Characterizing CCA as a “lottery” school is technically correct so I take no issue there but I raise the question of what are a kid’s chances of getting in? I have heard but not confirmed a success rate in the range of 90%. If so, that’s my kind of lottery. I have heard but not confirmed that CCA also has a continuity policy and sibling policy so once you are in there is no need to re-apply and your sibs get preference as well. If the above is true, I would not carve this school out of the analysis of LJ v. CV but instead would make the direct comparison. Per the DoE data CCA’s API in ’12 was 917 vs. LJH at 854. Whether someone finds that difference significant or not is up to them. At the middle school level, the DoE show CVM at 974 vs. Muirlands at 913 for ’12. Significant or not is up to you.
With respect to the SDU transfer policies, I make no assumptions and rely entirely on their published catalogue, which can be downloaded quite easily. It says what it says and I know nothing more.
Regarding socio-economically disadvantaged students, I think the data is clear that LJ has a far higher % than CV, which I assume is due to incoming tranfers from transfer program pattern feeder schools. I would expect some degree of higher motivation or at least higher level of parental involvment with respect to kids who are transferring in relation to those who stay put, for the obvious reasons.
I would expect that the transfer students’ performance in general would be higher than if they did not transfer based again on the obvious. However I think the suggestion that LJ has raised these students’ performance to the level of the average “allegedly more motivated” CV student is not borne out by the data, again at the middle and high school levels.
According to the DoE, the “average” CVM student has an API of 974. The same source states that the average API for a socio-economically disadvantaged youth at Muirlands is 793. That is almost 200 points. Significant or not is up to you. At LJH, the socio-economically disadvantaged API is 737 whereas at CCA the average API is 917. Another large difference.
In fairness to LJ I think there is probably data to support that they are raising the scores of transferees and getting better academic performance out of them which is fantastic and the whole point behind the transfer policies. I think the same holds true for CV regarding their small enrollment of disadvantaged students, who at CVM have an API of 844 and at CCA have an API of 840 per the DoE (which still exceed those of their LJ counterparts but not by nearly as much as the “average” CV score)
Overall I would tend to agree with UCGal to also look beyond the numbers based upon your personal situation because the final correct answer is not necessarily related to an average test score or student background data. Nevertheless the scores are what they are and provide an objective source of comparison.
