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.
Yeah, if your kid has the most important qualities (by far) to succeed academically (IQ, work ethic, and supportive parents) any one of the upper half of the LI districts would be fine.
As you move to the lowest end, there may be some school environment (safety, supplies, etc) issues that impede success.
And I agree these ratings have been around for quite a while, some districts have generally slid and some have generally risen and some have stayed about the same. The more desirable districts are fairly well known in any case.
SAT scores are ****supposed**** to be correlated to IQ score so the rankings purportedly show where the smarter folks live- not necessarily where the better educated folks live.
It would be nice if the state or SAT board would provide a median. Many of the districts high up on the list have little to no low income areas and thus are skewed up higher than those with such areas.
As someone who aced the SAT and was a high education achiever (doctor), I know the SAT is BS. The only thing it measures is the ability to take the SAT. It measures test taking skills more than anything. But since thats what they use to as one of the objective measures of educational achievement, then you play the game and study hard to ace this useless test.
High SAT districts doesn't necessarily mean the kids are smarter, but it definitely means they study harder and take education more seriously.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,091,524 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by chetstash
SAT scores are ****supposed**** to be correlated to IQ score so the rankings purportedly show where the smarter folks live- not necessarily where the better educated folks live.
It would be nice if the state or SAT board would provide a median. Many of the districts high up on the list have little to no low income areas and thus are skewed up higher than those with such areas.
Don't think a median SAT would change the relative rankings much.
Apart from that, there are many students who don't take the SAT (especially those who are not considering college) and that might skew the results in an unanticipated direction.
One takeaway from the SAT rankings: What is up in East Rockaway? 76 on the list if you follow the original link.
Don't think a median SAT would change the relative rankings much.
Apart from that, there are many students who don't take the SAT (especially those who are not considering college) and that might skew the results in an unanticipated direction.
One takeaway from the SAT rankings: What is up in East Rockaway? 76 on the list if you follow the original link.
East Rock has always had kind of a lousy reputation. I would also want to know the story here. It's a beautiful village, surrounded by other nice neighborhoods. Too bad.
As someone who aced the SAT and was a high education achiever (doctor), I know the SAT is BS. The only thing it measures is the ability to take the SAT. It measures test taking skills more than anything. But since thats what they use to as one of the objective measures of educational achievement, then you play the game and study hard to ace this useless test.
High SAT districts doesn't necessarily mean the kids are smarter, but it definitely means they study harder and take education more seriously.
I agree to an extent. I know of a person in college who scored 200 points higher than me on the SATs. He struggled mightily freshman year because he got distracted a ton. I had some distractions but still had a decent average (between 3.3-3.6) that year. He got sucked into the partying that happens at every college. Always other factors to SAT/GPA when it comes to college success.
SAT scores are ****supposed**** to be correlated to IQ score so the rankings purportedly show where the smarter folks live- not necessarily where the better educated folks live.
It would be nice if the state or SAT board would provide a median. Many of the districts high up on the list have little to no low income areas and thus are skewed up higher than those with such areas.
The only thing that correlates to IQ scores is an actual IQ test. You can coach a kid to getting a higher SAT score, but you can't do the same with IQ's.
The main thing these lists show is where the money is. Put up a list of money and hours spent with tutors, coaching, etc. and it will look about the same.
Apparently SAT scores are still quite important in getting into a good school:
From Forbes:
Quote:
Lie #1: Standardized Tests are Less and Less Important
Today, colleges are relying on standardized test scores when making admissions decisions to a far larger degree than they have in years. One reason is that the number of applications at most top colleges is soaring. That’s not because there are more 18 year-olds graduating from high school. It is because more kids are each applying to more colleges. And with little increase in the size of admission staffs at most colleges, schools are using SAT and ACT scores to make a fast, easy cut of the applicant pool.
Of course, no college is going to admit this. Colleges love a big applicant pool; not just to craft a more attractive class, but to show the ranking services just how selective they are. (In the perverse rankings world, more rejections equal a higher ranking.) Instead, colleges are using several forms of numbers subterfuge to obfuscate what is really going on.
The Three Card Monte Test Score Range – Almost every college publishes the range of SAT scores that kids in the last entering class achieved. The schools call this the 25th to 75th percentile range. In other words, 50% of last year’s entering class had scores within this range.
So if a kid sees a school’s 25th-75th range as 1280 to 1430, the student might reasonable think that their 1300 SAT score gives them a fair shot at admission. Wrong. In reality, the bottom 25% (below 1280) is reserved for the school’s “special interests”: athletes, students of color, development (big donors.) “To have a real shot,” says Muska “you really have to be at the upper end of that range.”
For example, Vanderbilt reports its 25-75 SAT range as 1380 – 1550. In reality, most of its unhooked admittees had SAT scores above 1500.
"I figure the teachers, texts, desks, pencils, and IQ's are all essentially similar across many LI districts"
Funniest thing I've ever read online...
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.
