepresented, (AS I BELIEVE YOU ARE DOING).

ACT sets the College Readiness Benchmarks, not me, and they utilized actual first year college course grades from over 90,000 college students to determine those Benchmarks. And, public school districts must make their indebtedness information available to the public.

I am sure that schools do make internal calculations as to their own debt load; this data is somewhat important to the ability to borrow. It is not at all a direct measure of what the property tax rate will be and I can honestly say that I have NEVER in 40+ years of real estate transactions heard ANY family ask about it nor do I think that ANY one that is not a chief school business officer or outside bond counsel understand the significance it might have on a district...

The indebtedness of a district impacts property taxes. That's why school districts need to pass referendums to issue bonds. I'm surprised no one in your experience has ever asked about this.

Despite what you say about this data being "freely available" this is CLEARLY NOT THE CASE. Either the Daily Herald sloppily did not select the data from the districts/schools I listed OR the districts WISELY found there to be no compelling case to grant a FOIA request (which is understandable given the negativity it seems to engender) OR the Daily Herald did some "cherry picking" to sensationalize the outcome. What do YOU think the explanation is?

I think the explanation is exactly the one they gave, "The Daily Herald reviewed ACT College Readiness reports from the 36 high school districts in our coverage area."

True to their word, the Daily Herald published the actual data from those 36 districts.

[chet everett]

This is, as I said, a very esoteric subject. Due in part to the Property Tax Cap, but more importantly the Illinois School Code there are really awful rules about how much a school can borrow:

105*ILCS*5/*School+Code.

105*ILCS*5/*School+Code.

105*ILCS*5/*School+Code.

Clear? Gosh I wonder why homeowners NEVER ask about that...

Do home buyers ask "how big is my tax bill gonna be"? You bet, all the time. Generally it'll be close to what the previous owners paid and THAT is important and easy to understand. You can thank the property tax cap for that. Yeah.

Now the question of "can schools here borrow more AND have little or no impact" on taxes MIGHT be useful, but again NEVER have I heard this question. People ask what may be a simpler question "are the schools going to have get more taxes?" -- but this has nothing do with what a homeowners tax bill is going to be. And frankly it is not by itself a very intelligent question...

If a school district converts older bond at a higher rate to new bonds at low rate (which is still pretty common even with the tightening of consumer credit) the district ends up with more cash with no change in its need to get more tax money.

If a district has a large debt there is a pretty good bet it built something expensive recently. If it has no debt it is a good bet that it recently paid off a bond issue -- in either case there is NO WAY to predict what the impact will be on individual's property tax bill. Many districts choose to collect significantly more taxes than they need to for current expenses for a variety of reasons. Some district pay off a debt early to plan for an even bigger bond issue down the road. No longer is the municipal/educational bond market the simple it used to be. The CDO and liquidity facilities are making new kinds of bond issues and debt refinancing available. Some of these can significantly improve the financial picture of a district WITHOUT having any immediate impact on taxes.

To determine the impact that a district's move to increase money flowing into the district will have on any taxpayer a whole list of data must be known:

The current levy of the district.

The current levy of other taxing bodies that show up on the same homeowner`s tax bill.

Future levy amount from the district and other taxing bodies.

The total current assessed valuation of all the properties in all the taxing districts as billed for the previous levy

The new total assessed valuation of all the properties in all the taxing districts for the future levy.

Any changes in property exclusions such as TIFs

Any changes in tax additions such as special service areas

The current assessed valuation of the home owners property

The new assessed valuation of the homeowners property

The old and new EAV equalization factors.

Any change in property tax exemption status for the homeowner

And maybe a few that even I have forgotten.,,.

Believe me this is NOT something that can be summarized in one number, a change in numbers, or any simple ratio.

To get anything that is meaningful I am quite confidant that what you'd really need to do is compare the rate of change in a district to the rate of change to the total change in assessed valuations. This is multivariate calculus. Even then, you'd need to factor for school districts that either have population growth or expansion / improvement of services...
Do I think that people should pay more and get less? Of course not. Looking at the indebtedness of school districts in isolation , or even with some artificial window into "college readyness" is not a helpful framework to determine that. Really, its just not. There is absolutely NO correlation to the numbers on that chart to what home owners in those town pay in taxes. NONE. It is solely a means for the Illinois State School Fianance Authority to have some data on schools cash flow & debt. Nothing more.

If a school district embarks on an improvement plan of any kind there needs to be some way to measure where it is successful. The best way that I know is to see what happens with property values relative to similar adjacent areas. This is one way of incorporating that rate of change in assessed valuation that I mentioned above. If you had data like that it might be useful. The data that the Daily Herald cobbled together is worse than useless. I have no idea if the debt than any school in 1989 (or any other year) is important. I have no idea if the average daily attendance in 1989 (or any other year) in relevant or important. Again, find some data that clearly shows a trend and MAYBE you have something useful. Would it have beyond the capabilities of the crew at the Daily Herald to make a frackin' GRAPH that detailed a decade or so of numbers? Would it have been instructive to see a perhaps an attendance line trend that is flat with an indebtedness trend that is rising. You bet it would. Somehow I don't think that is something that would be uncovered in ANY of these towns. Sure, there are going to be points in time when the directions are heading in opposite numbers but without supporting data maybe it was for something that some schools got whacked by -- an asbestos abatement program? an Americans with Disabilities compliance problem? Maybe a damned tornado ripped up the roof or worse... Are you going to tell those kids to suck it up so that the debt trend doesn't rise? Hardly. Believe me, you are living on a dream if you think that debt is bad thing when it comes to education finance. Schools get used harder than pretty much any other kind of building. You have pools and labs that need to be maintained. The lifespan of most schools ought to infinite as long their is adequate maintenance.
If there is "no debt" there is almost certainly an imbalance in between current operating expenses and the future maintenance needs.

I'd love to find any meaningful data about the trend of success for all schools that a town has. Sadly those trends are not directly comparable.
How long has the ACT been doing this "college success" calculation. Lets see the trend line on that too. And why wait to track this progress (or lack there of...) until kids are in 11th grade or whenever they're tackling the ACT. Could the Daily Herald find NOTHING to use in elementary schools? I am pretty sure that most people are vocal that there are TOO many standardized tests given to kids in nearly all age categories, not too few. And your ballyhooed "coordination" of Unit districts? Really now, the mobility factor and growth rate of many of these schools suggest there are not whole bunch of kids together in the same pot for 13 years....


Here's my guess. The DH writers are people just like you. They have kids. They probably think they live in "the best" area. MOST people feel that way about where they live. Heck think about how you tell people thinking of move near you "MAN am I getting a great deal -- good schools, lower taxes. WOO HOO, I'm a genius you can be too" you probably tell a different story to folks that have kids that you'd think drag down the schools "man the prices are outa sight by me, I can barely afford, you can look but your money will further some place else". How about what you'd say to somebody that seems like they'd be a good neighbor but are thinking of another town "It is up to you. I think you'll be throwing your money away"... SO the writers compile some data. It almost certainly support their decision to live where they do.

And there is nothing wrong with that, but no new "magic" either.

[InformedConsent]

It is important to know how much debt a school district already has, the spending per student, and academic achievement - including college/work readiness levels when considering where to move.

School districts that have amassed a debt load way out of proportion with their enrollment/attendance increase over the same amount of time would raise questions as to the competence of district leadership, planning, fiscal responsibility, etc. Were there extenuating circumstances that demanded a disproportionately large community investment, for example? The DH series rightly questions the fact that many school districts seem to treat their taxpayers as if they were an endless source of increasing amounts of money, without showing similar concerns for and effort to improve upon the surprisingly low levels of academic achievement most of the districts are reporting.

York just happens to be a good example of this, as Elmhurst's school district debt increased to over $18,000 per student in a district where 92% of graduating students continue on to college but only 30% are adequately prepared for such. Add to that further research which shows that they claim "academic excellence, improving standardized test scores" (your link) when neither is actually true.

The Elmhurst school district seems to be prioritizing building/renovating "beautiful classic collegiate gothic architecture" (your link) over providing an academically excellent education - unless there's a legitimate reason why the students in a town whose median home sales price is over $400,000 (Naperville's median home sales price is $330,500 - Wheaton's is $320,000 - source: Chicago Tribune/pricepulse) are underachieving compared to communities with similar, or even less advantageous, demographics.

How long has the ACT been doing this "college success" calculation. Lets see the trend line on that too. And why wait to track this progress (or lack there of...) until kids are in 11th grade or whenever they're tackling the ACT.

If you would have read the ACT College Readiness Benchmarks link provided, you would have seen that similar information can be tracked as early as 8th grade with the EXPLORE test. School districts that use the EXPLORE test know exactly where students are academically upon entering high school. This information should be used to both increase academic excellence in K-8, and increase academic achievement levels by the time students take the ACT. Is that happening? It appears that the answer is yes in a few districts, no in most.

The schools already have the ACT College Readiness Benchmarks information, but choose not to disclose this unless requested via a FOIA request (this particular information is not exempt, btw). Furthermore, because the DH series followed a single cohort of students (graduating in the year 2008) and the amount of money spent per student in each district from 1996 to present, only this year's college readiness percentages were reported.

Could the Daily Herald find NOTHING to use in elementary schools? I am pretty sure that most people are vocal that there are TOO many standardized tests given to kids in nearly all age categories, not too few.

The ISAT (K-8) was mentioned in the DH series, however ISAT scores are a poor indication of student achievement because...

"A study by the Fordham Institute, a Washington-based nonprofit promoting high standards and school choice, recently found the ISATs set some of the lowest standards in the nation.

What's more, the level of difficulty declined between 2003 and 2006 -- "dramatically so" in some subjects, according to the Fordham study.

...

Palatine-Schaumburg High School District 211 Superintendent Roger Thornton said the discrepancy is too wide between the ISAT and the ACT, which all Illinois juniors must take.

"The Illinois ISAT is viewed as one of least difficult nationally, while the ACT would be one of the more difficult"
Daily Herald | Chapter 10: Only 1 in 5 high school graduates are ready for college

Here's my guess. The DH writers are people just like you. They have kids. They probably think they live in "the best" area. MOST people feel that way about where they live. Heck think about how you tell people thinking of move near you "MAN am I getting a great deal -- good schools, lower taxes. WOO HOO, I'm a genius you can be too" you probably tell a different story to folks that have kids that you'd think drag down the schools "man the prices are outa sight by me, I can barely afford, you can look but your money will further some place else". How about what you'd say to somebody that seems like they'd be a good neighbor but are thinking of another town "It is up to you. I think you'll be throwing your money away"... SO the writers compile some data. It almost certainly support their decision to live where they do.

Wow. This makes no sense whatsoever considering the fact that the DH reported the same data on 36 school districts spanning 6 counties, with the higher performing districts occurring in various areas not limited to a single geographic area.

[chet everett]

Spending per pupil is not an absolute measure of anything -- it is only useful when comparing two or more districts. When you then look at two or more districts you had better be darned sure that they have the same structure, similar demographics, similar revenue base, similar age of physical infrastructure, similar size staff, and a dozen other factors.

You'd probably have a simpler task using the data for "instructional cost" and adjusting for school size. If you take a look at the data that the DH used for instructional (even as presented w/o any "per pupil" calculations) vs. overall district spending there is no clear trend. Over the periods cited some schools are spending a bit more outside the classroom, some a bit less. The data from the state as a whole shows a paltry shift form 50% to 49% -- probably reflective of the decade long building boom more than anything else.

I also have to strongly disagree that there is no geographic pattern. There very definitely is. Districts that are centered in more affluent areas perform better than those that are not, districts that have a more narrow range from minimum housing price to maximum perform better than those with a wide range, districts that have fewer rental units perform better than those with larger numbers. There are very strong geographic overlays to each and everyone of those...

Now if you want to quibble about which very desirable town has a better total picture you are leaving the realm of the objective and entering subjective -- some people really like a well developed mature town with ONE high school for everybody, other people want the flexibility that comes from having multiple schools and newer or older areas. Other people think it is ideal if there is one campus for frosh-soph another for fr-sr. Guess what ALL those variations exist. Wheaton, Naperville, Hinsdale Central, York, LT all very very good schools as measured by the standard of median home price. I know of no better predictor. Believe me the physicians, attorneys and other professionals that make their homes in ALL those districts are not going to leave their kids education to chance. They should (and do) spend a lot of time thinking about the impact that the commuting distance will have on their family life. They should and do think about the level of competition their children will have to face.

I really think your concern about the percentage of students that enter college less than ready would be far more believable if you were waving off people from districts that perform much worse. My goodness, there are districts in the greater Fox River Valley and in portions of the "Daily Herald primary circulation area" in Lake Co that make the performance of the schools in eastern/central DuPage look like we are in another state -- it is tied to the history of those towns and something that some places are struggling mightily to change. NOW that is something to get worked up about...

I do think that the DH would be slitting their own throat by heaping scorn upon some of those areas -- Realtors and new home builders in those areas generate a lot of revenue, revenue that could not be made up by "good press" in the higher performing areas. Once the readers in those towns drop their subscriptions and the advertisers boycott, the DH would simply have a smaller "circulation area". Of course maybe they'd then try an expansion into areas that have been conspicuously omitted from their coverage. Somehow I don't think they'd get much cooperation from the districts after the misuse of the present data...

BTW Around a decade ago a publisher that had experience in this area (and lived in Lincoln Park until he had kids and moved to 'burbs...) tried to target a publication toward people making the same kinds of decisions. He was saddened to find out that whenever he went beyond a retelling of the admittedly weak ISAT he got A LOT of flack from advertisers and parents -- most people don't WANT to hear about the less than stellar performance of the schools near them. Think about it. People LIKE mediocrity. McDonalds does better serving uniformity than any high end restaurant could ever hope for with creativity. Toyota's best selling car is the "does nothing too poorly or too well" Camry... Schools are not that different for most people. When a town grows and ages it is rare that its high performance does not ebb. Rarer still is a town that puts serious dollars into reviving the expectations of earlier times. Elmhurst is such a town and the median selling price is reflective of peoples approval.