|
|
Post by rew on Feb 12, 2008 14:25:58 GMT -6
For all their fancy talk, the proposed boundaries leave WVHS achievement worse off than it is now.
Current achievement for all test scores:
WVHS 88.4
NVHS 93.6
With the proposed BB boundaries the gap narrowed:
WVHS 89.4
MVHS 90.3
NVHS 93.3
But with the new proposed MWG boundaries gap widens:
WVHS 88.1
MVHS 91.3
NVHS 93.3
What happened to the BIG FIX??
|
|
|
|
Post by slp on Feb 12, 2008 14:28:30 GMT -6
For all their fancy talk, the proposed boundaries leave WVHS achievement worse off than it is now. Current achievement for all test scores: WVHS 88.4 NVHS 93.6 With the proposed BB boundaries the gap narrowed: WVHS 89.4 MVHS 90.3 NVHS 93.3 But with the new proposed MWG boundaries gap widens: WVHS 88.1 MVHS 91.3 NVHS 93.3 What happened to the BIG FIX?? I too am concerned about this. Can you suggest a "simple" TWEAK to the boundaries that could help bring WVHS closer to the scores of MV and NV? |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Feb 12, 2008 14:29:26 GMT -6
You could fix this two ways...
Owen to WV for McCarty to MV
or Owen and May Watts to WV for McCarty and Steck to MV
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 12, 2008 14:32:36 GMT -6
For all their fancy talk, the proposed boundaries leave WVHS achievement worse off than it is now. Current achievement for all test scores: WVHS 88.4 NVHS 93.6 With the proposed BB boundaries the gap narrowed: WVHS 89.4 MVHS 90.3 NVHS 93.3 But with the new proposed MWG boundaries gap widens: WVHS 88.1 MVHS 91.3 NVHS 93.3 What happened to the BIG FIX?? It appears it is more perception than reality --I have expressed exactly this concern to the SD/SB but what do I know. I would actually like to see something happen for WVHS other than assign a few larger homes to attend there. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 12, 2008 14:35:14 GMT -6
You could fix this two ways... Owen to WV for McCarty to MV or Owen and May Watts to WV for McCarty and Steck to MV Owen 93.2 Watts 94.9 McCarty 81.2 Steck 93.8 |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Feb 12, 2008 14:38:17 GMT -6
Question how are you doing this calcualtion?
Are you just taking the ISAT score of each school and finding the average or are you taking their enrollment % at WV and then determining the score. If you are just averaging the scores you would be underweighting Fry and WE at WV and overweighting the others.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolverine on Feb 12, 2008 14:38:58 GMT -6
For all their fancy talk, the proposed boundaries leave WVHS achievement worse off than it is now. Current achievement for all test scores: WVHS 88.4 NVHS 93.6 With the proposed BB boundaries the gap narrowed: WVHS 89.4 MVHS 90.3 NVHS 93.3 But with the new proposed MWG boundaries gap widens: WVHS 88.1 MVHS 91.3 NVHS 93.3 What happened to the BIG FIX?? Part of the plan is to offer 20 minute tutoring sessions on all buses............. This is really disturbing as well. There were several plans I saw floating around that had lower gaps ....along with lower commute times. I though we had |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Feb 12, 2008 14:41:31 GMT -6
Bob, on my excel spreadsheet I have all test scores multiplied by the number of students in each school and then I sum that and divide it by the enrollment total for an avg achievement score for the school.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 12, 2008 14:43:54 GMT -6
Question how are you doing this calcualtion? Are you just taking the ISAT score of each school and finding the average or are you taking their enrollment % at WV and then determining the score. If you are just averaging the scores you would be underweighting Fry and WE at WV and overweighting the others. weighted by actual enrollment and 06-07 ISAT scores - and includes all school splits as well-- so it is a true average score. would be glad to send to you that's why earlier today I got exact numbers of students i.e. Gombert area sent to MV etc.- still need Peterson split-have all else |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Feb 12, 2008 14:45:18 GMT -6
Actually, on my spreadsheet an Owen to WV, Gombert to MV would work too.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Feb 12, 2008 14:46:15 GMT -6
Question how are you doing this calcualtion? Are you just taking the ISAT score of each school and finding the average or are you taking their enrollment % at WV and then determining the score. If you are just averaging the scores you would be underweighting Fry and WE at WV and overweighting the others. weighted by actual enrollment and 06-07 ISAT scores - and includes all school splits as well-- so it is a true average score. would be glad to send to you that's why earlier today I got exact numbers of students i.e. Gombert area sent to MV etc.- still need Peterson split-have all else So what is your % between the 6 schools at WV. Just off the cuff, if WE Fry and Steck is 65% of the WV student body and using 06-07 ISAT then WV is 89.83.It is about half of the student body: fry Steck We |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 12, 2008 14:56:08 GMT -6
weighted by actual enrollment and 06-07 ISAT scores - and includes all school splits as well-- so it is a true average score. would be glad to send to you that's why earlier today I got exact numbers of students i.e. Gombert area sent to MV etc.- still need Peterson split-have all else So what is your % between the 6 schools at WV. Just off the cuff, if WE Fry and Steck is 65% of the student body and using 06-07 ISAT then WV is 89.83. might be easier to send you thw workbook ( GD has same one) WV Fry 95.9 871 kids 83528.9 weighted score Steck 93.8 663 kids 62189.4 Steck from young 96.3 23 kids 2214.9 WE 94.8 579 kids 54889.2 GT 80.9 615 kids 49753.5 Gombert 82.1 275 kids 22577.5 (others to MV) McCarty 81.2 637 kids 51724.4 Cowl(from McC) 81.2 36 kids 2923.2 Peterson 96.1 444 kids 42668.4 4143 feeder kids 372469.4 weighted score avg 89.9 remembering that xx number of Peterson kids willmove from WV to NV taking their 96.1 avg with them -- I am trying to size that exact number |
|
|
|
Post by hmmm on Feb 12, 2008 14:57:54 GMT -6
Ok, let me get this right... the proprosed boundaries: -widen the achievement gap -don't make geographic sense in relation to distance and somewhat continuity -will not allieviate overcrowding at NV -had someone with a conflict of interest evaluate the pedestrian bridge -will heavily line Laidlaw's pockets -and most importantly... will be built on a potential environmental nightmare with more money than we can afford and this is a good plan because....  ?? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 12, 2008 15:02:11 GMT -6
...because there is a history of leaving school districts with a huge mess to clean up after one leaves with a retirement package.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Feb 12, 2008 15:05:08 GMT -6
You have to prove to me the City of Naperville's and Park District's evaluation was a conflict of interest before I buy this.
|
|
??