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.
Everything else does matter, the extent to which is debatable and obviously varies by institution or even individual. My point is that it is not as weak as you, or NJ Monthly, are making it out to be. To me, and a vast majority of colleges, this is the biggest measure of an incoming student. As a parent, I want my child in a system with the highest average scores as possible....which is why I will be living in Ridgewood or Millburn by the time they reach middle school.
That's why mine are in West Windsor-Plainsboro (the oldest is at WW-P South).
Wouldn't a better statistical method be to use the median score instead of the average? Ranking them by where the median group of students scored would be a better indicator of overall "proficiency" and would eliminate the situation where a small school might have a small group that scores highly and skews the average. If we take two schools of 10 students...
There is a 90 point difference in the averages, but the median is higher for School B. By using the average we are giving weight to schools that may have a couple exceptional performers, but the rest of the school may perform worse. I'd be more comfortable saying B was "better" than A based on median than saying A was "better" than B based on average.
Everything else does matter, the extent to which is debatable and obviously varies by institution or even individual. My point is that it is not as weak as you, or NJ Monthly, are making it out to be. To me, and a vast majority of colleges, this is the biggest measure of an incoming student. As a parent, I want my child in a system with the highest average scores as possible....which is why I will be living in Ridgewood or Millburn by the time they reach middle school.
i've been told on this board a child is better off being an outstanding student in a mediocre district than being an above average student in an outstanding district when it comes to college acceptance. do you think your child(ren) can only get a high SAT score in a highly ranked SAT school?
Wouldn't a better statistical method be to use the median score instead of the average? Ranking them by where the median group of students scored would be a better indicator of overall "proficiency" and would eliminate the situation where a small school might have a small group that scores highly and skews the average. If we take two schools of 10 students...
There is a 90 point difference in the averages, but the median is higher for School B. By using the average we are giving weight to schools that may have a couple exceptional performers, but the rest of the school may perform worse. I'd be more comfortable saying B was "better" than A based on median than saying A was "better" than B based on average.
Interesting idea about the median. I wonder if there would be a lot of schools with significantly different means/medians.
i've been told on this board a child is better off being an outstanding student in a mediocre district than being an above average student in an outstanding district when it comes to college acceptance. do you think your child(ren) can only get a high SAT score in a highly ranked SAT school?
i get the point you're stating - but i think you have to be at the very very top of a mediocre district to surpass the "above average" student at an outstanding district.
the thing is...if you're in the top 40% of your class at the #1 school in NJ, you're probably not getting into Harvard. But you'll have your pick between plenty of top 50 colleges/universities.
to get the same pick coming from a mediocre school, you really need to be in the top. so, "better off"...maybe. but be damn sure you're in the top.
1-What's going on in Cedar Grove? Always was one of the better schools as per test scores.
2-Surprised at how well Montclair and Hanover Park were. Only surprised about HP because of the rumors you hear about it. Always figured it should be a strong school.
Everything else does matter, the extent to which is debatable and obviously varies by institution or even individual. My point is that it is not as weak as you, or NJ Monthly, are making it out to be. To me, and a vast majority of colleges, this is the biggest measure of an incoming student. As a parent, I want my child in a system with the highest average scores as possible....which is why I will be living in Ridgewood or Millburn by the time they reach middle school.
your kids' SAT score certainly will matter depending on what schools they want to go to. but the average score of the school your kid went to will have little impact on your kids' SAT score. It's a standardized test. You can certainly send your kid to a school that may have a solid ability to teach to a standardized test - but most likely, it will be the same as everyone else that scores well on those tests - you will help your children prepare, and they'll get better scores than their peers who didn't have help.
now - will your kid have a higher GPA at Ridgewood or Millburn? Especially his/her junior year? That's a huge factor in many college admissions criteria.
There are many ways to get good SAT scores that have little to do with their 8-2pm in-class instruction. But their GPA scores have everything to do with that time and those teachers, along with what you do in your home.
To pick a school based on average SAT scores and not realize how easily those numbers can be skewed seems very simple minded to me.
Wouldn't a better statistical method be to use the median score instead of the average? Ranking them by where the median group of students scored would be a better indicator of overall "proficiency" and would eliminate the situation where a small school might have a small group that scores highly and skews the average. If we take two schools of 10 students...
There is a 90 point difference in the averages, but the median is higher for School B. By using the average we are giving weight to schools that may have a couple exceptional performers, but the rest of the school may perform worse. I'd be more comfortable saying B was "better" than A based on median than saying A was "better" than B based on average.
very well put. yet another way to look at the SAT data. and more evidence that people should be looking at the total package, and stop getting so hung up on these numbers.
i've been told on this board a child is better off being an outstanding student in a mediocre district than being an above average student in an outstanding district when it comes to college acceptance. do you think your child(ren) can only get a high SAT score in a highly ranked SAT school?
There is a great book called Outliers--the science of success that really made me realize how much this stuff can be somewhat manipulated if you understand the nuances that drive success. There is no one RIGHT way--but there are tricks to getting your children ahead and putting them in a top district is one of them. It's not the education per se--it's the entire package--the education, the connections, the competition, the standards and....the adversity of it all....which raises the overall performance.
To your point--I think the answer is "it depends".
For example--here in Millburn, I am constantly surprised how pretty much "average" kids get into impressive schools. Of course--this is relative. I am not saying that these kids are ALL going to Harvard but a kid I would imagine would be lucky to get into Rutgers, gets into Cornell..... an actual example. Not that the children are not smart--they are, but they are not the shining stars that one would expect. Having moved around, I know kids in other towns that were equally smart and driven and were lucky to get into Rutgers--turned down by other ivies.
Now--take an academically gifted kid. Here in Millburn, those kids vie very aggressively for those top schools. I imagine some of those brilliant kids may have been better off in a smaller school. Maybe in a different school that kid would have been a real stand out and had a different "story" to tell admissions.
Now--the OP posted this because I imagine it's a way to make a choice about where to move.... So, I wanted to share a few thoughts.
One of the eye opening things for me about Outliers was the fact there is a difference in the behavior and attitudes of achievement oriented families. I can't remember all that I read--but the gist of it was that upper class families do something I think he called "cultivating" parenting--lots of encouragement, lots of support, passing on a sense of confident entitlement, having a social conscience, a sprit of fair play, citizenship, and an emphasis on results. By contrast, middle class parents believe the cream rises to the top on its own, and they don't spend nearly the same amount of time cultivating their kids achievement.
What astounded me was the fact that on some level, I had figured this out on my own. Growing up, i was left to my own devices and certainly my parents were not trying to "manage my academic career" as they were of the belief it was up to me. I love my parents--they are great people--but I see now that when I went up to compete with those upper class kids, they had edges that I simply did not have.
I am one of the few people in my HS that actually got ahead....and now that I see the view from the other side, I see that the behaviors we middle class people view with suspicion are actually sometimes effective tools for raising successful, confident and independent people.
My point is not to say we need to all go be pushy parents. I don't think that in the least. However--it bothers me when well meaning people don't realize that it takes a bit more than just hitting the books. Fair, not fair, I don't want to comment on that because I can't change a thing about it. However--for any parent out there trying to figure this out, go check out Outliers. It was one of the better, most thought provoking reads I have had in a long time. It may not change your choices, but at least it will make you conscious of why you are making them and how that is likely to affect you in the fture.
Every time I read about "the best schools in NJ" it just makes me laugh.
About 10 years ago Mountain Lakes was the most sought after schools for those who wanted the best schools for their kids. I see it is now number 13 on the list. I wonder how many of those people have moved to Princeton( this years #1) so thay can keep up with "the best schools in NJ"
Most everybody wants the best for their kids but to me if your district is in the top 50 your not going to see any difference in your kids scholastic performance. The smart kids in district #50 will be going to Harvard while the mediocre kids in district #1 will be going to community college.
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.
