Oxford High School has released the results of its first-ever Scholastic Aptititute Test (SAT) results, showing students score higher on the benchmark than those in many neighboring towns in the lower Valley.
Students also scored above the state average for the SATs.
Oxford score 502 in critical reading, 504 in math, and 514 in writing, for a total of 1520. By comparison, Seymour High School totaled 1474. That’s important to note because Seymour High School is where many Oxford students attended school before Oxford had its own high school.
The Oxford test results for 2010 were announced Tuesday during a school board meeting at the high school.
While the Board of Education did not publicly make comparisons to other school districts, James A. Connelly, Interim Superintendent of Schools, did note in a brief interview before the meeting that Oxford’s results are above the state average — 1500.
“We have nothing to compare it to because this was the first SAT test in Oxford,” Connelly said.
The public is able to access scores on a database hosted on Courant.com.
The database shows (article continues after the document):
The results will be useful as a baseline to compare next year’s results, according to high school principal Frank Savo.
“Hopefully we’ll show improvement in that time,” Savo said.
“They are good. Nothing to be ashamed of. Right above state average,” the principal said.
The results showed that Oxford’s scores were less than neighboring Masuk High School in Monroe, where many Oxford students were enrolled in the years before Oxford High School construction was completed in 2007. Masuk had a total of 1554, compared with Oxford’s 1520.
Oxford’s scores are high for the lower Naugatuck Valley in general. Ansonia scored 1358, Derby 1326, and Shelton 1494.
Oxford also eclipsed Woodland Regional High School, which serves towns including the neighboring town of Beacon Falls. Woodland scored 1482.
Wealthy communities perform better on SATs. For comparison, New Canaan scored 1796.
The SAT results should be compared to other districts in the same DRG. Only two towns similar to Oxford are listed, and both are significantly higher than Oxford in all areas.
Sounds like a Dick Burke cronie. Let’s get beyond that…
Tell us why it matters that the results need to be compared to the same DRG? Do schools in the same DRG use the same curriculum, do schools in the same DRG have the same teachers, are the students the same throughout the DRG, etc…?
Your argument is nonsense and is only used when you want the results to be something they aren’t. Yes, not all schools systems are the same, nor do they teach the same thing, but that is why you cannot compare your school to only a handful of others. Throughout the state, some school systems will do better and some will do worse, so knowing where you fall in relation to the majority is most important.
If this is wrong, tell me why!
I must say you are not afraid to show your ignorance. It matters in that you should strive to attain scores that reflect towns that are similar to insure your curriculum, and delivery of instruction are not flawed. Would you expect Oxford to have the same scores as an inner city high school? I would hope most people get it. Certainly it is a factor when our young people apply to colleges, but I can just bet you would be unaware of that also.By the way the DRG uses the towns wealth as a factor to determine the category. You should look into it before you head to your computer…it’s not a valley football competition.
To the OR Coward (ORC),
… or I may be a Rachel cronie to use you own poor choice of words, and proud to be such.
I intended to refrain from posting on this, but since the door has been opened and ORC has been so gracious in use of my name … I’ll respond.
Rachel has apparently done her homework and cares enough to comment realistically. ORC, on the other hand, has his head in the sand as usual. I wonder if he’s ever taken the time to fully understand the results of any of the testing our students undergo.
Unless Oxford parents are content with comparisons to the state average and valley communities, I concur with Rachel’s concern.
As does Rachel, I prefer a comparison against a higher standard and what the state deems a collection of similar towns (aka … the DRG).
ORC’s attitude in this matter begs a question … if Oxford’s taxpayers are content with a comparison against state average and valley towns … why did Oxford choose to spend almost 2X to build it’s own high school, rather than simply regionalizing with Seymour for much less?
ORC … it’s called return on investment to give our students the means to a better education. That “BETTER” education won’t happen unless the bar is raised, and people look at results with the aim of improvement.
I haven’t invested time to look at these SAT scores, but it seems Rachel has. If these SAT scores are similar to the CMT and CAPT results of the past seven years, as I suspect they are … they will show that Oxford, much too often, ranks in the 3rd & 4th quartiles as compared to “like” school districts. Our past superintendent knew this and would never divulge it.
ORC … the positive note in all this is that information is knowledge. By looking at the results, attention can be brought to the areas needing corrective action. I suspect, barring the distractions which you and your friends carelessly throw at the new BoE, they have already begun to do just this.
You, on the other hand, choose to live in la-la land believing Oxford is performing wonderfully and doesn’t require improvement. You and your attitude provide a dis-service to our town and it’s students. The fact that Oxford pays you … is a regretful voting mistake.
– – – – –
To Tony Spinelliand the VIS,
In the future, and especially concerning articles related to education, I urge you to investigate deeper and provide Oxford readers with more substance. This article fell short of good and beneficial ivestigative reporting. If Oxford readers feel more as Rachel and I do, we’d like to read more serious well-done articles, especially on such serious matter as education.