AP scores

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Roadrunner said:

Have you looked at my bio thread? 😂😂😂

As you know, I have 😂. I was thinking more about what would happen if we decided to send the kids to high school, though! 

[rzberrymom]

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

Lol... if we were in high school in CA, there's no way we'd be eligible, since I can't imagine what the point of DD8 taking A-G math or science in high school would be. 

Oh well 😛 . 

She could easily take courses at a local university or community college to satisfy the A-G requirement. Lots of accelerated kids do that here.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, rzberrymom said:

She could easily take courses at a local university or community college to satisfy the A-G requirement. Lots of accelerated kids do that here.

And it's OK if they are not the same classes? Like, if they are past the required classes?

[rzberrymom]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

And it's OK if they are not the same classes? Like, if they are past the required classes?

Of course. The requirements are wide open—way easier to fulfill that any elite private school, in my opinion.

[Roadrunner]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

And it's OK if they are not the same classes? Like, if they are past the required classes?

This is very high school dependent. Usually yes, it’s absolutely OK. 
 

I will have more to report as I navigate my younger kid in the PS system. 

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, rzberrymom said:

Of course. The requirements are wide open—way easier to fulfill that any elite private school, in my opinion.

Cool. I’m not actually in California, so it doesn’t matter 😂. I was just musing — sorry to derail!

[Arcadia]

5 minutes ago, rzberrymom said:

She could easily take courses at a local university or community college to satisfy the A-G requirement. Lots of accelerated kids do that here.

 

4 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

And it's OK if they are not the same classes? Like, if they are past the required classes?

 

Just now, Roadrunner said:

This is very high school dependent. Usually yes, it’s absolutely OK. 
 

I will have more to report as I navigate my younger kid in the PS system. 

The a-g requirements for college applications and the a-g requirements for the ELC (local guarantee) program might be different. For ELC, the participating schools do need to have a full list of UC approved courses. 

“To participate, a school must be located in California, have a College Board school code, and have a full list of UC-approved courses for the most recent academic year”

[lewelma]

On 4/21/2021 at 1:31 PM, JennyD said:

With respect to universities outside the US, however, I will be very interested to see if some of these places stick with their mostly-meritocratic admissions processes as their societies -- and the students admitted through these meritocratic processes -- rapidly become more diverse.  I hope they do, but the American experience is that majority ethnic privilege dies hard.

I'm late to the party, but this is a fascinating thread. NZ has a third way, different from both the US holistic approach and the UK (and others) meritocratic approach.  Like the UK, NZ university admission is based solely on test scores, but unlike the UK, NZ has only a minimum standard for entry rather than students competing with top grades for slots. The minimum standard is the equivalent (roughly) of five AP classes earning a 3 on each. If you get that, you get in to any of the 7 universities in NZ.  And there is also a backup plan for student who cannot meet this minimum requirement -- at the age of 20 you can attend with no requirements at all including any sort of high school 'diploma'. 

The kicker is that university course work here is high level. They don't dumb it down. If you can't cut it, you fail out. First year is free, so you have a chance to figure out if you can cut it without financial impact. You can, however, spend your first year in remedial courses (high school level) that won't count for your degree, so it would take you and extra year to finish with the associated cost.

High level majors are slightly different: Engineering you need roughly five AP classes with a 4 on each (including math and physics). For medicine, the competitive year is the first year of university. Admission into medicine is based on your university freshman grades, not high school (medicine here is not after a bachelors, it is after a 1 year university science year) . 

Personally, I like the model. And it has been wonderful for my younger. He has the test grades, he knows where he wants to go, so One and Done. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by lewelma

[lewelma]

On 4/21/2021 at 12:23 PM, Roadrunner said:

The purpose of college- I have been thinking about this or more about who/how gets selected. I tend to like an old world approach that if you can prove subject competence (A levels in Britain, Bac in France...) the doors open for you and then it’s up to you what you do next. I think acceptance should be based on hard work.

NZ does allow specialization in high school. for the five AP exams, they could be English, Media Studies, Photography, World History, and Geography if you wanted. Or Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Math, and Statistics.  Kids stay broad through 10th grade, then often but not always specialized in 11th and 12th. However, they have to show competence in 10th grade math and 11th grade English to get university entrance regardless on how they specialize. 

[lewelma]

On 4/22/2021 at 2:56 AM, Roadrunner said:

and why are we admitting based on promise? I want to admit based on demonstrated competence. That helps everybody. 

And honestly public universities need to be ashamed looking at their graduation rates.

Interesting assumptions. NZ does not care about graduation rates. Instead it gives every kid a shot, and provides all sorts of helps at the university for minorities and kids like my son with learning disabilities. But a lot of kids fail out.

NZ doesn't admit based on competence or promise. At 20, anyone can go who wants to. At 18, you must meet minimum standards.

[Farrar]

21 minutes ago, lewelma said:

I'm late to the party, but this is a fascinating thread. NZ has a third way, different from both the US holistic approach and the UK (and others) meritocratic approach.  Like the UK, NZ university admission is based solely on test scores, but unlike the UK, NZ has only a minimum standard for entry rather than students competing with top grades for slots. The minimum standard is the equivalent (roughly) of five AP classes earning a 3 on each. If you get that, you get in to any of the 7 universities in NZ.  And there is also a backup plan for student who cannot meet this minimum requirement -- at the age of 20 you can attend with no requirements at all including any sort of high school 'diploma'. 

The kicker is that university course work here is high level. They don't dumb it down. If you can't cut it, you fail out. First year is free, so you have a chance to figure out if you can cut it without financial impact. You can, however, spend your first year in remedial courses (high school level) that won't count for your degree, so it would take you and extra year to finish with the associated cost.

High level majors are slightly different: Engineering you need roughly five AP classes with a 4 on each (including math and physics). For medicine, the competitive year is the first year of university. Admission into medicine is based on your university freshman grades, not high school (medicine here is not after a bachelors, it is after a 1 year university science year) . 

Personally, I like the model. And it has been wonderful for my younger. He has the test grades, he knows where he wants to go, so One and Done. 

One of the problems that you see here is that Americans treat everything like a zero sum game. The schools are selling prestige as much as education. They're not interested in "watering down" their "brand" to provide a quality education to everyone who qualifies. And in this thread, there has been a refusal to accept that many, many students are not just qualified, but overqualified for even the top universities and that many, many of them could find success there. But the top schools actually like that people fight it out. When you throw in race to the conversation, it gets ugly.

I think Americans can't imagine a system where everyone capable gets in. They're suspicious of it. Schools that admit everyone or everyone with some basic minimum are viewed with disdain by a lot of Americans.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Farrar

[lewelma]

I will add that NZ now has specific race targets for medicine admission, with lower entrance criteria for races that are currently underrepresented. Their goal is to get the doctor racial demographic to exactly mirror the population demographic. Māori and Pacific have much worse health outcomes, so there is a huge push to fix this, and one way is to have people able to go to doctors that are from the same culture.

[Arcadia]

5 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Interesting assumptions. NZ does not care about graduation rates. Instead it gives every kid a shot, and provides all sorts of helps at the university for minorities and kids like my son with learning disabilities. But a lot of kids fail out.

I do like the idea. It is cutthroat to get in to public universities where I am from. 
Also taxpayers there would whine if graduation rates are low. 

[lewelma]

14 minutes ago, Farrar said:

Schools that admit everyone or everyone with some basic minimum are viewed with disdain by a lot of Americans.

I bet. But I'm guessing that is because of the culture of schools being 'ranked'. Here all the schools are the same. My local university on the QS international rankings is at the level of The University of Virginia, Georgetown, or Notre Dame. Our top university is listed along side Georgia Tech. So culturally, people know that the universities give a good education even if they accept everyone. 

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2021

Edited April 22, 2021 by lewelma

[Not_a_Number]

11 minutes ago, Farrar said:

And in this thread, there has been a refusal to accept that many, many students are not just qualified, but overqualified for even the top universities and that many, many of them could find success there.

My experience of actually teaching at those schools was that even the kids who got in largely weren’t ready. So I guess I can believe that schools are simply missing all the kids who are ready, but why would I?

[Not_a_Number]

At UT, we had pretty strict instructions to write our calculus exams so that they were exactly like the homework questions with the numbers changed. Otherwise, the pass rate was unacceptably low. As is, it was already too low -- DH has been on a ridiculous number of "calculus reform" committees, where people keep trying to solve the problem of kids who aren't ready. This isn't something people don't care about. 

If you're going to tell me my experiences of actually teaching kids at the college level don't actually matter or count as evidence, I'd like to know why I'm being thus dismissed. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Not_a_Number

[Roadrunner]

21 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Interesting assumptions. NZ does not care about graduation rates. Instead it gives every kid a shot, and provides all sorts of helps at the university for minorities and kids like my son with learning disabilities. But a lot of kids fail out.

NZ doesn't admit based on competence or promise. At 20, anyone can go who wants to. At 18, you must meet minimum standards.

Well, in a way we do as well. Anybody can start at a CC and get a guaranteed transfer to a state CA school. So yes, we also have a door open to everyone, which is why I don’t get why people worry about state schools. 
now private schools can do whatever they want in my opinion. 

[Roadrunner]

39 minutes ago, lewelma said:

I'm late to the party, but this is a fascinating thread. NZ has a third way, different from both the US holistic approach and the UK (and others) meritocratic approach.  Like the UK, NZ university admission is based solely on test scores, but unlike the UK, NZ has only a minimum standard for entry rather than students competing with top grades for slots. The minimum standard is the equivalent (roughly) of five AP classes earning a 3 on each. If you get that, you get in to any of the 7 universities in NZ.  And there is also a backup plan for student who cannot meet this minimum requirement -- at the age of 20 you can attend with no requirements at all including any sort of high school 'diploma'. 

The kicker is that university course work here is high level. They don't dumb it down. If you can't cut it, you fail out. First year is free, so you have a chance to figure out if you can cut it without financial impact. You can, however, spend your first year in remedial courses (high school level) that won't count for your degree, so it would take you and extra year to finish with the associated cost.

High level majors are slightly different: Engineering you need roughly five AP classes with a 4 on each (including math and physics). For medicine, the competitive year is the first year of university. Admission into medicine is based on your university freshman grades, not high school (medicine here is not after a bachelors, it is after a 1 year university science year) . 

Personally, I like the model. And it has been wonderful for my younger. He has the test grades, he knows where he wants to go, so One and Done. 

That’s the sort of system for public universities I would advocate. 

[Sneezyone]

25 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Interesting assumptions. NZ does not care about graduation rates. Instead it gives every kid a shot, and provides all sorts of helps at the university for minorities and kids like my son with learning disabilities. But a lot of kids fail out.

NZ doesn't admit based on competence or promise. At 20, anyone can go who wants to. At 18, you must meet minimum standards.

This is interesting to me. Do you have a national curriculum?

[Roadrunner]

25 minutes ago, Farrar said:

One of the problems that you see here is that Americans treat everything like a zero sum game. The schools are selling prestige as much as education. They're not interested in "watering down" their "brand" to provide a quality education to everyone who qualifies. And in this thread, there has been a refusal to accept that many, many students are not just qualified, but overqualified for even the top universities and that many, many of them could find success there. But the top schools actually like that people fight it out. When you throw in race to the conversation, it gets ugly.

I think Americans can't imagine a system where everyone capable gets in. They're suspicious of it. Schools that admit everyone or everyone with some basic minimum are viewed with disdain by a lot of Americans.

 But you are talking about private universities. I don’t care what they do.

I am talking about tax payer funded public ones. I would love to have a quality standard (like Lewelma’s example) and once that thresholds is met, kids could enter.

Private schools can do whatever they want. Admit all prep school kids for all I care.  
 

Also U.K. might open doors to all qualified, but that’s after these kids have shown competence through A level exams. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Roadrunner

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Roadrunner said:

 But you are talking about private universities. I don’t care what they do.

I am talking about tax payer funded public ones. I would love to have a quality standard (like Lewelma’s example) and once that thresholds is met, kids could enter.

Private schools can do whatever they want. Admit all prep school kids for all I care.  

To be fair, the idea of including GPA as well as test scores isn't crazy. You can see in the chart that Arcadia linked that having both pieces of information is more useful than just having one. 

[Sneezyone]

4 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

 But you are talking about private universities. I don’t care what they do.

I am talking about tax payer funded public ones. I would love to have a quality standard (like Lewelma’s example) and once that thresholds is met, kids could enter.

Private schools can do whatever they want. Admit all prep school kids for all I care.  

It’s not just private universities that get grief tho. In theory, our public universities already have a floor as far as courses taken and passed in high schools. What we lack, however, is a state OR national, standardized curriculum that would give all possible admits access to the same content. We don’t have any will to create one either.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[rzberrymom]

41 minutes ago, lewelma said:

The kicker is that university course work here is high level. They don't dumb it down. If you can't cut it, you fail out.

Germany does it like this too. And anyone can go for free, including international students: https://www.study.eu/article/study-in-germany-for-free-what-you-need-to-know

I’ve seriously thought of shipping my kids over there.

[Roadrunner]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

It’s not just private universities that get grief tho. In theory, our public universities already have a floor as far as courses taken and passed in high schools. What we lack, however, is a national, standardized curriculum that would give all possible admits access to the same content. We don’t have any will to create one either.

Only my nephew got a B in calculus BC at a public school and then failed algebra twice at a CC. 
I don’t see a floor when getting a grade is just a matter of showing up. 
And the part that really pisses me off is his parents thought all was well in high school. I mean a kid had good grades. And then reality hit. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Roadrunner

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

Only my nephew got a B in calculus BC at a public school and then failed algebra twice at a CC. 
I don’t see a floor when getting a grade is just a matter of showing up. 

Totally depends on the school. I’m aware that a lot of schools don’t actually encourage kids to take AP exams b/c they know the kids won’t pass. That’s always been the case tho. Then there’s me...I started AP calculus two months after the school year started and was hopelessly lost all year, didn’t even attend half the spring semester. Big fat F. Still got a 2 on the AP exam. Not even AP courses are standardized, just the exam at the end. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[lewelma]

16 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

This is interesting to me. Do you have a national curriculum?

Yes, we have a national curriculum for high school. All schools take the same external exams (like APs but all essay based), and create internal tests/papers/labs/portfolios based on national standards.  These internal assessments are moderated for equivalence in difficulty and equivalence in grading. Not all schools here are equal obviously, but they do provide the same curriculum, and all grades are comparable across schools. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by lewelma

[Roadrunner]

4 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Totally depends on the school. I’m aware that a lot of schools don’t actually encourage kids to take AP exams b/c they know the kids won’t pass. That’s always been the case tho. Then there’s me...I started AP calculus two months after the school year started and was hopelessly lost all year, didn’t even attend half the spring semester. Big fat F. Still got a 2 on the AP exam. Not even AP courses are standardized, just the exam at the end. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Oh I am sure at a Basis charter in San Jose, the situation is different. This is a somewhat struggling but fairly typical Central Valley CA high school. His grades were just mostly for showing up as we realized once he graduated and attempted college work. I don’t trust GPA out of most schools. 

[regentrude]

8 minutes ago, rzberrymom said:

Germany does it like this too. And anyone can go for free, including international students: https://www.study.eu/article/study-in-germany-for-free-what-you-need-to-know

I’ve seriously thought of shipping my kids over there.

Please keep in mind that German universities treat students like adults and do not offer the coddling that American parents expect of their kids' colleges. Students are responsible for their own education and will not receive much support.
Graded homework, quizzes for attendance, frequent tests, learning centers, tutoring, counseling and advisors - nope. One final at the end of the semester determines the grade, and you organize your own study sessions.
Class availability so you can graduate fast? Not an issue since unis have no incentive to make students get done quickly as there are no rankings. Funding is flat and stretched among too many students.
This system only works for mature students who are used to working independently. Many of the students I teach at my public U would not make it at a German university.

[Sneezyone]

9 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Yes, we have a national curriculum for high school. All schools take the same external exams (like APs but all essay based), and create internal tests/papers/labs/portfolios based on national standards.  These internal assessments are moderated for equivalence in difficulty and equivalence in grading. Not all schools here are equal obviously, but they do provide the same curriculum, and all grades are comparable across schools. 

Ok, yeah, the system you have makes a lot more sense. I’m not sure we could expect any different outcomes here with that testing/admissions scheme layered over such disparate school experiences.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Roadrunner]

6 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Yes, we have a national curriculum for high school. All schools take the same external exams (like APs but all essay based), and create internal tests/papers/labs/portfolios based on national standards.  These internal assessments are moderated for equivalence in difficulty and equivalence in grading. Not all schools here are equal obviously, but they do provide the same curriculum, and all grades are comparable across schools. 

You can’t seek this sort of thing here. As soon as you propose anything, rumbling will start how unfair it is to this group or that group. And I am curious how NZ handles kids with learning issues, because here you can’t really implement anything that puts those kids at a disadvantage, but their learning profiles are unique, so it’s hard to figure out what wouldn’t put them at a disadvantage other than maybe excuse them from all exams or maybe ask portfolios, which could be one way to go as an alternative. I simply don’t know. 

[Roadrunner]

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Ok, yeah, the system you have makes a lot more sense. I’m not sure we could expect any different outcomes here with that testing/admissions scheme layered over such disparate school experiences.

This is it. This is the problem. 

[Sneezyone]

19 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

This is it. This is the problem. 

So many things are based on rankings tho. In theory, it’s a great idea to have a common set of expectations for the whole country but then we wouldn’t be able to teach different versions of US history by state or choose whether to cover evolutionary biology. If you give up ‘local’ control or push for a standardized curriculum, people will rage over the fact that their homes would be devalued if everyone could have access to the same content. There’s a lot invested in the status quo, not just in terms of college admissions.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Not_a_Number]

20 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

This is it. This is the problem. 

Which comes back to the fact that test scores are, in fact, useful data!! 

[Sneezyone]

11 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Which comes back to the fact that test scores are, in fact, useful data!! 

They only reflect what we already know from a bunch of other data points. Disparate opportunities exist. Wealth affords access to more robust content and higher expectations. We don’t need test scores to tell us that. They also don’t help us understand who, among these differently prepared people, can and will succeed if given access to what they’ve missed.

It is a clunky and hamfisted process but we’ve apparently decided it’s better/easier than standardizing our curriculum and learning expectations.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

They only reflect what we already know from a bunch of other data points. Disparate opportunities exist. Wealth affords access to more robust content and higher expectations. We don’t need test scores to tell us that. They also don’t help us understand who, among these differently prepared people, can and will succeed if given access to what they’ve missed.

But we were just talking about how GPAs don't really tell us everything, due to disparate high school experiences...

And in fact, if you look at the chart linked upthread, knowing the GPA and the ACT score gives you more information than one of those pieces of information by themselves. 

For instance, if someone has 30+ on the ACT and a GPA below 2.0, there's clearly something going on 😉 . And indeed, kids like that fail out at high rates. 

[lewelma]

1 hour ago, Roadrunner said:

And I am curious how NZ handles kids with learning issues,

If you have dyslexia or dysgraphia, you get a reader/writer for all assessments.

If you have slow processing speed, you get extra time.

If you have anxiety or ADHD, you get a separate room and possibly break time.

If you have dyscalculia, you can do a lower level of assessment for university entrance requirements in math. We also have a lower level of attainment for English if required. 

etc. 

In addition to the above, you can choose just to take internal assessments that often don't have a time restriction. And you get to focus in 11th and 12th grades, so you can simply skip anything you don't like or are bad at.

Algebra is not required to attend university. 

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by lewelma

[Sneezyone]

10 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

But we were just talking about how GPAs don't really tell us everything, due to disparate high school experiences...

And in fact, if you look at the chart linked upthread, knowing the GPA and the ACT score gives you more information than one of those pieces of information by themselves. 

For instance, if someone has 30+ on the ACT and a GPA below 2.0, there's clearly something going on 😉 . And indeed, kids like that fail out at high rates. 

Test optional is just that. I’d expect kids who need or want to show their testing strengths will continue to do so.

My general point is this—we don’t actually care about meritocracy in this country. We give it lipservice when kids get to certain milestones like high school graduation and then want them all to compete on the same playing field with the same test scores and meeting the same milestones but that’s silly. We know that’s not fair to anyone. Removing testing as a requirement for admission simply acknowledges this reality. It removes the veneer of meritocracy from the process and acknowledges that the goals in admissions are more reflective of equity than equality concerns. If we cared about equality then we would not have the K-12 system that we do.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Roadrunner]

15 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

So many things are based on rankings tho. In theory, it’s a great idea to have a common set of expectations for the whole country but then we wouldn’t be able to teach different versions of US history by state or choose whether to cover evolutionary biology. If you give up ‘local’ control or push for a standardized curriculum, people will rage over the fact that their homes would be devalued if everyone could have access to the same content. There’s a lot invested in the status quo, not just in terms of college admissions.

I do think the core can be standardized - math, sciences, English (say a type of AP English Language goal). I can’t imagine advocating more than 4 exams. I do think even history at its basic core can be standardized, but I don’t see a reason why we can’t offer electives to branch out and go deeper. 
 

I say we could use some home devaluation right about now. 😋

The funny thing is all the districts around here (fancy or poor) are using really same textbooks. So in a way it’s all standardized. Maybe a reading list in English varies, but overall, we are now all using textbooks by few giant curriculum companies. I think the problem is some of it is utter garbage (think math books), but most of all, richer districts hire better teachers because they get more funding. Plus you have more involved parents. It’s really difficult to worry about your kids’ homework when you are working in the fields all day. So we really need better mentorship programs in communities and early intervention. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

Test optional is just that. I’d expect kids who need or want to show their testing strengths will continue to do so.

Hmmm. That's fair. You're right that kids can certainly still choose to take the test. 

 

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

My general point is this—we don’t actually care about meritocracy in this country. We give it lipservice when kids get to certain milestones like high school graduation and then want them all to compete on the same playing field with the same test scores and meeting the same milestones but that’s silly. We know that’s not fair to anyone. Removing testing as a requirement for admission simply acknowledge is this reality. It removes the veneer of meritocracy from the process, and acknowledges that the goals in admissions are more reflective of equity and not equality concerns. If we cared about equality then we would not have the K-12 system that we do.

Well, I care about meritocracy, but you're right that our K-12 system does not. 

[Roadrunner]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Test optional is just that. I’d expect kids who need or want to show their testing strengths will continue to do so.

My general point is this—we don’t actually care about meritocracy in this country. We give it lipservice when kids get to certain milestones like high school graduation and then want them all to compete on the same playing field with the same test scores and meeting the same milestones but that’s silly. We know that’s not fair to anyone. Removing testing as a requirement for admission simply acknowledge is this reality. It removes the veneer of meritocracy from the process, and acknowledges that the goals in admissions are more reflective of equity and not equality concerns. If we cared about equality then we would not have the K-12 system that we do.

We should care about meritocracy though. 
But I am with you over k-12 system. 

[Sneezyone]

12 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

We should care about meritocracy though. 
But I am with you over k-12 system. 

Oh, I agree. I just don’t think there are many takers nationally tho, not when they REALLY understand what that means for them personally. As Farrar said, it’s seen as a zero sum game where if you win, I lose. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

Oh, I agree. I just don’t think there are many takers nationally tho, not when they REALLY understand what that means for them personally. As Farrah said, it’s seen as a zero sum game where if you win, I lose. 

Meritocracy would mean relinquishing unearned privileges, lol. I can see why some people don't want that! 

[Sneezyone]

8 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Meritocracy would mean relinquishing unearned privileges, lol. I can see why some people don't want that! 

I’m not leaving myself out of that either. I’ve acknowledged before that I moved my family to this district and out of DoDEA schools (even tho I preferred living overseas) because the schools are  flat out better. It’s been challenging for my average kiddo but the proof is in the pudding. When kids leave this high school they generally find college easy/easier and feel well-prepared. That can’t be obtained everywhere.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

I’m not leaving myself out of that either. I’ve acknowledged before that I moved my family to this district and out of DoDEA schools (even tho I preferred living overseas) because the schools are  flat out better. It’s been challenging for my average kiddo but the proof is in the pudding. When kids leave this high school they generally find college easy/easier and feel well-prepared. That can’t be obtained everywhere.

I mean, I'm homeschooling because it will give my kids advantages in college. I'm not about to start equalizing the playing field starting with my own kids... I know some people do, but I certainly didn't. 

[lewelma]

1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:

such disparate school experiences.

I went into the statistics. We have 3 levels of attainment - level required for the trades (L2), a full high school diploma (HS), and university entrance (UE).

By decile

                        L2           HS           UE

decile 1-3      70%           59%         30%

decile 8-10      84%         77%          65%

By ethnicity       L2         HS          UE

Māori               69%         55%       30%

European          81%       71%        55%

Data from here: https://www.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/About-us/Information-releases/Ministerial-advice-April-2020/Education-report-Final-2019-NCEA-and-University-Entrance-attaiment-statistics-CR20479.pdf

What I like is that this data is calculated and published. It does show a few things. 1) we have a long way to go to remove inequality. 2) minimum standards on average allow 49% of students to attend university at 18 if they want. 3) Only 67% of students on average earn a high school diploma and 77% of student earn the lower level of diploma required for the trades. We have no grade inflation. You do have to pass the standards, you will not just be pushed through. 

Those UE percentages are to attend universities ranked at the same level as Georgia Tech, UVA, Georgetown, and Notre Dame. So they might be low percentages from the point of anyone can go, but they are much high percentages for top ranked schools than in the USA.

Edited April 22, 2021 by lewelma

[Sneezyone]

41 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I mean, I'm homeschooling because it will give my kids advantages in college. I'm not about to start equalizing the playing field starting with my own kids... I know some people do, but I certainly didn't. 

Oh, I would happily move my peeps to something resembling NZ’s system but I wouldn’t take my chances in Anywhere, USA.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

Oh, I would happily move my peeps to something resembling NZ’s system but I wouldn’t take my chances in Anywhere, USA.

Eh, I wouldn't take my chances in NZ, either. And neither would @lewelma, lol. 

[Roadrunner]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Eh, I wouldn't take my chances in NZ, either. And neither would @lewelma, lol. 

But you are looking for something exceptional. Now for the majority of population, an excellent school that helps them move on to the next step is the goal. 

Edited April 23, 2021 by Roadrunner

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Eh, I wouldn't take my chances in NZ, either. And neither would @lewelma, lol. 

You have different learners. My oldest is totally average. The youngest is too busy sleeping and growing to know we’re working with.

Edited April 23, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

You have different learners. My oldest is totally average.

I'd teach average learners at home, too. But mostly because I'm not an average teacher 😉 .