Home › Forums › General Discussion › bad news for Tier 3/4 parents
- This topic has 64 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by West Loop Parent.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
cps_lifeParticipant
The CPS CEO will remove the 30% ranked seats for SEHS.
CPS is surveying parents right now with two bad options:
https://cpsengagement.com/selective-enrollment-policy
Option 1: remove 30% rank seats and each tier gets 25% of the seats
Option 2: keep 30% rank seats but give more of the remaining 70% to Tier 1 and Tier 2 students.
Both are bad but option 2 seems less bad.
Why isn’t the status quo an option?
-
cps_newbieGuest
“This new change would make the admissions process more fair, rather than having it tip in favor of students from middle- to upper middle class communities, said Lauren Sartain, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and an an affiliated researcher at the University of Chicago Consortium on School Research.”
^ I think that’s why it’s important to challenge the status quo. To create fairness and give a more equitable admissions process
-
cps_lifeParticipant
It is just words without any substance.
The current system already favors tier1/2 students by putting enforced quota that is only available to them.
The most equitable system is to abolish selective enrollment and invest in neighborhood school. I would love that to happen. The reality is that Chicago spends tons of more money in SEHS while neglecting the majority. To appease voters, Chicago politician uses this factious criterion of equity to diminish the chances of smarter students. What is the point of admitting non-qualified students to a tough environment that they are not prepared for? It is not good for the students, nor for the school. It goes against the intent of SEHS, which is to allow more prepared students to have higher achievement than they can in neighborhood schools.
There are some many issues CPS need to address but the first grand thing this new CEO does is to make the selection system more discriminatory to Tier3/4 students. This the identity politics to the worst.
-
CPSmomof1Guest
I agree that CPS should invest more in neighborhood schools. It is a travesty that students are pit against each other Hunger Games-style in order to receive a great education, but I do not see how changing the current system would let non-qualified students into SEHS. Students would still have to test to get in, and a minimum score would still be in place. SEHS are not meant for better prepared students, but for students who would not be challenged appropriately at a neighborhood school. By definition “better prepared students” refers to students who have been prepared. This does not mean they would be more successful than less prepared students in the long run. There are many tier 1/2 students who are more successful in a SEHS than tier 3/4 prepared students. These students may not have been able to have someone sit with them and ensure they studied material above grade level or completed test prep, but they were able to shine in a SEHS. They just needed the opportunity.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
I don’t think Tier1/2 students admitted with lower scores will do as well as others. By your reasoning, if a Tier1/2 student will do just as well in SEHS, then why not a Tier3/4 student with the same or higher test score? Tests are filters to select students with certain type of habits and goals. Not everyone should go to SEHS. Not everyone should go to Ivy League. Not everyone should study engineering or natural sciences. Not everyone are MDs or lawyers. Society needs all kinds of people. SEHS is not a concept that should fit all people. Some unprepared students will find SEHS highly stressful, which is detrimental to their development.
It is wrong to assume that Tier3/4 student will have someone sit besides them to tutor them or have some test prep. That is a generalization not based on facts. Instead of providing free access to test preparation and make the methodology of selecting test content available to the parents, CPS uses the Tier system to teach students that it is not hard work that counts but where they live.
-
PetraGuest
I’m sorry, do you not understand that the test that CPS uses is almost certainly biased (not intentionally, probably, but hey) in favor of Tier 3/4 students? “Not everyone is cut out to be xyx!!” Ok, but do you REALLY think that more affluent kids of particular demographics just have more NATURAL aptitude than Tier 1 black/brown kids? Come on. The system is flawed. It will always be flawed. But it CAN be improved, and it’s really annoying when the privileged class stands in the way of that.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
I heard this argument before that Math/English tests favor students of certain demographics. This argument is made as if it were the truth but where is the proof?
-
PetraGuest
I haven’t seen you provide proof of your claims/implications that Tier 3/4 students are (overall) more deserving of a seat at a selective school, but sure, I’ll bite.
I don’t have a lot of time to be trying to dig up articles that back up the notion that standardized tests seem to be biased, but here’s one that I think is interesting re: the SAT.
If I recall correctly, Ibram X. Kendi has also written/spoken quite a bit about racial bias in education/testing. I’ll see if I can find something more concrete to share, but in the meantime, I’d say that’s a good starting point.
-
PetraGuest
Also, re: CPS-specific test, I have no idea what is/has been on the SEHS test in the past, but there is a LOT of anecdotal info (both on this very board and in the comments of CPSobsessed) that the SEES test has frequently had questions about money/coins. I feel like the bias there is self-evident.
-
-
cps_lifeParticipant
SEES test is a different matter. Testing 5 year old to determine which school they should enroll is ludicrous IMHO.
It is basically to find out which 5 year old have an attention span longer than the test period.
SEHS tests are fair to all students because they test knowledge the students learn in school, which I presume is the same. Tier 3/4 students don’t necessarily go to better schools than Tier 1/2 students. How do they enjoy any advantage is beyond me.
Even if we accept the premise that the tests are not fair, shouldn’t we change the tests instead of setting quotas? My guess is that the test is not the problem because if it is, then changing the testing methodology and testing content is the easiest approach to take.
We all know, deep down in our heart, that the tests, though flawed, don’t systematically favor any group of students. In fact, no matter how we change the test, the same group of students will always do well.
-
PetraGuest
SEHS tests are fair to all students because they test knowledge the students learn in school, which I presume is the same.
Do you have any proof or evidence to support this presumption? Having spent a decade teaching in Chicago schools, I feel pretty confident in saying that there is absolutely not a standard curriculum across all elementary schools.
Tier 3/4 students don’t necessarily go to better schools than Tier 1/2 students.
“Better” is a pretty nebulous term, but let’s say that CPS’s own Level 1+/1/2/etc. system is sufficient for determining the approximate quality level of schools. Do you have proof that there is no average quality/rating difference between schools with a high proportion of low income students and those with few low income students? Because it sounds to me like you’re suggesting that schools with a majority of low income students are just as highly rated as those with very few low income students, and if so, I’d like to see evidence to back that assertion up.
My guess is that the test is not the problem because if it is, then changing the testing methodology and testing content is the easiest approach to take.
Changing the testing methodology seems like the better approach to me, but I’m certain it would not actually be easier. Quotas are easy. Working to reduce test bias is a long, complicated, iterative process.
We all know, deep down in our heart, that the tests, though flawed, don’t systematically favor any group of students.
Leaving aside the fact that what we know “deep down in our heart” cannot possibly be a legitimate basis for this discussion, I’d also like to emphasize that this is not something that “we all” know or agree with. I vehemently disagree with this premise.
In fact, no matter how we change the test, the same group of students will always do well.
Who is part of the “the same group of students” referred to here? What characteristics do the members of this group share? Would you say that the majority of them are and will always be Tier 3/4 students? If so, why? Is there something innate to Tier 3/4 students that makes them a part of this group, or is it perhaps some external factor that advantages them over others?
-
-
cps_lifeParticipant
“Do you have any proof or evidence to support this presumption? Having spent a decade teaching in Chicago schools, I feel pretty confident in saying that there is absolutely not a standard curriculum across all elementary schools.”
https://www.cps.edu/academics/educational-standards/
This is link to CPS standard. In the past, students have to pass MAP tests, which are standardized tests to evaluate student performance. So, there was at least some target to shoot for. There is no evidence that there is systematic imbalance across CPS students based on income level of the student parents.
For example, I live in Tier 4 area but my neighborhood elementary school is rated 2/10. I don’t think it is a bad school — just lowly rated because of the statistics of student achievement. There is absolutely no correlation between the rating of elementary school and the Tier of the school zone. Most highly related elementary schools are either SEES or lottery schools. Lottery is completely equitable. So no one gets any benefit.
I also disagree that SEES introduces broad-based biases from the start. The portion of students go to SEES is very small compared to the overall student population applying SEHS. This is not sufficient a reason to make SEHS more biased than before.
“Do you have proof that there is no average quality/rating difference between schools with a high proportion of low income students and those with few low income students? Because it sounds to me like you’re suggesting that schools with a majority of low income students are just as highly rated as those with very few low income students, and if so, I’d like to see evidence to back that assertion up.”
I don’t have proof right now but I got the necessary data to crunch some numbers. I can overlay the boundaries of Tiers with the assigned elementary schools () and see whether there is any correlation between school ratings and Tiers. But like I said before, high-rated schools are mostly SEES or lottery-based. So, Tier plays little role in this.
“Changing the testing methodology seems like the better approach to me, but I’m certain it would not actually be easier. Quotas are easy. Working to reduce test bias is a long, complicated, iterative process.”
I can’t disagree more. Changing testing methodology and content is easy to do because the tests are generated from a test bank with a number of adjustable parameters. It is also the right thing to do to ensure a fair system to all students regardless their socioeconomic background. It is also very lazy to simply enforce quota. It shows a blatant disregard to the spirit of fairness of competition. CPS could have invested in free access to test preparation materials and tutoring to help students understand how the entrance exams are designed and how to properly prepare for the exam.
“Who is part of the “the same group of students” referred to here? What characteristics do the members of this group share? Would you say that the majority of them are and will always be Tier 3/4 students? If so, why? Is there something innate to Tier 3/4 students that makes them a part of this group, or is it perhaps some external factor that advantages them over others?”
The same group of students who do well in the SEHS exams are hardworking students with good study habits and lofty goals set for themselves. They don’t have to have the same demographic traits. Correlation is not causation. Just because Tier3/4 students have higher grades, it does not mean that their economic condition causes higher grades. There will always be some achievement gaps between areas. Instead of beating down those who do well, we should lift up those who do not.
-
PetraGuest
Post 1/2
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>For example, I live in Tier 4 area but my neighborhood elementary school is rated 2/10. I don’t think it is a bad school — just lowly rated because of the statistics of student achievement. There is absolutely no correlation between the rating of elementary school and the Tier of the school zone. Most highly related elementary schools are either SEES or lottery schools. Lottery is completely equitable. So no one gets any benefit.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>I think it’s pretty bold to state that there’s no correlation when you haven’t actually run the data to see. It might take a little while, but I definitely intend to take the data that’s available and see whether or not there actually </span><i><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>is</span></i><span style=”font-weight: 400;”> a correlation between school ratings and proportion of low income students. My hypothesis is that there will be. We’ll see.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>Regarding Tier 3/4-area schools with 2/10 ratings, I found at least one school that serves a Tier 3/4 area with a 2/10 rating on greatschools.org: Belding. Interestingly, CPS has Belding rated as a Level 1+ school. There’s no current info on test scores (because covid), but using the web archive, I was able to find that the last time test scores were reported, Belding’s were in about the 85th percentile, on average, for both reading and math (</span><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>SOURCE HERE</span><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>). Great Schools’ numbers are totally different: they claim that Belding’s English scores are “10%” and Math are “16%” and both are well below the national average. Which doesn’t make any sense. Honestly, it looks to me like Belding’s low Great Schools rating is due in large part to incorrect test score data.</span>
-
PetraGuest
Post 2/2
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>I can’t disagree more. Changing testing methodology and content is easy to do because the tests are generated from a test bank with a number of adjustable parameters. . .It is also very lazy to simply enforce quota.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>Here’s some info about how standardized tests get made</span><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>. Does this sound like a quick, easy process? Questions have to be written (and aligned to standards!), pilot tests have to be run, there are a bunch of totally over-my-head algorithms and data analysis happening, completely unanticipated instances of bias are being flagged, etc. Meanwhile, as you said, it’s “lazy” to enforce a quota. Because it’s simple, straightforward, quick, and easy. It is NOT ideal. But it </span><i><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>is </span></i><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>easy.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>The same group of students who do well in the SEHS exams are hardworking students with good study habits and lofty goals set for themselves.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>How do you know this? I have </span><i><span style=”font-weight: 400;”>personally</span></i><span style=”font-weight: 400;”> known extremely hardworking students who absolutely bombed that test, and I know totally lazy doing-just-enough-to-skate-by students who have aced it without putting in any effort. This is just a generalization without any basis in fact or evidence, sorry.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>Just because Tier 3/4 students have higher grades, it does not mean that their economic condition causes higher grades.</span>
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>Ok, so what do you think causes Tier 3/4 students to have higher test scores, grades, etc. than Tier 1/2 students?</span>
-
PetraGuest
Half the time I try to write a longish post with links/sources, the system refuses to post it, and when I finally mange to get it to show up, the formatting is all screwed up. Sorry about the terrible readability, idk what to do about it.
-
-
cps_lifeParticipant
Does this sound like a quick, easy process? Questions have to be written (and aligned to standards!), pilot tests have to be run, there are a bunch of totally over-my-head algorithms and data analysis happening, completely unanticipated instances of bias are being flagged, etc. Meanwhile, as you said, it’s “lazy” to enforce a quota. Because it’s simple, straightforward, quick, and easy.
I messed up what I was trying to say. By simple, I meant that changing the testing methodology and content is simple for the parents. They only need to know one thing — the score. Making tiers is simple for CPS but not simple for the parents, who have to deal with the reality where their children may not get to the schools they want to join even with very competitive score. This year, Payton rejected many Tier 4 kids with 900 points. Where is the fairness in that? The tiebreakers require the students who enter to have perfect component scores. What if that is not enough next year when the new CPS CEO enacts the new system where each Tier gets 25% of the seats? If that is the case, what tier breakers will CPS use then?
-
cps_lifeParticipant
I have known extremely hardworking students who absolutely bombed that test, and I know totally lazy doing-just-enough-to-skate-by students who have aced it without putting in any effort.
I do agree that using high-stake tests alone is probably not a fair way to select students. This is why I say that the methodology needs to change. The MAP tests shouldn’t be removed because it makes it very easy to for a hardworking student to mess up the single test and then miss out the high school they want to join.
However, the reality is that there are always people who rejects the idea of more testing. CPS has decided to use a single test for the selection. It is what we have to work with.
As to students who do not seem to put into any effort still get very high grades in the test, I offer you two possible explanation: 1. the students do work hard but they don’t show because they are very efficient 2. the students are just simply geniuses. Either or both could be true. I don’t think a student who is not a genius and can ace a test without studying.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
Ok, so what do you think causes Tier 3/4 students to have higher test scores, grades, etc. than Tier 1/2 students?
This is a very interesting question and I wish I can have an answer with evidence some day. In the meantime, I speculate that there are following reasons:
1. information
Tier3/4 parents get more information related to SEHS and the necessary testing preparation. It could be the social circles the parents belong to. I didn’t know anything about academic center or SEHS until a friend with an older child explained this to me. It is just by chance that the information was delivered to me. If I don’t have such a friend, I would have had no idea until it is too late.
2. expectation.
This is related to 1 as well. When a parent’s social circle include other parents with higher expectations of their children, it is just natural to develop similar expectation. The fear of left-out is very strong.
3. tradition
Children are strongly influenced by their parents. When parents go to certain school, work in certain discipline, the children are very likely to follow. So, if Tier3/4 parents went to schools similar to SEHS, their children tend to have the strong desire to attend selective schools as well.
4. time/resource
It is possible that Tier3/4 parents are able to spend more time to supervise their children to work harder. There are more resources available to Tier 3/4 parents such as test preparation classes.
This is why I say that CPS should make it easier to get help with test preparation.
-
PetraGuest
I messed up what I was trying to say. By simple, I meant that changing the testing methodology and content is simple for the parents. They only need to know one thing — the score. Making tiers is simple for CPS but not simple for the parents. . .
Oh, now I get what you were saying before! I actually agree with you here.
This is a very interesting question and I wish I can have an answer with evidence some day. In the meantime, I speculate that there are following reasons:
1. information
2. expectation
3. tradition
4. time/resource
I agree, I think all of those factors go into why Tier 3/4 scores tend to trend higher. But I don’t think these factors are separate from socioeconomic level: for example, if you have more money, you can afford more time/resources. Parents with higher education levels are more likely to have the application process on their radar, and to be familiar with application process and all that they entail (i.e. so they’re not going to accidentally miss a deadline, etc.). They can afford to pay for test prep and schedule (and keep up with) a life full of academically enriching experiences for their children.
This year, Payton rejected many Tier 4 kids with 900 points. Where is the fairness in that? The tiebreakers require the students who enter to have perfect component scores. What if that is not enough next year when the new CPS CEO enacts the new system where each Tier gets 25% of the seats? If that is the case, what tier breakers will CPS use then?
I think CPS should stop giving scores in percentiles and switch to a scale score that’s more granular. If 99s can now look like anywhere from, say, 875-900 on a hypothetical 900 point scale (which, it doesn’t have to be 900 points, I just picked that randomly), then now you’ve got a 25-point spread and a more varied score distribution instead of thousands of kids with perfect scores.
-
-
-
-
-
-
LeeGuest
They should not change the current system but should instead improve the schools in the tier 1 neighborhoods. The current tier 1 average scores to enter the selective high schools are already below the minimum of the other tiers. That’s unfair to the students that had higher scores but weren’t able to get into the top schools.
Another solution would be to open up another selective school near Humbolt Park. This area of Chicago has been gentrifying quickly and is also close to the west side neighborhoods. To open up a successful selective high school, it needs to be close enough for the white and asian students to travel to. This would be a great location because it is close to the tier 1 students on the west side as well.
-
PetraGuest
Test scores of Tier 1 Kindergarten applicants (so…4 and 5 year olds) to SEES are, on average, a lot lower than those of Tier 4 applicants. So if Tier 1 students are already starting at a significant disadvantage/deficit before they even begin school, their schools are going to need to be significantly BETTER than those in mainly Tier 4 areas in order to get their test scores on par with those of higher income applicants. (Important caveat: I don’t personally think that the SEES test perfectly and impartially measures academic aptitude; the fact that Tier 1/2 students tend to score lower than Tier 3/4 students does not mean that they’re any less intelligent or capable, it just means that their early life experiences don’t typically translate as easily to a high test score…and for some Tier 3/4 students, who have been prepped, their high test scores are simply a function of deliberate preparation, not natural aptitude.) And I guarantee that any plan that tries to accomplish elevating Tier 1-area schools like this is going to face the same kind of pushback this proposal has…from the same set/demographic of parents.
Another solution would be to open up another selective school near Humbolt Park.
Maybe they could name it “Westinghouse“!
-
PetraGuest
Adding bc I don’t think I was clear about why I was mentioning SEES scores when you were referring to Tier 1 SEHS scores being lower:
If Tier 1 students’ test scores are already significantly below Tier 4 students’ scores at age 4-5, then how do you expect them to catch up by the time they’re in 8th grade? You say “improve Tier 1 schools,” but the reality is you’re saying students in Tier 1 schools need to consistently have more academic growth each year than Tier 4 students. This means that their schools must not only be on par with Tier 4 schools, but, arguably, better.
I hope that makes sense!
-
-
Cps teacher and parentGuest
You can invest in neighborhood schools all you want, but unless neighborhood schools no longer have to take every student, the problems they face will remain. I do not want my 14 year old sitting in a class with a 21 year old. I also do no want my kid in a class with a kid who is awaiting trial for a serious crime or has already been sentenced to one sand is wearing an ankle bracelet in class. I don’t want my kids in school with gangbangers. Having taught in a neighborhood school, I would not send my kid there with the current student population. The selective enrollments schools don’t have better teachers. What they have is a better student population.
-
hparkerParticipant
Exactly. There was a study from UofC a couple of years ago showing that SEHSs don’t help much academically for the prepared or “good” students. It’s the safety there above all other reasons that attracts like-minded families.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
Well. It does help in getting some students into very prestigious universities. SEHS developed a reputation where top students in there excel in those universities and they rarely turn out duds. I am not saying this is fair but it is the reality we are living with.
-
-
-
qrGuest
In 30% top scorers there are 73% from T3 and T4. The rest, 27%, are from T1+T2. We don’t know how the % would be assigned for T3 and T4 if 30% stays. They are asking us to form an opinion on the imperfect information., which is insane! Unless we get more information, I think it’s better to have fixed 25% per tier than a variable 30% plus, what I assume, 10% per T3 and T4.
All kids from T3 and T4 who score 900 deserve to be in a school of their choice. Those kids and families worked extremely hard for two years, at least, to be where they are. Depriving them of the possibility to ripe fruits of their hard work is ridiculous.
-
hparkerParticipant
CPS has very stupidly made it rather easy to get a perfect total score.
-
mjbGuest
No, CPS scores are not raw scores, rather scaled scores based on percentiles. A perfect score doesn’t mean get all questions correct, only means the kid scored higher than 95% (for example) of the kids. So, there will always be a percentage of kids get “perfect” scores every year. That’s why even if two kids get the same 900 perfect scores, 1 can get into a school and the other cannot, because CPS uses actual scores to break the tie.
-
PetraGuest
I think the previous poster means that CPS has chosen a stupid way to communicate scores to students and families. If you have a score out of 900 on a 900 point scale, your brain is going to interpret that as “perfect”. Psychologically, if you then don’t get into your top-choice school, the impact of that is going to feel more unfair than if you had a 1520 and the cut score was a 1590 (both of which have historically been 99th percentile SAT scores). In the latter case, you’ve still got a 99th percentile score, but if those 99th percentile scores are spread across a wider range, then there’s less of a chance of it seeming like you were screwed over. It’s not, “Hey, I had a 900 too, why’d I get rejected?! That’s not fair!” Instead, you know that you missed the cut by 70 points, which, while painful in its own way, is going to reduce the feeling-of-unfairness factor.
CPS needs to get rid of percentile scores for the SEHS exam and replace them with a scale score that allows for greater variation (i.e. 99th percentile scores can range from 1520-1600, or 840-900, or 470-500, etc.).
-
-
qrGuest
@ hparker
<div class=”bbp-author-role”>How come CPS made it easier the get a perfect score?!? Do you have a 7th grader in a good school that scored enough to be considered a 900-scorer? Abandoning the NWEA did make things easier, but not for T4/T3.</div>
<div></div>
<div>You are aware that grades from the 7th grade count too and 7th grade is not easy? Kids have to always be on top of the game. My 7th grader was killing herself with all the work she needed to do, and there were loads of serious work. Too many nights she went to bed around midnight, so no, in her particular school, it was not easy to get all As.</div>
<div>It is extremely disrespectful from your side to generalise and say that CPS made it easy for kids to get a perfect score. In the future, CPS’s will make it easy for kids that don’t put enough effort, for whatever reason, to get into the top schools but it’s not making it easy for hard working kids from T4+T3 to get in.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Are you also aware that in WP this year at least 47.5% of kids scored enough to be considered perfect? And also that some kids from T1 and T2 scored 900, so it’s not unheard of to have a hard working kids in those tiers too?</div>
<div>(all kudos to those kids (and families), I would like to see CPS giving them monthly monetary stipend to keep them motivated in doing a great work).</div>
<div></div>
<div>A hard working kid from T1 and T2 will always make the cut but not the kids from T3 and T4. And not everyone living in T4 can afford private schooling for their kids.</div>-
PetraGuest
I’m almost certain that hparker meant “easy” in the sense that hundreds of SEHS applicants were able to achieve the highest possible score of 900. Lots of kids got a 900; hence, it’s “too easy” to get one. No one’s saying that achieving a score of 900 doesn’t take a lot of effort for most students. However, CPS should rethink an application process that allows so many students to have the perception that they have a “perfect” score.
Also I’m not sure what’s up with all this “hardworking T3/4 kids are being punished!!!” rhetoric. There are already TONS of hardworking students who aren’t getting into their preferred school, and some aren’t getting into any SEHS at all. These hardworking kids don’t all live in Tier 3 or 4, either. Straight-A students from affluent families have plenty of high school options available, and if they don’t make the cut at Payton, like…so what? It’s not like there’s a lack of options or their chances to attend a prestigious university have been dashed.
-
hparkerParticipant
“Are you also aware that in WP this year at least 47.5% of kids scored enough to be considered perfect? ” – This is an excellent example of the problem created by CPS scoring. Too many kids gained a false notion of their being perfect, while in reality they could have gotten a fair number of questions wrong in the exam.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
This is an excellent example of the problem created by CPS scoring. Too many kids gained a false notion of their being perfect, while in reality they could have gotten a fair number of questions wrong in the exam.
CPS scoring is based on national ranked percentile, which is in turn based on statistical likelihood of a student getting a question right according to some mysterious statistics.
If Chicago students are consistent with the national ranking methodology, a ‘perfect’ score, 99% on both Math and English should mean that the student with this score is better than 99% of current student pool.
I estimate 25,000 CPS students are in 8th grade but I don’t know how many non-CPS students also took the test. Let’s say there are 30,000 students in total took the test. Then, there are roughly 300 students with ‘perfect’ score. Among these 300 students, up to 140 applied to Payton, between 90 and 140 applied to Northside, and the rest applied to other schools. That is just a very rough guess. Yes, there are 900 points student who did not get into Payton. There are component scores. 99% in ELA doesn’t mean 99% in Reading, Vocabulary, and Language Arts. It is still tough to get to 99% on everything — even if you get a few wrong.
We get the feeling that there are a lot of kids reporting ‘perfect’ score is because (1) everyone took the test (2) everyone knows the score the same time and early.
-
-
-
-
cps_lifeParticipant
I think option 2 is still better because it didn’t specify what the percentage for Tier 3/4 would be. It can be 5% or it can be 14%.
If they pick option 2, there is still a fighting chance.
I am all for equity but I think using quota is not going to help. Making test preparation accessible does.
-
ESGuest
Reading through this as well as another thread where people describe pervasive gaming of the system, I feel like both options will not produce the results CPS wants and only will allow more system gamers to get in.
Maybe, a better option would be to eliminate tiers, award all spots based on rank, no principal discretion, test every single student at school, and provide extra free prep resources to neighborhood schools in tiers 1 and 2, not students officially residing there, but actually attending tier 1 and 2 neighborhood schools.
This may still not be 100% equitable, but at least as close to equitable as it can get.
-
LsmomGuest
That’s the New York system, and would make the schools less diverse. There’s no chance of moving to straight rank.
-
-
-
-
mjbGuest
Among 11 SEHSs, 5 of them
Brooks, King, Lindblom, Southside, Westinghouse
Tier 4 kids needs lower scores to get in than Tier 1 kids.
while for Hancock Tier 1 and Tier 4 need similar scores.
Then for Payton, Northside, Jones, WY, Lane Tier 4 needs substantial higher scores than Tier 1.
Is the system that unfair?
It reflects a chicago reality: a segregated city. CPS will have 0 impact to remedy the situation. I’m not sure what CPS wants to achieve. Pure political BS. Much ado about nothing.
-
ESGuest
Cut off scores is a function of the number of applicants. If not too many tier 4 kids apply for Lindblom, whether it is school rank or location, cut off scores will be lower.
-
Southside DadGuest
I wonder, of the Black and Brown kids that attend Young, Jones, Northside, Lane, and Payton, the number that are from Tier 4. Because my thinking is, if some of these kids weren’t able to get into these schools because of the change in selection methodology, then quite a few might go to other SEHS like Westinghouse, Brooks, Lindblom, South Shore, and Hancock. And if that happens, maybe the Tier 4 cutoff at those schools increases.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
It is tough to build an attractive high school.
You need 3 things:
1. updated facility
2. great teachers (principal)
3. motivated students
CPS invests in 1 and 2 but don’t always get 3 for every school.
The current list of SEHS may have 1 and 2 but not always 3.
It is hard to know why. Payton was not top-ranked at the beginning but it rises rapidly to the top. Lane was always good and kept being good despite its size. Maybe someone should study the reason why so that all SEHS become good and the competition becomes less severe.
-
ESGuest
I think its location that’s convenient for both north and south sides results in more applications. Additionally, it’s a quarter of Lane size, so that increases number of kids vying for one seat even more. The result is the cutoff scores are superinflated and the image as the most desired school is established.
-
-
-
jazzmanGuest
The only real problem with Brooks or Lindbolm would be its location more so Lindbolm but the students are very safe without problems from the area. Brooks has one of the most beautiful campus of All the High Schools in Chicago don’t believe me go take a visit and you will be amazed. Lindbolm or Brooks is located in a tier 4 neighborhood.
-
momGuest
Yes, agree. Location is a big factor when attracting students. My kid attended a sports event at Brooks HS not long ago and was highly impressed by the campus. Said the football field was beautiful, pool was ‘awesome’ like no other in CPS, building is new, and even has a public library on site. The only downside was the commute from the northside, during rush hour my kids team took about 1.5 hrs to get there. It would be impossible for many families if parent’s work is downtown or farther north. Not even sure if public transportation Brooks is available for kids to do after school activities.
-
-
chitownmamaGuest
Does anyone know if CPS announced if one of these options will be implement for the 2023-34 admissions? The articles all say that CPS would post the decision, but I can’t locate any additional information. I’ve also contacted CPS with this question and haven’t received a reply.
-
cps-thoughtsGuest
I don’t think there can be any changes for the 2023-24 school year since the proposed changes would need to be approved by the Board first. As I understand it, the proposed changes have not yet even been put to a vote.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
This is a good thing. The longer this waits, the better since more people will realize how ridiculous the move is.
CPS has a lot of problems and the new CEO’s first significant decision a big middle-finger to many CPS families.
I know for a fact that a wealthy family’s child got into a good school by having an address in a lower tier. The tier system is fully of loopholes that trucks can drive through. It only punishes the families without means to cheat or don’t have the stamina to cheat.
-
ESGuest
Agree, a couple of kids at our SEES class whose address is officially in tier 1 ride to school in brand new luxury cars.
If rules are going to change, they need to determine tiers by parents’ income based on the IRS transcripts for the past 5 years or so, not even w2.
This way it will be much harder to cheat.
-
-
-
-
frustrating….Guest
For Tier 4 – the penalty you pay for living in a safe nice neighborhood is basically having to do private high school or move away when your kiddos hit puberty. SEHS is great if you can get in, but whole idea that you can take the 10,000 or so brightest kids off the top and put them in really nice public schools together, and leave the rest to some really bad and underfunded ones without the same opportunities or course offerings is fundamentally flawed.
-
Honest QuestionGuest
Honest question here, as my kids are still very young and I know very little about high school options. What are non-SEHS high schools like in safe nice neighborhoods? I’m thinking Lakeview HS, Lincoln Park HS, Amundsen. I know at least a couple have honors and IB programs. Are they really that bad that they would prompt a move?
It seems like part of the motive or expected result of implementing this relatively small change in how they allocate seats at SEHS is to bolster those neighborhood high schools. This makes sense to me. The whole selective enrollment system is a rat race, but I do think there is a place for it in providing a very high level of education to as wide a socio economic and racial student as possibility, even if it falls short of the ideal in practice. Still, it would be awesome if non SEHS high schools had the same appeal as some non-SEES neighborhood elementary schools.
With regard to the current tier system, no it’s definitely not perfect, but I just don’t see a huge public school system pivoting to relying on individual applicants IRS or other income related documentation for each applicant to more evenly allocate seats. That would be a nightmare for CPS to administer and could cut a lot of people out of the system who don’t want to do or submit to the paperwork and others would find loopholes.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
Each CPS applicant is given a form to declare their family income. This can be made mandatory to determine their Tier status. This is easily verifiable through the state tax system. It is certainly not perfect but far more reliable than address. The reason I suspect that this was not adopted is not due to cost or complexity. I think this will close the giant loophole many wealthy families are taking advantage of.
-
-
cps_lifeParticipant
You don’t need to be in SEHS to excel. Many parents choose SEHS for safety reasons. Spreading resources to each school evenly is probably the better approach but I doubt that is the only reason that some SEHS are more competitive than the others.
The reality is that if the current Tier system is changed for the worse, then more families would be forced to use a secondary address in lower Tiers to give their children an edge. I don’t see any enforcement action ever from CPS on Tier system abuses.
-
-
ESGuest
Actually income verification via tax records would be very easy to administer. It would be less of a nightmare than the current address verification, fraud investigation and so on.
There would be huge savings also if cps were to adopt the income based tier system.
-
IncomeGuest
I would not submit my personal information to cps. We all received notice this summer that our kids data was leaked by a cps third party. Also, those families with true W-2s or income verifiable forms will lose out to those families who cash basis business income.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
The ship has sailed. Experian, the company knows more about you than yourself, was hacked a few years ago. Everyone’s financial information can be bought in the dark web nowadays.
-
-
IncomeGuest
<p style=”text-align: left;”>Regardless, I’m not giving my info to cps because it won’t make a difference for tier 4s who are middle income but can’t afford private., I agree with above about other non sehs options. We certainly will be looking into non sehs.</p>
-
ESGuest
It is ok not to want to provide your income information, cps could just consider those automatically tier 4.
Regarding cash based businesses. Those people, if they want to be able to apply for a car loan or mortgage, have to file taxes. Those who use cash only throughout their lives are a minority. There will be always exceptions, but again, right now there are way more people who have tier 4 income and buy tier 1 properties to cheat than there will be people who only use cash and have no official income. Besides, people with that mentality and way of life usually do not provide the educational resources for kids, it is not their priority, so I would not mind those considered tier 1.
-
cool_momGuest
My two cents here:
We moved to a tier 2 apartment back in 2014 (way before we even decided to have kids) and simply stayed here because we love where we are. I recognize this may give us some advantage when applying to schools but please saying that anyone “cheats” is wrong. The system is set up this way and while there are some families that intentionally move to “worse” Tiers for the sake of securing a better chance at some of the SE schools, that is not the case with all people who live in Tier 1 or Tier 2 who drive “a luxury car”. I think we need to be less judgmental also towards what we think other people own or should own, or should not own… it is not your business to say that someone who lives in Tier 1 should not afford a good car (or “luxury car”). We can move anywhere we want, apply to any school we want, and nothing about it is “cheating” because it is not illegal to do all that. I would never intentionally move to a low tier neighborhood to secure a better spot for my already very privileged kids that have access to so many recourses and also just because I am already in Tier 2 with higher income I will try to move to upper Tier to “not cheat”… please don’t judge a book by its cover.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
Well, your situation is exactly what is wrong with system. No one is blaming you for living in Tier 2 and take advantage of the system. If I had the foresight to live in a place I like in Tier 2 I would do so as well. Like others said, it goes against the spirit of the system, which is supposed to make the selection process more equitable but somehow makes it less equitable. Tier 2 has quite a big advantage. It is just not fair to the students who work extremely hard but still can’t achieve their goals because of where they live.
- This reply was modified 2 years, 3 months ago by cps_life.
-
West Loop ParentGuest
Can you please tell me what your neighborhood is so we can move to that tier too? Thanks!
-
ESGuest
There are pockets of tier 2 in West LP by the British school and Skinner North. Just one example if you can afford it.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
I just saw it. This makes me so angry that a luxury condo building full of million dollar units is listed as Tier 3.
The vast expanse of the areas included luxury buildings are considered Tier 2 and Tier 3.
You are right. One has to be really rich to be considered poor in Chicago.
-
cps_lifeParticipant
Here is a gem:
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1326-N-Cleveland-Ave-Chicago-IL-60610/80835440_zpid/
Tier 2 housing for a cool 2.1 million and change.
-
-
-
-
-
ESGuest
My point was that the current tier system is flawed as it does not really account for the true resources a child has access to.
E.g. there are almost a million dollar condos across the street from Skinner North. The address is tier 2. Someone who can afford to buy a condo in that tier 2 obviously has the resources of tier 4.
Basing tiers on income would be a better and more equitable way to determine who should be in what tier.
-
West Loop ParentGuest
Indeed They should just get rid of the tier systems and just look at the students grades/entrance exam scores.
-
-
-
AuthorPosts