Matt Barnum and Gabrielle LaMarr LeMee wrote a provocative article about the way that a private school rating agency rates schools and steers patents toward white affluent schools and away from schools where children of color predominate. Larry Cuban reposted the article on his blog.
GreatSchools ratings effectively penalize schools that serve largely low-income students and those serving largely black and Hispanic students, generally giving them significantly lower ratings than schools serving more affluent and more white and Asian students, a Chalkbeat analysis found.
And yet, according to GreatSchools’ own data, many schools serving low-income, black, and Hispanic populations are doing a good job helping students learn math and English. But those schools still face long odds of getting an above-average rating on GreatSchools — likely because their students are arriving far behind.
The result is a ubiquitous, privately run school ratings system that is steering people toward whiter, more affluent schools. A recent preliminary study found that as the site rolled out an earlier version of its ratings, areas with highly rated schools saw increases in home prices and rises in the number of white, Asian, and better-educated families. After three years, the study found, property values in those areas increased by nearly $7,000, making it more difficult for low-income families to buy into the areas.
Readers of this blog will not be surprised to learn that this rating service is funded in part by rightwing foundations that want to promote school choice and destroy neighborhood schools. Most notable among the funders is the Walton Family Foundation, which despises public schools and eagerly promote charter schools and vouchers.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“GreatSchools had intentions to provide some equity.” Greatschools was intended to give parents information to help them select a school for their children. Instead, it became a vehicle to more isolation and segregation in the same way that charter schools were intended improve all schools through competition. Any statistical model based on test scores will result in whiter more affluent schools being viewed as superior. Instead of helping schools become more equitable, it enhances segregation just like privatization. Diverse schools end up with lower ratings.
Instead relying on scores, schools should be rated by the services they provide. Parents should consider class sizes, the training and experience of the teachers, and whether the school offers support by having a school nurse, a social worker, a well equipped library, an adequate, safe physical plant, access to a psychologist, an effective administration and support teachers that serve special education and ELL populations. How the school functions and supports students is far more important than misleading standardized test scores.
I commented onLarry Cuban’s blog that GreatSchools is a marketing environment where ratings are rigged and data from users is leased or sold for a fee. For a fee, advertisers can push users to their preferred school(s).
The rating scheme for schools is clear as MUD. See for yourself here and note of all the hedging. The rating scheme had to be modified with the passage of ESSA because each state had some options on measures. If you are interested in the dark arts of score-keeping in education see https://www.greatschools.org/gk/ratings-methodology/https://www.greatschools.org/gk/ratings-methodology/
dark arts. YES.
I read a lot of ed reformers and Chalkbeat is the only reform media outlet who publish anything critical of reform.
They should be credited with that.
The school ratings are perfectly consistent with ed reform ideology (and it is an ideology)- the belief goes that if people are given information markets will work and people will “vote with their feet”. That this doesn’t address any of the practicalities or geography or real life application of the ideology doesn’t matter. It has to work, thus it will work- it just needs freer markets or better information or more choice.
The truth is the ed reform theory can never be really tested without a 100% voucher system. They’re all heading in that direction because they have to. Their systems don’t make any sense without it. They don’t tell the public that because it’s truly a radical change and they have no earthly idea how it will actually play out, but they get further and further down the voucher road every year because it’s inevitable. Will not work without vouchers and abolishing public systems. They’ll all end up there eventually. They’re halfway there already.
Every single thing their critics said about them has proven to be true – it all does end at vouchers. They’re already further Right than Barry Goldwater ever dreamed of, and they’re only halfway there.
As with all ed reform initiatives, I’m struck by how this does nothing to actually improve any existing public school.
You’d think they would at least inadvertently benefit a public school somewhere along the line, given how huge the (paid) “movement” is and how it’s so flush with cash.
Once again, public schools are the collateral damage of the ideological crusade. They know there are students in those schools, right? Didn’t they sell this to the public as “improving public schools”? Can they show us where they’ve done that?
Growth ratings are not in any way better than proficiency ratings. (I am so disappointed that Nick Melvoin was able to convince Jackie Goldberg to support the district creating growth ratings — right after she ended the Yelp-like single-digit rating fiasco of an idea.) GreatSchools argues that growth scores are not as discriminatory as proficiency scores. They are less discriminatory. They’re also just as meaningful as rating student growth in physical height. Less bias, more stupid.
GreatSchools says low test scores help non-affluent neighborhoods fight for change. If they see low test score ratings, do the parents get together and beat the poverty out of each other? Or do they imitate white flight, and drain the neighborhood of funds and higher scores by going to vampiric charters? GreatSchools is not helping anyone. They’re helping themselves to a whole bunch of people’s personal data, though, and exacerbating segregation. Just terrible. GreatSchools must go.