Spent my lunch looking at US News report on High Schools. They're messed up. They ranked the top 75 in the state. They put Mystic Valley(#7),Arlington(#16), Framingham(#37), Malden(#49), Cambridge(#60), Revere(#63) and Medford(#70) all ahead of Melrose. Melrose didn't get a ranking. That means it didn't get into the top 75.
U.S. News comprehensive rankings methodology is based on these key principles: that a great high school must serve ALL of its students well, not just those who are college bound, and that it must be able to produce measurable academic outcomes to show it is successfully educating its student body across a range of performance indicators. It also looks at college readiness of the student population. In other words, Melrose under CT's "leadership" didn't stand a chance.
The Melrose College Readiness Index of 30.8 is surpassed by Wakefield's CRI of 40, and Wakefield didn't make the list either. Puts a point on how far Melrose has fallen under Taymore. Compared to the rest of the Mdsx League, it isn't the lowest, but it's pretty discouraging, compared to Belmont's 69.6 and Lexington's 68.5.
I can't find the link. Where did they rank Lincoln-Sudbury? That is one of the better schools in the state.
Can someone post the link? This sounds pretty awful for Melrose. Maybe if some well respected school districts didn't rate, it bears looking at through a different lens but to do worse than Revere? Bad days are here. In the most recent issue of Boston magazine "Can you afford to live here" Melrose didn't rank very highly either. In the section that compares data across the towns.
Guarantee you won't hear about this in Ms. Taymore's next performance evaluation! After all - look at the rubics she is judged against - nothing to do with the performance of the school district - nice going school committee - paying someone $178K and not holding them responsible for student outcomes yet judging her own staff 18% needs improvement - go figure!