Fairfax County Public schools has released their 2014 SAT scores by high school. As always TJHSST was far ahead of the other schools in all three categories. Other top schools were Langley, Oakton, McLean, Woodson, Madison and Marshall, schools in the highest income parts of the county. While scores at most high schools went up by a few points, some schools continue to decline, Stuart, Edison, Fairfax, and Robinson. Scores at West Potomac high school changed by one point in two categories with no change in the third category. Oddly enough Lee high school had exactly the same scores as last year in all three categories. Both schools are among the lowest scoring schools in the county. All high school scores for the last three years can be found here.
19 comments
[…] More here, here, here, and here, […]
And your point is what?
This question is to BLSkinner
Earlier this year The Cato Institute did a state-by-state review of long-term spending and SAT scores. As spending soars, SAT scores remain flat. http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/state-education-trends
There is no co-relation between increased school costs and school improvement. More money doesn’t mean better schools or higher SAT scores, or any other scores.
Is there any correlation between SAT scores and success in life?
Yes, there is. SAT scores are the best predictor of income at age 40. It seems smart people remain smart and tend to have higher incomes. Makes sense, doesn’t it?
Jeanie – there is so much wrong with your comment. Are you sure you don’t want to retract it.
First, there are other tests that the SAT that colleges use for admission, such as the ACT, so the emphasis on the SAT only focuses on one companies standardized test. But, that is a minor point.
More importantly is you suggestion that SAT scores correlate to success in life. Do you have a study that shows the relationship between SAT scores of a 16-17 year old and their income more that 20 years later.
Even more disturbing is you statement that smart people have high income and your implication that this means they are more successful that those with lower income. Are you really saying that a doctor is more successful than a nurse because the DR earns more? Are you saying that a lawyer is more successful than a school teacher. Are you saying that a housewife is less intelligent that her husband. Are you saying that professional football player is smarter than just about anyone else?
You insistence of using income as a measure of intelligence and success is quite troubling. I challenge the republicans who read this blog to pick a side on this one. Do you agree with Jeanie? Or are you disturbed by her statement?
Are you saying that higher income people are not generally smarter? Really? Doctors and lawyers do not have above average intelligence? Income is not co-related with intelligence? Of course it is.
Of course there are smart people at all income levels, but overall smart people have higher incomes. It’s rather difficult to become a brain surgeon with a less than average IQ.
Yes, someone who is smart at 17 is likely to be smart at 40. And yes there are studies that show that.
Hey J. Professors and Nobel prize winners earn less than junk bond traders but might have a higher intelligence. Do you really think that smart people choose higher laying careers? How about your suggesting that money equates to success. That means that ministers, teachers, first responded who follow their calling are unsuccessful simply because they decide to forgo pay for something else.
Your original point is that SAT scores are the best predictor of future wealth and sucess and that school spending does not equate yo higher SAT scores. One can easily predict you were headed toward advocating lower spending on schools on an attempt to lower taxes. You are quite silly in your argument and very transparent in your purpose.
Though I will say you are consistent with you use of illogical reasoning, non-existent studies, political motivation, and general overall crankiness.
I ask the others here again, do you equate intelligences and wealth with sucess?
Here is but one study, http://www.businessinsider.com/this-chart-proves-just-how-much-sat-scores-predict-future-success-2012-5
I gave you a chance to gracefully back off the idea that success = money but you continue to pursue the point. Your study is a narrow look at income, patents, and tenure tracks at one college but does not look at the notion of success. From your materialistic point of view, you say that housewives cannot be successful because they do not earn outside the home and police officers cannot be successful because they are not paid much. Did you know that a career switcher who moves from industry to public school teaching can take a 60% pay cut to follow a new calling? From your standpoint, they become less successful when they decide to dedicate themselves to the teaching.
I will agree that smarter people and more educated people do better in their chosen profession but I must attack your notion that income is the only true measure of success. Please take notice that no one else on this blog is coming to your defense of money.
I have never said that money is the only measure of success, but it’s difficult to find studies that measure other indices of success.
Your whole point until just now was that income equates to sucess. I am glad to see that you never meant what you wrote. I take it that you now back off the importance of SAT scores.
Of course, this ranting without thinking is your normal SOP
I’ve been poor and no longer am. It’s much easier to be happy when you have money and don’t have to worry about bills, food, cars, housing, etc. Money means more choices and more freedom and less worrying.
I’m cranky? Who knew? I guess I’m not good at conveying my love of life.
To show your intelligence you might want to spell my name correctly. Just sayin’………
Well actually if you look at the spending per student in Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William you will see huge differences in SAT scores based on the spending per student. This is even true among the schools with the highest rates of free and reduced lunch. For 2014, Fairfax is spending $13,472 per student while, Loudoun is spending $11,638 per student and Prince William is spending $10,158 per student. Which has the highest test scores? Fairfax has the highest scores, followed by Loudoun, followed by Prince William. Loudoun is finally starting to catch up to Fairfax now that spending is increasing. SAT scores are not everything, but spending per student clearly has a huge impact in this area. Please consider the facts again.
You forgot to include DC schools which spend close to $18,000 per pupil. They do not do well on SATs. Again, there is no co-relation between education funding and achievement. I will do a post later this evening that proves that point. As per pupil spending across the nation has increased, achievement has decreased.
Fairfax spends far more per pupil at their lowest achieving schools because those schools need more special education teachers, social workers, and counselors. The money in FCPS isn’t going to Langley or TJ, it’s going to all those schools that got stuck with the very expensive IB program, Stuart, Edison, Mount Vernon, Lee and Edison. Check my current post for how poorly those schools perform. http://thebullelephant.com/sat-scores-in-northern-virginia-schools-2014/
Fairfax has the most educated parents in the area. They just might produce the smartest kids (assuming you believe in those silly gene theories) and the children whose parents value education the most. Look at the income and education levels of the parents and you will see where the smartest children are. Loudoun has the income levels, but does not exceed the education levels of parents in Fairfax. I would venture to guess that Fairfax has twice or thrice the percentage of heliocopter parents. Highly educated parents tend to care greatly about how well their children are preforming in school and their SAT scores.
Are you saying we should decrease spending in the public schools?
The educational attainment rate is almost the same for Fairfax County and Loudoun County, in fact it might as well be negligible since Loudoun has an overall higher household income. Fairfax is still 50 points above Loudoun. Could it be that Fairfax has better teachers? or that Fairfax has a system in place for students at risk? Who knows? When you compare all of Fairfax’s lower performing schools to Park View high school, the Fairfax schools generally all come out on top.
And quite honestly, SATs are not everything. It is possible for a school that takes from a very wealthy neighborhood to get great SAT scores but have bad teachers and administrators that are just pushing kids through the system. The rich kids will do well regardless. Whereas you may have a poorer school that gets lower scores, but that actually cares about the students’ success. To a degree I agree with you that it is not all about the money. It has a lot to do with the people who run those schools.
But if you live in a school district like Prince William county, and you are trying to pinch every penny, it gets to the point where the services are inadequate. Having overcrowded classrooms and overworked teachers is a side affect of taking the easy way out.