Schools in Waltham? (Cambridge, Newton, Somerville: apartments, to rent, houses)

[Cato the Elder]

I don't think having proper grammar will ever go out of style. Unfortunately, I've never heard of anyone gaining this skill "on the streets."

[495neighbor]

Originally Posted by Dan1974

Credentialism is the result of mediocre leadership in corporate america, unable to evaluate performance for it's real value. So it rely on University faculty to tell them who is who and what is what.

It has evolved into a business, providing a very lucrative revenue for those creating the illusion of elitism out of this ponzi scheme.

Like everything else based on false pretenses and fraud, it will eventually deflate in the coming decades. It is well established by now that Ivy leaguers are mediocre performers. Personally, when asked about my opinion about a candidate with an all-star academic background, I alwasy give a thumb down. They come in with a sense of entitlement and are not willing to "fight" for anything.

So this maskarade will eventually end, and so will this psychotic distortion about altering a kids future forever if they happen to mingle with anything else than propped up overachiever, pressured by tiger moms to get these straight As for 2 decades in a row.

I want my kids to do well, but have life experience as well, and not reach adulthood as socially awkward wimps, whose only skill is to score a perfect SAT which, if they are lucky, give them a marginally better shot at getting a job in todays economy. And we wont even talk about student debt here but, you get the point.

People are nuts, thats what I think. Completely insane....

Masters have become the new two years of job experience as on the job entry-level training no longer exists. With the exception of a few companies, the inexperienced must hit the ground running, day one. No three month break in period for anyone.

[donewithpretty]

On the subject of credentialism, this link about hiring practices at Google has been making the rounds today:

The Most Innovative Employees at Google Aren't Stanford/MIT grads with Perfect SATs : iDoneThis blog

Parents do their best to provide the right environment for their kids, but we all have to guess. When I was growing up, becoming a lawyer or doctor was considered the best way to make money. Now, new lawyers are lucky to get a job, and new doctors can't afford malpractice insurance. The next generation is being taught that only business majors and tech geeks will make money. That may be true for a time, but then who knows? Those degrees could become dime a dozen.

Today's focus on homogeneous schools (and therefore, higher test scores) could be considered silly in 10 years' time, in favor of schools with diverse student bodies. No one knows the answer to that. All you can do is check out the schools for yourself and make sure the programs fit your kids' needs.

[tribechamy]

Without addressing the whole digression about the usefulness of higher education, wanting good schools isn't all about trying to get into Ivies or plum jobs.

I'd like my kids to go to school in a place that values education, which of course means decent curricula in the schools but also means that it's a place where parents encourage their children to actually do their homework, where smart kids don't have to pretend that they're not smart, where kids don't get teased or beaten up for carrying books or a violin case, and otherwise where there is a safe and positive environment for learning. (An absence of nearby drug dealers is also a plus.)

If anyone can address those matters, that would be great.

[thatspoetic]

I can't directly address your question about the environment in the schools, but I've been trying to find out the same information and came across some other data that is useful for getting a larger picture of the Waltham school district in terms of demographics and MCAS scores at the MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and the School/District profile tab (School and District Profiles).

To sum some of it up, for 2012-213 Waltham had higher percentages than the state of First Language not English students (37.5 vs 17.3), English Language Learner (12.2 vs. 7.7), Low-income (43.5 vs 37.0), Students With Disabilities (22.7 vs. 17.0), and High Needs (56.9 vs 47.9). The non-native English speakers appear to be mostly Hispanic students (32.5% Hispanic students vs. 16.4 for MA).

If you go to the Assessment tab and then MCAS results by subgroup, you can see that quite understandably, all of those subgroups got lower MCAS results than their peers. For example, 45% of low income students got Needs Improvement while only 27% of non-low income; 51% of English language learners and former English language learners got it. The data doesn't have a non-ELL category, but we can probably guess that the "White" students, who have a 26% Needs Improvement rating, are mostly non-ELL and non-low income (since the percentage is almost the same as the non-low income percentage).

This data leads me to believe that in this situation, the lower district MCAS scores that are often the basis for rating school districts don't necessarily indicate "bad" schools (though some may), but do indicate a more diverse student body with higher needs than MA in general, especially in the English language learners category.

I still would like to know more about the in the classroom teaching aspect and if students that don't have higher needs also get enough attention and resources to succeed, but I care less about averaged standardized scores and more about schools having a diverse student body, so it was welcome information.

[tribechamy]

thatspoetic, thank you for your response! That's a very good analysis

[semiurbanite]

Even though most people do it, it is generally not wise to judge a school system based on it's overall scores. Student achievement is correlated much more to household factors than to school factors. I recently compared our local Somerville and Cambridge elementary schools to the "best" school town in the area, and guess what? When you look at only higher income students, Somerville and Cambridge are just as good and sometimes better than Newton, Weston and Lexington!

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1OS...it?usp=sharing

[claiz]

Semiurbanite - I looked at the spreadsheet and I actually drew a different conclusion. Take Kennedy school in Somerville for example. In Grade 3, the first grade you can find test data, the school ranks very favorably among some of the "best" school towns in the non-low income student population. But in grade 5, the comparison is a lot worse. You can almost argue the student started well but after getting through the elementary school education, it came out behind the "best" schools that they used to beat.

It is worth mentioning in the case of Kennedy school, over half of students are low income student. If you assume low income student is dragging down the test score, then it is reasonable to wonder whether the teaching during class is going to be dragged down as well. I have no information on that but it's the no.1 thing I would check out if I am really going for an urban school.

Another point worth mentioning is there may not be a lot of non-low income students in some urban school. Thus the data/test score it produces have a lot of noises in them and can fluctuate greatly. The small sample problem, as you may say.

If I am dead set on living an urban lifestyle and at the same time want to get the best education for my kids, I will try to stay within Boston public school district. If my kids are really good they can always shoot for Boston Latin.

[sharencare]

My advice is to try to see if the local PTA in Waltham has a listserv. Then reach out to a few parents and just ask them what they think. As other people have pointed out, MCAS scores don't paint a complete picture of a school's learning environment. I would be more concerned about budgeting, facilities, teacher quality/turnover, and administrative leadership. Individual teachers make a difference and you have to make sure the administration is supporting them. But it's ultimately on you as a parent. I've always preferred larger schools as your kids have potential to make more friends. At the worst, your kids might be able to switch classrooms if the teacher isn't great.

I've joined a listserv for Boston Public School parents that has postings going back years and years. I've actually observed that there are tons of well educated and articulate parents of all races and income levels who are very much interested in investing in their urban elementary schools, and who quite frankly aren't freaked out by the MCAS scores. They understand that there are ESL students and special needs students being tested with their kids. The main frustration I see in an urban district like Boston is the unpredictability of the lottery--half the people are disappointed when they don't get a K1 seat (which isn't even offered in other school districts) and some don't get their top choices in K2. But the new Home-based A plan is supposed to make it more likely that 80 percent of parents will get their top 3 school choices, and most parents should get one of their top 5 or at least get something out of a school list of 8-10.

Look, my husband and I naturally gravitated to Newton, Lexington, and all these other education power house schools because we're nerds that value education. But my husband and I are just starting out, and we think it's financially risky to try to get out a jumbo loan for a $600K+ hut in one of these towns and maintain two cars for long commutes to boot. I've also talked to teachers and parents of some highly rated affluent high schools and you're going to see some drugs because the kids are rich and don't care about consequences. You might also see some entitlement issues and feel pressured to pay for additional tutors to "keep up".

I think ultimately the best way to learn is to talk to parents of kids currently attending the schools.

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by claiz

Semiurbanite - I looked at the spreadsheet and I actually drew a different conclusion. Take Kennedy school in Somerville for example. In Grade 3, the first grade you can find test data, the school ranks very favorably among some of the "best" school towns in the non-low income student population. But in grade 5, the comparison is a lot worse. You can almost argue the student started well but after getting through the elementary school education, it came out behind the "best" schools that they used to beat.

It is worth mentioning in the case of Kennedy school, over half of students are low income student. If you assume low income student is dragging down the test score, then it is reasonable to wonder whether the teaching during class is going to be dragged down as well. I have no information on that but it's the no.1 thing I would check out if I am really going for an urban school.

Another point worth mentioning is there may not be a lot of non-low income students in some urban school. Thus the data/test score it produces have a lot of noises in them and can fluctuate greatly. The small sample problem, as you may say.

If I am dead set on living an urban lifestyle and at the same time want to get the best education for my kids, I will try to stay within Boston public school district. If my kids are really good they can always shoot for Boston Latin.

I guess you can speculate that way if you choose. I'm not saying that the Somerville and Cambridge schools are better, just that they hold their own against the "best" elementary schools. I could turn the argument around and say that Weston 3rd graders are under-performing other schools because they spent their toddler years with nannies, but its pure speculation. Part of this is also the quickly changing demographics, especially in West Somerville. While the new numbers are not out until September, evidently the Kennedy elementary scores are even higher than last year, especially 5th grade, so i'll update the numbers in a few weeks and re-post.

Most research does show that household factors impact achievement much more than the school itself.