Cardinal Sins
Apr. 16th, 2010 10:12 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
essentialsaltesVaroujan pointed out a NYT article on a charter school that was denied an extension of its contract due to low performance. The kicker? The school is run by the Stanford Dept. of Ed.
The article is very interesting, and provides more than just some random anecdata supporting my dim views about both Ed schools AND the feeling of superiority that oozes from Stanford. (obquote: “I would have expected that any school that is overseen by Stanford would have the best scores.”)
To their credit, they didn't choose an easy student population of, say, children of Stanford faculty and Google employees. Instead the population is primarily Latino, with 80% non-native English speakers.
Also to their credit: "Still, Stanford New School has had success in certain areas. The state’s high school completion rate is 80 percent, Stanford New School is 86 percent; and an impressive 96 percent of the charter school’s seniors are accepted to college, even though the most current state numbers show that the average SAT scores per subject hover in the high 300s."
The LA Times' truly marvellous school guide puts Stanford New School's SAT average at 1030. Not too horrible, til you remember that nowadays the SAT has three components instead of two. 1030 coincidentally ties for the lowest average SAT score in LA County's schools. Now there must be an effect due to the higher percentage of the Stanford school's students taking the SAT (since so many are applying to college), but I think there's no question that 1030 is abysmal.
And you'd think the Stanford school would be able to do pretty well with a K-12 school with 500 students. 40-50 kids per grade level? Compared to poor Santee Dairy, er Santee Education Complex, with 3400 kids in 4 grades?
And yet, even if the Stanford New School kids are mainly going to community college and junior college, it does seem that the school has imparted a desire for education in its students, and this is laudable. Unfortunately, the school seems to be a failure at imparting an education.
I'm not saying there's an easy answer to the problem of education. Indeed, if the answer really were 'just listen to the eggheads from Stanford,' then there would be an easy answer, and there isn't.
The article is very interesting, and provides more than just some random anecdata supporting my dim views about both Ed schools AND the feeling of superiority that oozes from Stanford. (obquote: “I would have expected that any school that is overseen by Stanford would have the best scores.”)
To their credit, they didn't choose an easy student population of, say, children of Stanford faculty and Google employees. Instead the population is primarily Latino, with 80% non-native English speakers.
Also to their credit: "Still, Stanford New School has had success in certain areas. The state’s high school completion rate is 80 percent, Stanford New School is 86 percent; and an impressive 96 percent of the charter school’s seniors are accepted to college, even though the most current state numbers show that the average SAT scores per subject hover in the high 300s."
The LA Times' truly marvellous school guide puts Stanford New School's SAT average at 1030. Not too horrible, til you remember that nowadays the SAT has three components instead of two. 1030 coincidentally ties for the lowest average SAT score in LA County's schools. Now there must be an effect due to the higher percentage of the Stanford school's students taking the SAT (since so many are applying to college), but I think there's no question that 1030 is abysmal.
And you'd think the Stanford school would be able to do pretty well with a K-12 school with 500 students. 40-50 kids per grade level? Compared to poor Santee Dairy, er Santee Education Complex, with 3400 kids in 4 grades?
And yet, even if the Stanford New School kids are mainly going to community college and junior college, it does seem that the school has imparted a desire for education in its students, and this is laudable. Unfortunately, the school seems to be a failure at imparting an education.
I'm not saying there's an easy answer to the problem of education. Indeed, if the answer really were 'just listen to the eggheads from Stanford,' then there would be an easy answer, and there isn't.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Ignorant commenting
Date: 2010-04-16 07:38 pm (UTC)Certainly that seems to be part of their message:
Like I said, the number of kids they send to college must affect the low SAT average. So a fairer comparison is API, since all kids take those tests. API is a 1000 point scale with 800 as the target. The LA Times website has Stanford in the bottom 10%, though the actual API score (605) is nowhere near the real bottom of the barrel. There are more than 100 schools in LA county with worse scores, ranging down to 325 (though it looks like most of the schools way down there are alternative or continuation schools [they also have no reported SAT scores, which probably means nobody took it since I see averages reported for schools with 3 SAT takers]).
To make a slightly fairer comparison, I could totally pick at complete random a school like Leuzinger.
Similar ethnic profile, though Stanford has more ESL to deal with. Stanford beats Leuzinger in API, 605 to 576.
Stanford beats Leuzinger in STAR math
Leuzinger beats Stanford in STAR English
(though no one should crow when both schools have proficiency percentages in the teens)
Leuzinger beats Stanford at SAT, 1180 - 1030
But only about 200 out of Leuzingers 750ish seniors took it.
vs 31 of Stanford's 40-50? seniors.
It would be interesting to see where the kids are going to college. I expect a lot of community college. I mean, if there really are 40-some seniors, then there are a dozen kids going to college without an SAT score.
Ouch, I used the power of internet to find the AP scores for the school --
Total of 57 seniors. 28 seniors took 33 AP tests. 23 scores of 1. Four 3's, two 4's and four 5's.
You can slide over to the SAT's as well. 32 of 57 took it. So a little over half, compared to 25% for Leuzinger. Two scored over 1500.