When ranking school districts, which sites do you rely on most? (Cambridge: 2013, colleges)

[pennyone]

Cambridge Ridge and Latin gets an A+ too, according to Niche, and yet its graduation rate is only 87%, 84% proficient in Math and 90% proficient in Reading.....how is that better than excellent?

Or maybe being near Harvard campus means those dropouts will breath the magic air and get educated through diffusion and osmosis?

[Dm84]

Originally Posted by pennyone

Cambridge Ridge and Latin gets an A+ too, according to Niche, and yet its graduation rate is only 87%, 84% proficient in Math and 90% proficient in Reading.....how is that better than excellent?

Or maybe being near Harvard campus means those dropouts will breath the magic air and get educated through diffusion and osmosis?

You have to control for income. Then the rankings are better than they appear on paper.

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by Dm84

You have to control for income. Then the rankings are better than they appear on paper.

Do you disagree that SES of the household is an major factor in academic achievement? If you want to compare Lexington to Cambridge, it's the only fair way of doing it.

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by pennyone

Cambridge Ridge and Latin gets an A+ too, according to Niche, and yet its graduation rate is only 87%, 84% proficient in Math and 90% proficient in Reading.....how is that better than excellent?

Or maybe being near Harvard campus means those dropouts will breath the magic air and get educated through diffusion and osmosis?

Because it is socio-economically diverse. Ask these parents about it, who just experienced 9 years of private school and then chose public high school. Cambridge Rindge And Latin Diversifies — With Private-School Students

[Dm84]

Originally Posted by semiurbanite

Do you disagree that SES of the household is an major factor in academic achievement? If you want to compare Lexington to Cambridge, it's the only fair way of doing it.

Here's the thing - no one cares about incomes.

In the real world a school is either good or it's not.

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by Dm84

Here's the thing - no one cares about incomes.

In the real world a school is either good or it's not.

Actually, an urban school where the non-low income half of the class outperforms top rated districts is arguably a better school than those top-rated district schools. Think about it - they have higher achievement while also teaching lower income students in the same class. What is the argument against that again? The only one I can think of is parents who don't want the lower income kids in the class even when proven that they don't pull the others down - an environment I would never want to be a part of.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by semiurbanite

Because it is socio-economically diverse. Ask these parents about it, who just experienced 9 years of private school and then chose public high school. Cambridge Rindge And Latin Diversifies — With Private-School Students

Originally Posted by Dm84

Here's the thing - no one cares about incomes.

In the real world a school is either good or it's not.

At a big, rich high school (and Cambridge spends nearly double the state average per student, so I consider it rich) it doesn't really matter. Kids have already segregated into different tracks and the high-achieving students only interact with the low-achieving students in electives and socially. Rating methods that determine the performance of the average kid will make these districts look worse than those that track the performance of the best performers or that normalize based on some criteria (like income level).

In lower grades or in smaller districts it matters a lot more. Before schools can separate kids based on performance the average student does reflect the average level of education. Concerned parents can and often do make up for these deficiencies, but it is a genuine concern for parents.

[pennyone]

Originally Posted by semiurbanite

Do you disagree that SES of the household is an major factor in academic achievement? If you want to compare Lexington to Cambridge, it's the only fair way of doing it.

But...in real life, do you really "control" for the people that you interact with at school or on the street? If so, then you are basically saying that you will only "hang out" with those in your income bracket? Do you seriously think your child should be taught to hang out with only those in his socio-economic class so that they can mutually support each other to achieve higher academic standard? No, your child will make friends with whoever, and he/she will be influenced by the whole school and all of its diversity....kids are influenced tremendously by their peers as much as by their parents, which is both a good and a bad thing, depending on the situation.

But regardless, the Niche ranking is suppose to be for the whole school, not just those portion of the school that have parents with higher income. So, how can a school with mid 80% graduation rate be considered to be A+? That's astounding, unless, like I posit, there must be some magic fume coming out of Harvard...LOL!

[semiurbanite]

Originally Posted by pennyone

But...in real life, do you really "control" for the people that you interact with at school or on the street?

Of course not, my child plays with kids of all backgrounds and income levels, that's why we live here.

[CaseyB]

Originally Posted by semiurbanite

Of course not, my child plays with kids of all backgrounds and income levels, that's why we live here.

Well that's what some of us don't understand. What exactly are you "controlling"?