School Gentrification, part 5823: the actual schools and their numbers

This is a quick post, but in regards to this piece and blog follow-ups (here, here, here), I’ve been sitting on these numbers for a while, so I figured I may as well just publish them for the edification of the Internet.

Here are the fourteen CPS neighborhood elementary schools I identified as being in the process of major gentrification, with each school’s change in the percentage of low-income students and change in the percentage of students exceeding ISAT standards in 2010 and 2013.

  1. Lincoln
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 15.2
      • 2013: 13.2
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 47.4
      • 2013: 56
  2. Burley
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 28.9
      • 2013: 19.9
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 33.3
      • 2013: 41.2
  3. Blaine
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 24.7
      • 2013: 17.1
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 32
      • 2013: 39.7
  4. Alcott
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 27.4
      • 2013: 17.8
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 24.8
      • 2013: 31.2
  5. Audubon
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 40.4
      • 2013: 29.4
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 17.3
      • 2013: 26.4
  6. Ogden
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 27
      • 2013: 21.3
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 23.9
      • 2013: 26.1
  7. Nettelhorst
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 30.9
      • 2013: 28.3
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 17.2
      • 2013: 25.1
  8. Agassiz
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 56.2
      • 2013: 46.8
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 8.6
      • 2013: 24
  9. Columbus
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 88.9
      • 2013: 77.2
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 14.1
      • 2013: 20.2
  10. Waters
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 65.7
      • 2013: 48.2
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 11.7
      • 2013: 19.6
  11. Prescott
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 81.2
      • 2013: 60.4
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 3.9
      • 2013: 17.8
  12. Hamilton
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 62.6
      • 2013: 39.1
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 7.4
      • 2013: 17.6
  13. Ravenswood
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 65.5
      • 2013: 55.2
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 7.5
      • 2013: 13.1
  14. Burr
    • % Low Income
      • 2010: 66.6
      • 2013: 52.3
    • % Exceed
      • 2010: 5.8
      • 2013: 10.7

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “School Gentrification, part 5823: the actual schools and their numbers

  1. Mayer’s a magnet – this list is just for neighborhood schools. This list would be much longer if it included magnets and other selective enrollment schools.

  2. I’m not familiar with the ISAT scoring. Is 56% exceeding, the highest achieving school (Lincoln) good? How would this compare to one of the better suburban schools? My reaction is that 56% isn’t all that good.

    Random observations:
    • It appears that at 20% low income, the results fall off a cliff.
    • Beyond 20%, results can vary all over the board – implies that the staff at individual schools has a significant impact on results. As implies that even with a good staff – results can be disappointing.
    Random opinions:
    • While the injection of 20% poor can have a significant (negative) impact on scores, a 20% non-poor would have minimal (positive) impact on results.
    • Disparities between urban schools and good suburban schools are not too significant until around the 8th grade – when schools take divergent paths.
    • Culture is as big a determinant of achievement as income.

  3. Yes, 56% exceeding is very good. A top suburban school in Naperville, a much lauded Chicago suburb in terms of schools, has 48.5% exceeding.

    1. Yeah, that’s right – it’s a little confusing (my fault) because I used “exceed” scores instead of the much more frequently used exceeds + meets standards composite, which would be much, much higher for all of these schools. But “exceed” is 1) the benchmark that independent researchers suggest means an elementary student is on track for college and 2) much more sensitive than the composite, which can’t distinguish well between the many good schools in the 90-99% range on that metric.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s