Newsweek ranks top public high schools

[UCGal]

[quote=AN]What? MMHS ranked higher than Coronado, Scripps, and RB? Wow, that’s definitely surprising to say the least. The best we can do in SD is Westview @181? That’s pretty sad.[/quote]

Preuss was #10 and one of the 4 schools at SDHS’s campus was #60.

But I was surprised by the rankings also. To see University City HS so close to Torrey Pines HS was a shocker to me.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=UCGal][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

UCGal: I went to school up in the SF/Bay Area (in Mountain View) and I was shocked to see some admitted “middling” performers in the top rankings, such as Mountain View HS, Los Altos HS and Monta Vista. Schools such as Gunn (Palo Alto) and Cupertino definitely belong there, but some of the schools mentioned are no great shakes, especially in the college prep department.

Gunn has been a feeder school for Stanford University for years and I know that Los Altos HS (which is a few miles distant from Gunn) struggles to place even a few students in Stanford, instead sending the bulk on to Cal State programs (and no knock on CSU schools, I went to one).

I agree with the data points assessment, but some data points are more meaningful than others.

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.
[/quote]

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=UCGal][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

UCGal: I went to school up in the SF/Bay Area (in Mountain View) and I was shocked to see some admitted “middling” performers in the top rankings, such as Mountain View HS, Los Altos HS and Monta Vista. Schools such as Gunn (Palo Alto) and Cupertino definitely belong there, but some of the schools mentioned are no great shakes, especially in the college prep department.

Gunn has been a feeder school for Stanford University for years and I know that Los Altos HS (which is a few miles distant from Gunn) struggles to place even a few students in Stanford, instead sending the bulk on to Cal State programs (and no knock on CSU schools, I went to one).

I agree with the data points assessment, but some data points are more meaningful than others.

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.
[/quote]

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=UCGal][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

UCGal: I went to school up in the SF/Bay Area (in Mountain View) and I was shocked to see some admitted “middling” performers in the top rankings, such as Mountain View HS, Los Altos HS and Monta Vista. Schools such as Gunn (Palo Alto) and Cupertino definitely belong there, but some of the schools mentioned are no great shakes, especially in the college prep department.

Gunn has been a feeder school for Stanford University for years and I know that Los Altos HS (which is a few miles distant from Gunn) struggles to place even a few students in Stanford, instead sending the bulk on to Cal State programs (and no knock on CSU schools, I went to one).

I agree with the data points assessment, but some data points are more meaningful than others.

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.
[/quote]

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=UCGal][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

UCGal: I went to school up in the SF/Bay Area (in Mountain View) and I was shocked to see some admitted “middling” performers in the top rankings, such as Mountain View HS, Los Altos HS and Monta Vista. Schools such as Gunn (Palo Alto) and Cupertino definitely belong there, but some of the schools mentioned are no great shakes, especially in the college prep department.

Gunn has been a feeder school for Stanford University for years and I know that Los Altos HS (which is a few miles distant from Gunn) struggles to place even a few students in Stanford, instead sending the bulk on to Cal State programs (and no knock on CSU schools, I went to one).

I agree with the data points assessment, but some data points are more meaningful than others.

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.
[/quote]

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=UCGal][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with the results is the methodology used to calculate them.

My understanding is that other criteria, such as dropout rate, GPA per student/class, etc were not taken into account.

Rather the ranking simply looked at the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and Int’l Baccalaureate (IB) participants per school and divided that into the number of students in the school.

Seems like a pretty narrowly defined criterion. [/quote]

UCGal: I went to school up in the SF/Bay Area (in Mountain View) and I was shocked to see some admitted “middling” performers in the top rankings, such as Mountain View HS, Los Altos HS and Monta Vista. Schools such as Gunn (Palo Alto) and Cupertino definitely belong there, but some of the schools mentioned are no great shakes, especially in the college prep department.

Gunn has been a feeder school for Stanford University for years and I know that Los Altos HS (which is a few miles distant from Gunn) struggles to place even a few students in Stanford, instead sending the bulk on to Cal State programs (and no knock on CSU schools, I went to one).

I agree with the data points assessment, but some data points are more meaningful than others.

I agree that the methodology is less than perfect. But it’s the same methodology that newsweek has used for years. It’s a data point… among many data points.
[/quote]

[waiting for bottom]

You forgot San Marcos High at 494!

[waiting for bottom]

You forgot San Marcos High at 494!

[waiting for bottom]

You forgot San Marcos High at 494!

[waiting for bottom]

You forgot San Marcos High at 494!

[Author]

Posts