Georgia Schools 7th best in the nation?!?

LisaC

I'm here to spin the moral compass.
I was very pleasantly surprised when I read this!!

From the article:

7. Georgia
> State score: 81.0
> State grade: B-
> High school graduation rate: 62.7% (5th lowest)
> Per pupil expenditure: $9,606 (13th lowest)
Georgia was the only state to receive a perfect score for transitions and alignments, indicating that the state is preparing students to enter postsecondary education and the workforce. Among many other strengths in that department, Georgia is one of only eight states to require that course credits in high school align with the state’s postsecondary education system. Georgia is one of a minority of states that evaluate teachers annually, and is also among the minority in tying teacher evaluations to student performance. The state is also one of just 10 where student performance data has a direct correlation to [color=rgb(102, 136, 51) !important][/color]teacher education programs[color=rgb(102, 136, 51) !important][/color].


Read more: States with the Best and Worst School Systems - 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/2013/01/16/states-with-the-best-and-worst-schools/#ixzz2JfrLCVMT
 
My thoughts exactly, LTD. Ye gods. If Georgia is 7th best, this country is doomed even sooner than I already thought it was.
 
lotstodo said:
How can they completely discount the graduation rate and the low test scores? ???
Actually, according to the article, those were factored in.
 
I don't like articles like this because they often factor in a lot of things besides outcomes. Also, in my quick perusal, I found one factual error: the article stated that North Dakota does not have a way to offer college courses in high school This is not true. My own rural district offers several. Most districts do. There is even a state scholarship that requires the students to take college courses.

To avoid stepping on any toes, I'll analyze South Dakota's entry (supposedly one of the worst states in the nation):

South Dakota is the state with the worst-run school system, according to Education Week. The policies in place in South Dakota would make it very difficult to recruit top teachers. Among other weaknesses, South Dakota doesn’t have pension portability across state lines, doesn’t have a plan to formally differentiate roles among teachers and doesn’t pay teachers to earn national board certification. The state’s governor in 2012 proposed plans to eliminate tenure and pay $15 million annually in bonuses to both high-performing and hard-to-find teachers, although residents voted against the idea in November. South Dakota also scored third from the bottom in transitions and alignments.
[ul]
[*]pension portability: actually pensions are not portable in many states, and what does this have to do with educational quality?
[*]No plan to differentiate roles among teachers: Really? Who cares? Why would the state have anything to do with a teacher's job in an individual school? Especially one with so many tiny school districts?
[*]National Board Certification: actually studies have shown this one has very little impact on student performance, so who cares if a state doesn't support it?
[*]Transitions and Alignments: This one is actually academic, though I have no idea what this particular article used to measure these.
[/ul]

Articles that attempt to paint a state with a broad brush like this cannot accurately rank states. How much weight do they give to different factors? How do they decide which factors to include? How do they rate different factors?

To say "Georgia is seventh best in the nation in graduation rates" is easily measured, although this is fraught with trouble too because it's hard to define the term "dropout". We have a dropout in our statistics who actually moved to another district, enrolled there, and dropped out before attending a day of class.

What about the other things? Maybe a liberal thinks a school should provide condoms? Maybe a conservative thinks schools should teach creationism? And these types of rankings include factors like taxes, teacher pay, and other things that don't actually affect what goes on in the classroom.

I hate articles like this. Can you tell? It doesn't matter how they rate my state.
 
Actually Waski, Georgia's High School graduation rate is one of the WORST in the nation at 67% (cohort method). Only New Mexico and Nevada are worse. Hence my apprehension about the accuracy, or even the point of this article.
 
lotstodo said:
Actually Waski, Georgia's High School graduation rate is one of the WORST in the nation at 67% (cohort method). Only New Mexico and Nevada are worse. Hence my apprehension about the accuracy, or even the point of this article.
I was just throwing out an example of something that could be measured. I know where Georgia ranks in many educational areas, but I chose not to cite any actual Georgia statistics our of respect of the board members.
 
I recall reading an article recently that put the graduation rate over 75%. One of my bigger concerns (actually not bigger since I'm not happy with my son's educational experiences, but that's personal to me and not being factored in statewide) is that even with the Hope Scholarship program, the college graduation rate is quite low. Most of the folks we are sending to higher education are dropping out. And, I personally find the pre-k program a complete waste of money.
 
Madea said:
I recall reading an article recently that put the graduation rate over 75%. One of my bigger concerns (actually not bigger since I'm not happy with my son's educational experiences, but that's personal to me and not being factored in statewide) is that even with the Hope Scholarship program, the college graduation rate is quite low. Most of the folks we are sending to higher education are dropping out. And, I personally find the pre-k program a complete waste of money.

I know that this last year at graduations chairs were pulled up until the day before of kids not graduating because of not being able to pass the high school graduation tests. (this present school year is the first year all of them will not be required to graduate) I would find 75% almost impossible to believe of past years.

The Hope is not paying what it once was (this is the first year for the cut) I believe the college drop out rate will be even more with this factored in. I also agree with you on the pre-k program.
 
Madea said:
I recall reading an article recently that put the graduation rate over 75%. One of my bigger concerns (actually not bigger since I'm not happy with my son's educational experiences, but that's personal to me and not being factored in statewide) is that even with the Hope Scholarship program, the college graduation rate is quite low. Most of the folks we are sending to higher education are dropping out. And, I personally find the pre-k program a complete waste of money.
To my horror, and the horror of the GTAA, it has been proposed that some funding for Georgia's colleges and universities be tied to graduation rates. That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard when it comes to higher education. We have seen that time and time again this does nothing but drop standards, standards which Georgia Tech has stated they refuse to drop. Ever since the Institute has been founded, they have prided themselves on giving everyone who is likely qualified an opportunity. They also have a 31% fourth year graduation rate, one of the lowest in the nation. Don't be fooled, Georgia Tech is hard for a reason. Their graduates must compete not with those from other Georgia Universities for jobs in Georgia, they compete for the top jobs worldwide with the graduates of the world's best engineering and science institutes. They have graduated 14 Astronauts. Offering a shot to every kid with a solid "B" average and very good SAT scores is far different from being forced to graduate them. The alternative will be to lower graduation standards or raise admission qualifications, and the net result of Hope was a lowering of those qualifications to accommodate more students.

I have no problem with giving these kids a chance. Most of the ones who can't cut it will realize that by the end of their freshman year. I do have a problem with some idiot telling me that a certain percentage of them must graduate. If that's the case then Tech will go back to admitting about 35% of the applicants instead of half, and that would take opportunities away from some deserving students.
 
But, Ltd, I think it (my statement) proves the point that not every child should be on a college track. Which is the complete opposite of our blumbler in chief. But, I wasn't suggesting a % cap or anything.
 
Madea said:
I recall reading an article recently that put the graduation rate over 75%. One of my bigger concerns (actually not bigger since I'm not happy with my son's educational experiences, but that's personal to me and not being factored in statewide) is that even with the Hope Scholarship program, the college graduation rate is quite low. Most of the folks we are sending to higher education are dropping out. And, I personally find the pre-k program a complete waste of money.

That is exactly why we chose to go the private pre-k route. Even when I looked at facilities with lottery funded pre-k and private pre-k options, the schools would tell you that there were clearly differences in the two groups. The classes in private pre-k were a lot more focused on teaching the kids and had a lot more advantages, while the lottery funded classses were more about socialization. And, that transitioned over to Kindergarten - there were kids who were clearly farther behind academically than the private pre-k kids. It is a joke!
 
Madea said:
But, Ltd, I think it (my statement) proves the point that not every child should be on a college track. Which is the complete opposite of our blumbler in chief. But, I wasn't suggesting a % cap or anything.
Correct, and not every child should graduate high school with a "B" average either. I don't think the problem is the Hope Scholarship, except in perhaps the influence it has on teachers fudging grades to get a marginal kid the scholarship. The problem is also that Georgia is giving some kids the false impression that they can kill it at places like Georgia Tech or Emory. I've seen this many times. A kid graduates from a Cobb County School (as an example) with AP courses and a "B+" average. He does pretty well on the SAT's. He goes to a quality research institution and is suddenly faced with the prospect of having to actually study and work for a grade. I don't think that every kid is able to go to college, but I also don't think that our schools are really doing a good job preparing students who can achieve for what lies ahead either.

The problem is twofold. A lot of kids are graduating with grades that may over state their abilities, and those kids who do have the aptitude are not being taught how to study when it no longer comes easy to you. In other words, "AP" is in many cases a joke. If you want to prepare a kid for difficult course work in college, you should give them difficult course work in high school and teach them how to learn. We are so concerned with bring up the bottom to average, that we forget that we need to raise that average by bringing up the top as well.

You are correct that some kids are destined to be everything from servers to mechanics. There is nothing wrong with that, we need people to do those jobs. One thing that we don't do in the US that is often done overseas is to directly link achievement to salary in the minds of kids in school. that is as much a social problem as anything. If kids are aware that reward is based on achievement, not just effort, then they can better prepare for their career no matter what it is. People can do well without a degree, but they still must achieve their own goals. Kids are taught that there are no winners and losers until one day they leave school and realize that not only haven't they won, they don't know how to win. By then, it is usually too late.
 
LisaC said:
Madea said:
I recall reading an article recently that put the graduation rate over 75%. One of my bigger concerns (actually not bigger since I'm not happy with my son's educational experiences, but that's personal to me and not being factored in statewide) is that even with the Hope Scholarship program, the college graduation rate is quite low. Most of the folks we are sending to higher education are dropping out. And, I personally find the pre-k program a complete waste of money.

That is exactly why we chose to go the private pre-k route. Even when I looked at facilities with lottery funded pre-k and private pre-k options, the schools would tell you that there were clearly differences in the two groups. The classes in private pre-k were a lot more focused on teaching the kids and had a lot more advantages, while the lottery funded classses were more about socialization. And, that transitioned over to Kindergarten - there were kids who were clearly farther behind academically than the private pre-k kids. It is a joke!

We did private pre-k for both of ours. I really didn't think it was necessary, but we thought the short days would get them accustomed to being away from home. It was 3 hours a day.
 
Back
Top