<p>^ It isn’t funding, it’s demographics and wealth.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a problem if the test doesn’t test the right things. I don’t claim to know whether the tests here in Illinois “test the right things,” but if they do, then I have no problem with instruction geared to equip kids to pass those tests.</p>
<p>The educators will complain, you can’t test some of the valuable things we should be teaching. Yes, I get that. But I’m reminded of a conversation I had with an elementary school district principal a few years ago. He said that his district concentrated on teaching the higher-order skills, things that you couldn’t test with a standardized test. Therefore, he wasn’t worried if his kids didn’t do well on the tests. I asked, “So you’re saying a kid who hasn’t mastered basic skills can be expected to master higher-order ones”? He had no answer for that.</p>
<p>Surely, the NCLB tests are not perfect indicators of the educational worth of a school, and no test could ever be. But the alternative is to just accept the “we all live in Lake Wobegone” message that the educational establishment so loves to live by. They have no problems assessing and grading students on imperfect tests - just when the tables are turned, it becomes another matter entirely.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They’re so highly correlated as to make distinctions mostly meaningless, when you look at a population as a whole (certainly on an individual level there are wealthy people who don’t have much education and poor people who do). I would predict that if you did a correlation between average scores on the ACT within a school district and average income level of the population of that district, you’d see an r value approaching +1.</p>
<p>EDIT: But I do agree with the basic point: what makes the difference is the education level of the parent. It’s just that there’s such a high correlation between that and income (and, in most cases, funding).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In fairness, of the ones you cited, only Hinsdale Central or New Trier could fairly be said to be in “uber-wealthy” areas (and even so, Hinsdale Central does cover some less affluent areas - indeed, I have an employee right now from HC who is from Westmont and lives in a modest apartment near train tracks). I wouldn’t term Neequa Valley or Naperville North “uber-wealthy,” just nice upper middle class.</p>
<p>Not to hijack this thread (more than it already has been) with a discussion of suburban Chicago demographics, but the median family income in Naperville is $120,000. Uber-wealthy? Not compared to Glencoe or Kenilworth, but right in line with Wilmette ($124,000). Guess it depends on your definition of uber-wealthy; living in a community with a median family income of about $45,000, I suppose my perspective is different that some peoples’.</p>
<p>Anyway, I think we’re in agreement on the basic point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am a parent and, while I might agree with that general premise, I think there are exceptions. For example, my D attends a school that is in a very low socioeconomic area, but I would still rate it quite highly despite the fact that it ranks quite low in most indicators (eg graduation rates, college attendees etc). Why? because if a kid wants to, they can get a great education there. They have some great teachers and great programs, most kids just don’t avail themselves of the opportunities. I would prefer that over a school with mediocre teachers/programs where almost everyone does average.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually this point has intrigued me for a while. I’ve been wondering, with NT (my alma mater) slipping so badly, if there isn’t a marginal return beyond which funding and money no longer assist education. IME it is middle to upper middle class areas which turn out the best education. When you get into too wealthy of an area,which the New Trier district when I was growing up was NOT the way it is now. There were a mix of blue collar parents as well as docs and lawyers), I think there is too much competition and every single kid is competing for what become very scarce resources. Cooperation evaporates and people are just at war. </p>
<p>I think, like with happiness, there are diminishing returns on this, in education. Or, this is what I have concluded after leaving the New Trier district for a much less intene area with a better high school.</p>
<p>The other thing that comes into play in a school like New Trier is size. But, I’m not sure that is the answer either, since Stevenson is just as big and is consistently ranked the best public. </p>
<p>It’s an interesting situation, though.</p>