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.
These linear school rankings are as good as brittle toilet paper. A better metric would be what percent of its graduates go on to do something productive with their lives, and what percent of those attribute their success to their high school.
Saying that the kids who come from broken homes dont do well etc. just dosnt jive with me at all. I was the product of a broken home, 5 kids, single mum, poor on welfare most of my childhood. Mum didnt get involved in our school and never helped with homework.
However, my sibs and I all turned out great, are we rich ; no, are we all happy and well adjusted ; most definitely. Yes, we need to hold the parents accountable, but it is our own responsibiility to study hard, and be the best we can be. I didnt have mentors or anything, just a self preservation attitude.
Congratulations on your success.
But in general, obviously the kid with less barriers is predisposed to do better than the kid with the world stacked against them.
I agree. It is not the teachers who cause the good and bad scores on exams. That is why I've never jumped on the illogical 'blame the teacher' bandwagon.
Again with the red herring. There is no "blame the teachers" bandwagon. It's a "the teachers are overcompensated" bandwagon and that is quite logical and difficult to deny or defend so the victim stance works better politically. Poor persecuted teachers. Asked to be held accountable for progress for only a meager $125k/yr and stellar benefits. Boo hoo.
Originally Posted by Quick Commenter
I agree. It is not the teachers who cause the good and bad scores on exams. That is why I've never jumped on the illogical 'blame the teacher' bandwagon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose65
Again with the red herring. There is no "blame the teachers" bandwagon. It's a "the teachers are overcompensated" bandwagon and that is quite logical and difficult to deny or defend so the victim stance works better politically. Poor persecuted teachers. Asked to be held accountable for progress for only a meager $125k/yr and stellar benefits. Boo hoo.
Perhaps there is more than one 'bandwagon' out there? Possibly? The thread references student test results and school district rankings.
Doubtlessly there are some who think teachers all make 125K plus benefits and are therefore overcompensated and should have their pay cut to 35K or 50K or 75K or 100K or something. That may be a red herring on this particular thread.
Last edited by Quick Commenter; 08-26-2013 at 09:54 AM..
It's politically incorrect to point this out but higher scores seem to be positively correlated to percentage of Asian students, and by Asian I mean not just Chinese and Koreans but Indian, Bengali and Pakistani as well.
Saying that the kids who come from broken homes dont do well etc. just dosnt jive with me at all. I was the product of a broken home, 5 kids, single mum, poor on welfare most of my childhood. Mum didnt get involved in our school and never helped with homework.
However, my sibs and I all turned out great, are we rich ; no, are we all happy and well adjusted ; most definitely. Yes, we need to hold the parents accountable, but it is our own responsibiility to study hard, and be the best we can be. I didnt have mentors or anything, just a self preservation attitude.
You're going to get the idiots that don't like your comments or have something smart to say. You're 100% correct. NYC school system is like crossing a mine field and they turn out a lot of successful students each year, some way above what these so called great districts on LI turn out. There are a lot of factors contributing to some of these students excelling while others do not (socioeconomics as mentioned. If some of these parents will pay 10g a year for their kids to play soccer or Lacrosse, then they will spend as much or more for them to get the right help and be prepped for the test. Some people just cannot afford that type of cash/disposable income)
A perfect example will be the new standards. If a kid from a privileged background is struggling, you bet his parents will be able to afford help while someone from a less privileged background may not be able to afford the help or know where to find the help, however like someone else mentioned all of these students that attend privileged high do not turn out to be much more than a bagel shop worker (nothing wrong with a honest profession) so maybe the judge should be how many do something useful with their lives.
These linear school rankings are as good as brittle toilet paper. A better metric would be what percent of its graduates go on to do something productive with their lives, and what percent of those attribute their success to their high school.
As if there's any way to meaningful gauge something like "doing something productive with their lives."
This is a list based on NYS report cards. I suppose report cards are as good as brittle toilet paper, too?
NYC school system is like crossing a mine field and they turn out a lot of successful students each year, some way above what these so called great districts on LI turn out.
You made some good points but ALL the 100 school districts of Long Island (for the exception of 2 districts-Hempstead SD and Roosevelt SD) have a higher graduation rate than NYC public schools; even Wyandanch SD has a higher graduation rate than NYC public schools.
As if there's any way to meaningful gauge something like "doing something productive with their lives."
This is a list based on NYS report cards. I suppose report cards are as good as brittle toilet paper, too?
What I meant is that SAT scores and GPAs are poor indicators of future productivity and/or success. Obviously, someone with a 3.9 and 2350 SATs is more likely to be successful than a student with a 2.7 and and a 1710. But what about someone with a 3.6 and a 2190? Sure, the former might exceed the latter in the art of test taking, but that student is definitely not more likely to achieve success. The reason is because success depends on many many more factors including, but not limited to, creativity, social skills / networking, passion, persistence, innovation, etc, that no test could ever feasibly measure.
My main point is : #3 is most likely "better" than #33, but I'd be careful when saying #1 > #2 > #3 > #4 ...
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.
