Shocker: Los Angeles County Test Performance is Largely Predictable by Socioeconomic Status

This is not breaking news. When you look at 2015 English scores from the CAASPP, the top 10 districts are very wealthy:

Out of the list above, Arcadia has the highest rate of socioeconomically disadvantaged students (20%) while the 9 others are all under 8%. Compare this to Montebello at 86.1% or  Compton at 81%.

So how correlated are socioeconomic population and ELA test scores?

Just on their own, there is a pretty moderate correlation. There are some fun outliers to look at: Whittier, El Monte, Rosemead and Alhambra all have pretty good bang for their buck when it comes to socioeconomic status – outperforming the trend line by over 15 points each.

Just as I did with the FO’REAL score, by the end of this week, I plan to regress the scores and get a model that really evaluates whether your district outperformed or underperformed given its demographic make up.

 

2 Replies to “Shocker: Los Angeles County Test Performance is Largely Predictable by Socioeconomic Status”

  1. Mean Old Man says:

    Looking at this and earlier posts…i’m sure the trends are accurate, but questions: are FRMP and “disadvantaged” one in the same? how are they determined? i’ve always been a bit skeptical of the FRMP numbers, assuming they are based on parents filling out a form with no evidence to back up income claims…for example, Alhambra Unified is basically the cities of Alhambra and Monterey Park. according to the US Census, median income is 53-54K with poverty levels around 15%…what FRMP and “disadvantaged” numbers are you working with for these cities?…i’m also curious what the ELA meet/exceed percentage is for AlhambraUSD since you cited it as an outlier….and then i’m also curious if you can pull ELA data for the City of South Gate as a whole….according to the Census, median income there is 43K, with 21% poverty…do you have different income numbers?

    Disclosure: I teach in South Gate and live in Monterrey Park (2 kids).

  2. FRPM is based on self-reported family income. The income levels can be found here: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/nu/rs/scales1516.asp. it is based on income level and family size, not just income – and I find that to be a more accurate measure of poverty than simply using median income. To be fair though, it is self-reported so there is the possibility that people lie so that they can get free lunch (But in personal experience, I have not found that to be a very often occurrence).
    The levels of FRPM can be found embedded in the testing data, and that is where I get my FRPM levels from.
    As for pulling data for South Gate, in order to do that I would need to know exactly which schools are considered South Gate schools – which can be a bit controversial. For example, I believe State Street Elementary pulls from parts of Huntington Park, South Gate and Walnut Park. If you gave me a list of schools, I could put it all together.
    Hope that helps!

Comments are closed.