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.
For all those people looking for the best public high schools in Westchester by SAT scores, the top 5 are as follows: These are also the towns with the highest real estate values.
This is a no bull list, unlike the Niche site. That ranking system is made up of smoke and mirrors and diversity formulas. If you look further at the data, Scarsdale has the most students in that list taking the test, so I would say strictly speaking Scarsdale High school wins.
For all those people looking for the best public high schools in Westchester by SAT scores, the top 5 are as follows: These are also the towns with the highest real estate values.
This is a no bull list, unlike the Niche site. That ranking system is made up of smoke and mirrors and diversity formulas. If you look further at the data, Scarsdale has the most students in that list taking the test, so I would say strictly speaking Scarsdale High school wins.
You start off ok saying the list is just based on SAT scores - so it shows the schools with the best SAT scores.
Then your post descends into drivel by stating Niche is bull, regardless of the fact that Niche explicit states it is multifactorial (and so takes into account things such as sports involvement, extracurricular, availability of foreign exchange and many other measurements etc etc and makes them part of its ranking) and so measures something different.
If you are getting pissed because you think the school with the highest SAT score should be at the top of the highest SAT score list and every other different type of ranking - well, get your kid to explain what "critical reading" is - they study it for the SAT
For all those people looking for the best public high schools in Westchester by SAT scores, the top 5 are as follows: These are also the towns with the highest real estate values.
This is a no bull list, unlike the Niche site. That ranking system is made up of smoke and mirrors and diversity formulas. If you look further at the data, Scarsdale has the most students in that list taking the test, so I would say strictly speaking Scarsdale High school wins.
I'll take the Niche rankings over pure test scores.
You start off ok saying the list is just based on SAT scores - so it shows the schools with the best SAT scores.
Then your post descends into drivel by stating Niche is bull, regardless of the fact that Niche explicit states it is multifactorial (and so takes into account things such as sports involvement, extracurricular, availability of foreign exchange and many other measurements etc etc and makes them part of its ranking) and so measures something different.
If you are getting pissed because you think the school with the highest SAT score should be at the top of the highest SAT score list and every other different type of ranking - well, get your kid to explain what "critical reading" is - they study it for the SAT
The fact that Niche explicitly states what it is based on doesn't make it any more or less "bull".
If I rank MLB teams based on niceness of uniforms, politeness of players, and who hits home runs when their is a full moon, than such list would be useless. It doesn't become less useless if I publish the criteria upon which I made the list. The poster's point was that Niche is based on bull **** factors, a logical opinion shared by many.
The fact that Niche explicitly states what it is based on doesn't make it any more or less "bull".
If I rank MLB teams based on niceness of uniforms, politeness of players, and who hits home runs when their is a full moon, than such list would be useless. It doesn't become less useless if I publish the criteria upon which I made the list. The poster's point was that Niche is based on bull **** factors, a logical opinion shared by many.
A smart kid will do well on the SAT's regardless of whether they go to a good well rounded high school, or a high school that measures the size of its d*ck based purely on test scores.
I'd rather my kid learn more in high school than just how to take some standardized tests.
Last I checked, colleges didnt admit kids based on the "cumulative" SAT scores of their graduating class. I went to an "average" high school, got good grades and aced the SATs - and voila! I got into a good college!
But if people live in a community where they have pep rally's while they unveil the SAT results, then I guess its embedded into the town culture and anything else seems abnormal.
The fact that Niche explicitly states what it is based on doesn't make it any more or less "bull".
If I rank MLB teams based on niceness of uniforms, politeness of players, and who hits home runs when their is a full moon, than such list would be useless. It doesn't become less useless if I publish the criteria upon which I made the list. The poster's point was that Niche is based on bull **** factors, a logical opinion shared by many.
The criteria are posted, but don't let that stop you. They include actual economic diversity, absenteeism, sports participation, athletic facilities, facilities grade. All part of what a school is.
At School A, you've got 10 kids coming in and they scoring 90% percentile on standardized tests when they come in and 90% percentile SAT 5 yrs later when they leave.
At School B, you've got 10 kids coming into a school and they are scoring 50% percentile on standardized tests when they come in and 80% percentile SAT 5 yrs later when they leave.
Which is the highest scoring set of students? A.
Which is a better school, A or B? One did a much better job at improvement. The other may have just been coasting. Your "logical opinion" fails you there. (Mainly because it isn't actually logic, just a silly appeal to the authority of logic to justify an opinion.)
One dimensional measurements are apparently held in high esteem by one dimensional thinkers. Are you a realtor or something?
A smart kid will do well on the SAT's regardless of whether they go to a good well rounded high school, or a high school that measures the size of its d*ck based purely on test scores.
I'd rather my kid learn more in high school than just how to take some standardized tests.
Last I checked, colleges didnt admit kids based on the "cumulative" SAT scores of their graduating class. I went to an "average" high school, got good grades and aced the SATs - and voila! I got into a good college!
But if people live in a community where they have pep rally's while they unveil the SAT results, then I guess its embedded into the town culture and anything else seems abnormal.
Everything you just said is true. Its also true that the Niche rankings are useless garbage.
SAT scores are a great indicator of the quality of a school. Its almost always true that high SAT scores = great school. The correlation is almost always there. This is not the same thing as saying that the school is great because of the high SAT scores, or that a kid can't score high on the test while at a school with lower SAT scores. Nor is it the same thing as saying that a school with low SAT scores must be a poor school.
Also, I have never known a high school to focus on the SAT at the expense of other programing. You act like its a zero-sum game - that if a HS has high SAT scores, than it must be true that the students are learning less elsewhere or are somehow not getting a well-rounded education (whatever that means).
You seem to be mocking communities that are proud of their high SAT scores. Equally worthy of mockery are communities that view their lower SAT scores as proof that they are offering their children a more well rounded education.
Everything you just said is true. Its also true that the Niche rankings are useless garbage.
SAT scores are a great indicator of the quality of a school. Its almost always true that high SAT scores = great school. The correlation is almost always there. This is not the same thing as saying that the school is great because of the high SAT scores, or that a kid can't score high on the test while at a school with lower SAT scores. Nor is it the same thing as saying that a school with low SAT scores must be a poor school.
Also, I have never known a high school to focus on the SAT at the expense of other programing. You act like its a zero-sum game - that if a HS has high SAT scores, than it must be true that the students are learning less elsewhere or are somehow not getting a well-rounded education (whatever that means).
You seem to be mocking communities that are proud of their high SAT scores. Equally worthy of mockery are communities that view their lower SAT scores as proof that they are offering their children a more well rounded education.
I am mocking people that get caught up in judging a high school based purely on test scores. Its a phenomena, especially in the ny metro area.
The OP was doing just that.
As you said, good test scores may indicate a good high school, but lower "cumulative" test scores dont indicate a bad high school.
And sometimes, a lily white homogeneous high school isnt what people want. Even if it means sightly lower cumulative test scores. This is where diversity comes into play.
The criteria are posted, but don't let that stop you. They include actual economic diversity, absenteeism, sports participation, athletic facilities, facilities grade. All part of what a school is.
At School A, you've got 10 kids coming in and they scoring 90% percentile on standardized tests when they come in and 90% percentile SAT 5 yrs later when they leave.
At School B, you've got 10 kids coming into a school and they are scoring 50% percentile on standardized tests when they come in and 80% percentile SAT 5 yrs later when they leave.
Which is the highest scoring set of students? A.
Which is a better school, A or B? One did a much better job at improvement. The other may have just been coasting. Your "logical opinion" fails you there. (Mainly because it isn't actually logic, just a silly appeal to the authority of logic to justify an opinion.)
One dimensional measurements are apparently held in high esteem by one dimensional thinkers. Are you a realtor or something?
If you want to argue with yourself, just do so without the use of a message board. You are rebutting points that have not been made.
And its you who are the "one dimensional thinker". You somehow think just because one school increased its students' standardized tests percentile, it must be the better school. You are the one who is judging based on one dimensional thinking. Moreover, simply using multiple measurements does not make a test or ranking useful. If the multiple measurements are meaningless and/or subjective and/or do not correlate to the quality of a school, than the tool is useless. Niche uses a number of criteria that do not correlate to the quality of a school and/or are too subjective for use in a ranking. As such, in my opinion, it is useless. As I said before, it does not become useful or accurate simply because it utilizes multiple criteria. Diversity is one such useless measurement. Judging the quality of a school by its students' skin color is idiotic.
SAT is a great starting point. Its almost always true that when a school has a very high average SAT score, it is a great school. This is not the same thing as it being a great social fit for all types of people. Nor does it mean that the school will have a culture sought after by all parents.
One dimensional measurements are very often quite predictive in all areas of human life. Mocking such just makes you look stupid. Its doubly stupid to mock it while utilizing a one dimensional measurement to try to prove your point.
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.
