A recent Daily Mail editorial suggested parental involvement is a primary factor in school success - "Parents who make education important wind up with children who do well in school."
The piece then went on to compare Kenna Elementary and West Side Elementary schools state ranking in test scores.
Even though I know it is the season for the inevitable Westest2 hyperbole and rhetoric, this particular editorial was even more over the top, implying that if all kids could have parents like the ones at Kenna Elementary, they too could be "high performing" rather than "low performing."
By "performing," I assume you are referring to test scores. How specifically do "parents make education important" at Kenna Elementary? If the test scores at Watts Elementary were higher than Kenna's would Watts' parents be better then?
Did you look at any of the data comparing parents and students and schools? Socioeconomic metrics? Household demographics? Health information? Extracurricular activities?
As you say in your article, "the gulf between schools is wide." Indeed it is, but using Westest2 scores as the measuring stick is disrespectful and hurtful to every child and parent/guardian that you call low performing.
I suggest whomever wrote this article spend a whole day at each of the West Side elementary schools and meet the children, their teachers, their parents and take a look at the world through their eyes and not the results of a standardized test.
And while you are at it, why don't you take the 11th grade Westest2 exam. I did, and, at 53 years old, I discovered I was ranked low performing as well, even though my parents thought education was important.