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.
That being said, I'm sure "failing schools" have increases at different levels.
What does this mean?
How does it remotely disprove the fact that nothing else changed except admins and 30% of the teachers and scores have gone up significantly (yes, as a STEM school we actually keep data on this sort of thing). The sending districts haven't changed, admissions hasn't changed, incoming scores haven't changed, palcement test scores haven't changed, just the amount of "value" added.
We get it, SES is the main factor, but it isn't the only factor at all.
^^I have no disagreement with the above, I don't know why you're belaboring the point. The correlation is strong. You've heard that from several teachers on this board. The question was, as I understand it, does hiring good teachers make a school good? The answer, nationwide, seems to be "no".
I've long thought that myself. Most of those kids from the higher SES group would do well and learn no matter who is teaching the course.
I keep bringing it up because so many see the correlation and automatically jump to the conclusion that higher SES causes better students. Therefore all problems are due to low SES. Therefore transfer more money to lower SES will fix all problems. This is a false trail that starts from the false assumption that correlation equal causation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman71
Maybe... and maybe not.
As for making comparisons using value-added scores, understand that the better students (usually the higher SES students) usually are predicted to score higher than others, therefore usually score less growth than students predicted to score much lower. My students usually have a lower predicted score in Chemistry than most of the surrounding schools, but I can show tremendous amounts of growth because of it - and do . But I've seen schools - usually STEM or Magnet - that have much higher predicted scores than mine, but this gives the students very little, if any, room to grow.They still outscore most of their fellow students else, the schools "show no growth". Not a great way to make a comparison.
The very problem in our school district. There's no where to go from up, so the score bizarrely shows the schools as failing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by psikeyhackr
There is a certain amount of circular logic to it that makes it somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Since the money for education often comes from property taxes "more expensive schools" tend to be in areas with more expensive housing. So what kind of people can afford the housing?
But if there are more "poor" people than well to do ones if the Bell Curve is a same for everybody then smart kids with poor parents are being sabotaged by bad schools.
Is the socio-economic structure really based on psychological sabotage instead of genetic superiority. If it is then don't some people want to keep it that way? But couldn't cheap but powerful computers with good content blow the whole system out of the water?
psik
I believe the bell curve is a bad assumption that can lead us down the wrong path usually because we often try to fit the bell curve (because it's seems natural) to non normal populations. Soon as you select a population for any characteristic, it is unlikely to still be normal and the bell curve no longer applies.
There is a certain amount of circular logic to it that makes it somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Since the money for education often comes from property taxes "more expensive schools" tend to be in areas with more expensive housing. So what kind of people can afford the housing?
But if there are more "poor" people than well to do ones if the Bell Curve is a same for everybody then smart kids with poor parents are being sabotaged by bad schools.
Is the socio-economic structure really based on psychological sabotage instead of genetic superiority. If it is then don't some people want to keep it that way? But couldn't cheap but powerful computers with good content blow the whole system out of the water?
psik
Most states have some type of equalization funding to at least tamp down the rich district/poor district problem.
Most states have some type of equalization funding to at least tamp down the rich district/poor district problem.
In my state, the poor schools get more money from the state wherease the local district will supplement their property taxes based on it. As said before, poor schools have to spend money on services that won't be prevalent in the wealthy schools. Another problem with a lot of cities is that they are mayor controlled so the board members don't have to answer to the public. That's a problem and what leads to corruption. Now that cities are being required to fund charter schools they never wanted, less is left for public schools.
In my state, the poor schools get more money from the state wherease the local district will supplement their property taxes based on it. As said before, poor schools have to spend money on services that won't be prevalent in the wealthy schools. Another problem with a lot of cities is that they are mayor controlled so the board members don't have to answer to the public. That's a problem and what leads to corruption. Now that cities are being required to fund charter schools they never wanted, less is left for public schools.
What? The state money, corruption, BOE? Not sure what's different.
The school districts are separate from the city government, even in Denver. Most districts are mulit-city districts, taking in all or part of a county. The cities per se don't fund the schools, the state and school district do.
The school districts are separate from the city government, even in Denver. Most districts are mulit-city districts, taking in all or part of a county. The cities per se don't fund the schools, the state and school district do.
Ok. In CT, each town/city has it's own district. So the local school district is the town pretty much. Some regionalize for high school, but that's it. There is a huge movement among people wanting to privatize schools to further regionalize into a similar county like system, but they are from out of state and have little knowledge of public schools (I believe CO has been victim to lots of outside money trying to control local boards).
Ok. In CT, each town/city has it's own district. So the local school district is the town pretty much. Some regionalize for high school, but that's it. There is a huge movement among people wanting to privatize schools to further regionalize into a similar county like system, but they are from out of state and have little knowledge of public schools (I believe CO has been victim to lots of outside money trying to control local boards).
LOL, victim! The people spoke in both Jefferson County, where such money was alleged, and in Douglas County as well, and threw the bums out.
LOL, victim! The people spoke in both Jefferson County, where such money was alleged, and in Douglas County as well, and threw the bums out.
Keep any eye on it. Those reformers don't like democracy and when the people speak, they will go over their heads to the state or fed to get their way.
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.
. But I've seen schools - usually STEM or Magnet - that have much higher predicted scores than mine, but this gives the students very little, if any, room to grow.They still outscore most of their fellow students else, the schools "show no growth". Not a great way to make a comparison.
