4 ms·
The race distributions are interesting, sure. But the full report has some better data points for drawing conclusions. Of particular interest to me was the inco
by digdugdirk 4y ago
The race distributions are interesting, sure. But the full report has some better data points for drawing conclusions. Of particular interest to me was the income/parental education differential (obvious increases, but interesting to see by how much) but especially a category for results by when the test was taken - weekend vs in-school. Students who took the test on a weekend were nearly 300pts higher, and the "met requirements" percentage nearly doubled.
It would be particularly interesting to see this parsed out by the same economic and education related parameters in order to see how much an effect just having a smaller quieter "separate" test environment helps a student's score.
- sokoloff 4y agoIsn't that likely driven by a selection bias? "Everyone in school A takes the test in-school" vs "School B does not offer the test, so a subset of school B's students take the test on a weekend." From that alone, I'd expect school B's test results to substantially outperform school A's results.
- uup 4y agoThe test was mandatory for all HS students to take, but I do think there is an element of selection bias. Those who took the test on the weekend may have been more invested in the result. They certainly dedicated at least an extra weekend's worth of time.
- sokoloff 4y agoIt was "mandatory", but still had only an 85% compliance rate. I would bet that almost none of the most academically inclined students were in that 15%.