This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

GASP!!! PS 321 is NOT the best? It got a 'B' ?!?! — Brooklynian

GASP!!! PS 321 is NOT the best? It got a 'B' ?!?!

1646412
1646412
edited November -1 in Park Slope

Subject: GASP!!! PS 321 is NOT the best? It got a 'B' ?!?!

Anyone else in shock?
Check out the grades online....

Look at that ugly 'B'.
321, you can do better, can't you? You make me feel very disappointed.

My goodness. Won't that just turn the neighborhood upside down.

http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/B17D43AA-FD6E-4C11-ADEF-5ACE8E355783/0/Progress_Report_Results_2007.xls

Comments

  • belzjm
    belzjm
    my understanding is that 55% of those scores were based on improvement on test scores by students, so if test scores were already above average, they would not have scored as well as the more underperforming schools.

    i believe the test was more about finding and weeding out the bad (d and f) schools than it was about the top performing ones. they were at a disadvantage based on the criteria for the grading system.
  • doldrums
    doldrums
    PS 107 on 13th st and 8th ave got an A
  • pitu
    pitu
    belzjm wrote: my understanding is that 55% of those scores were based on improvement on test scores by students, so if test scores were already above average, they would not have scored as well as the more underperforming schools.

    i believe the test was more about finding and weeding out the bad (d and f) schools than it was about the top performing ones. they were at a disadvantage based on the criteria for the grading system.
    interesting
    thx for pointing that out

    here's the NYT blog item about making sense of the scores
    http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/making-sense-of-the-new-school-rankings/
  • 1646412
    1646412
    yes, but considering that the 'top tier' high schools - for the most part - maintained their elite status and 321 was eclipsed by its 'little brother' 107, doesn't that say something?
  • 1646412
    1646412
    but on the other hand, here's an interesting - and perhaps entirely legitimate - spin on this sort of issue:

    John Galvin, the assistant principal at a popular Brooklyn middle, I.S. 318, said his school's leadership met to discuss their new grade, a B, but decided not to make any changes. Moving to an A, he said, would require spending many hours on small improvements, moving students who are already passing tests to get just one or two more questions right on a standardized test.

    He said test prep would leave students bored, not stronger learners. "We're not going to give up doing art, music, chess, robotics — all the great programs we have during the day that gifted kids are interested in — just to make sure they get a better or equal score than they got the year before," he said. "We do care about the test, but not enough to sacrifice."

    (from NY Sun)
  • yoda
    yoda
    PS 295 got an A
    the Brooklyn New School got a C
  • veets
    veets
    1646412 wrote: yes, but considering that the 'top tier' high schools - for the most part - maintained their elite status and 321 was eclipsed by its 'little brother' 107, doesn't that say something?
    No... It says nothing about the potential education your kid might have in either school.

    I did like John galvin's response.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    a lot of times its not the school its the kid. the kid could be dumb as doorknob they could be sent to the best schools and still learn nothing!!!

    smart kid goes to crappy school and would still learn something.
  • hamilton
    hamilton

    Subject: stress factor

    who cares ,let kids be kids,it 'll save you a fortune on therapist bills
  • 1646412
    1646412
    veets wrote: [quote=1646412]yes, but considering that the 'top tier' high schools - for the most part - maintained their elite status and 321 was eclipsed by its 'little brother' 107, doesn't that say something?
    No... It says nothing about the potential education your kid might have in either school.

    I did like John galvin's response.

    but what does it say about the 'perceived value' of the 321 experience?

    let's remember there is a significant bias towards 321 and a premium placed on family-sized real estate within the 321 boundaries...

    so, how do we actually judge the efficacy of an education?

    is it based on individual satisfaction (of the parent? of the student?).

    and what is the satisfaction based on? your child getting into stuyvesant? the fact that your child had a good time and made friends while they were there?

    and when you are in the process of choosing how will you know? do you have faith that good things will happen?
    or do you think that the 'proper' choice wards off evil? or that your virtuous choice of a public school (opposed to private) affords one some extra karmic points?


    .... maybe it's just the cultish worship of 321 to the exclusion of all others that rubs me the wrong way.....
  • santa
    santa
    I made B's throughout school and I'm ok.
  • longtimesloper
    longtimesloper
    Boy, you sure seem to have it in for 321!

    First of all, there is nothing wrong with a "B" grade in any sort of report card. If my child brought home all B's, I would be perfectly happy with that.

    Secondly, the NY times article clearly states that a few "prestigious" schools had their grade drop due to the fact that a good portion of the school grade is based on test scores improving. So, if a school tests scores did not improve because the test scores were always high to begin with, their overall grade dropped.
  • restless native
    restless native
    Regardless of what the article says, I don't need a third-party to put me on to the fact that 321 is not exactly churning out Brooklyn's "best and brightest".. anyone who's had any experience with recent 321 alum knows what I'm talking about. :lol:

    Kind of reminds me of my stint working on 7th Ave, when the 321 kids would come in to my store for lunch - snotty 8yr olds waving around 20 dollar bills, debit cards, and cell phones. Now there's a group of kids being raised with the right values. :roll:
  • bluecat
    bluecat
    The real disappointment is PS39 received a "C". I heard they made great improvements w/a new principal this past year so why the "C"?
  • longtimesloper
    longtimesloper
    Restless Native wrote: Regardless of what the article says, I don't need a third-party to put me on to the fact that 321 is not exactly churning out Brooklyn's "best and brightest".. anyone who's had any experience with recent 321 alum knows what I'm talking about. :lol:

    Kind of reminds me of my stint working on 7th Ave, when the 321 kids would come in to my store for lunch - snotty 8yr olds waving around 20 dollar bills, debit cards, and cell phones. Now there's a group of kids being raised with the right values. :roll:
    No, I am sorry, i do not know what you are talking about. Two of my children are recent PS 321 alums and they turned out just fine and are now in college. And, neither of them had 20 dollar bills or debit cards-who gives an 8 year old a debit card? I have a 7 year old going there now, and I don't see any of his friends with debit cards or that kind of cash. Me thinks you are exaggerating.
  • clear
    clear
    This thread is satire, right?
  • jamzer
    jamzer
    clear wrote: This thread is satire, right?
    More like farce I would say.
  • restless native
    restless native
    LongTimeSloper wrote: Me thinks you are exaggerating.
    Ok you've got me, I was exaggerating and making things up, as usual. I never saw any such thing, and 321's children are a model of how all children should be, just as Park Slope is beacon of model urban family living. :)

    Instead of 'snotty', I should've just referred to the new crop of 321 kids as "lemons" - all that money and expectation invested into them, and they still turn out to be duds. :shock:
  • hamilton
    hamilton
    Restless Native wrote: [quote=LongTimeSloper]Me thinks you are exaggerating.
    Ok you've got me, I was exaggerating and making things up, as usual. I never saw any such thing, and 321's children are a model of how all children should be, just as Park Slope is beacon of model urban family living. :)

    Instead of 'snotty', I should've just referred to the new crop of 321 kids as "lemons" - all that money and expectation invested into them, and they still turn out to be duds. :shock:


    Who cares,let lemons be lemons.
  • restless native
    restless native
    Hamilton wrote:

    Who cares,let lemons be lemons.
    Oh believe me I let them, and look forward to seeing those 'unfortunate' tots, whose parents couldn't afford to live in the city's most 'desirable' school districts, run circles around the 321 princes and princesses in the future as grown ups. :wink:
  • belzjm
    belzjm
    generalizations are not helpful.

    i highly doubt more than a handful of said ps. 321 8 year olds have debit cards and cell phones, so saying it as a blanket statement about the kids that go there is really not helpful.

    you don't say very nice things in general, i've noticed.
  • hamilton
    hamilton

    Subject: pseudo educations

    Having worked on Wall Street and watching the so-called elitist join the firm with this strutting, I control the world attitude, was very amusing and enlightening

    We would create pools on how long these self proclaimed geniuses would survive and it wasn't very long,as their common sense,performance, problem solving and people skills were non- existing .

    Most of them would have been better off if their family gave them the $250,000.00 plus spent on an education, that wasn't an education and have them do something they like to do,get drunk,do drugs and wait for Mom and Dad to die so they can collect their inheritance
  • wtgirl
    wtgirl
    O.K. 321 didn't get a perfect score for the perfect kids.

    But what about poor 154 getting a D! A D for a school that the realtors use to jack up the prices over here.
  • hamilton
    hamilton
    WTGirl wrote: O.K. 321 didn't get a perfect score for the perfect kids.

    But what about poor 154 getting a D! A D for a school that the realtors use to jack up the prices over here.
    *********************************************************************************
    Those kids from 154 will probably become real estate brokers
  • hamilton
    hamilton
    Santa wrote: I made B's throughout school and I'm ok.
    Thats good ,hope to see you Dec. 24th,
  • veets
    veets
    Hamilton wrote: [quote=WTGirl]O.K. 321 didn't get a perfect score for the perfect kids.

    But what about poor 154 getting a D! A D for a school that the realtors use to jack up the prices over here.
    *********************************************************************************
    Those kids from 154 will probably become real estate brokers

    Join with me you serious people!!! That was a very funny thing that Hamilton said!!

    This thread is turning in to a "who cares" thread.

    Listened to WNYC today and many discussions about the interpretation of these results with the experts... and writers from the NY Times as well (ha ha).
  • hamilton
    hamilton
    Hamilton wrote: [quote=WTGirl]O.K. 321 didn't get a perfect score for the perfect kids.

    But what about poor 154 getting a D! A D for a school that the realtors use to jack up the prices over here.
    *********************************************************************************
    Those kids from 154 will probably become real estate brokers

    Join with me you serious people!!! That was a very funny thing that Hamilton said!!
    *********************************************************************************
    Whats funny, I was serious.
  • satoriz
    satoriz

    Subject: PS 124 got an A!!!!!!

    Obvously the best school in Park Slope
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories