The CHS decline is no surprise given the people in charge. No vision or presence among the student body.

They need to fire the whole counseling staff. They are completely useless. We have first hand experience.

Guess the annual 4.5% increase that keeps getting voted in for the teachers isn't making them all perform better. Perhaps we need to have a vision and scrutinize the spending more. one of the best budgets in the state; we should have better outcomes.

I guess the wonderful Jim O'Neill didn't do as well as he's told everyone he did!

Have any of you above bothered to look at the actual 2012 numbers compared to 2010? In most of the testing areas they are better then in 2010. What has lowered CHS ranking has little to nothing to due with the quality of the education. For example SAT scores CHS scores better then 14 out of the 19 schools above them in overall ranking. in % advanced proficient HSPA Language - better then 18 of the 19. Math - 13 of the 19. % AP Test resulting in in 3+ - CHS better then 15 of the 19. Class size for example hurt the rankings. Please read the actual story and the rankings before commenting.

Does anyone recall NJ Monthly naming Chatham the best town in NJ in which to live? We did not earn that distinction this year. Why? Well it's NOT because it's no longer the nicest town, but because NJ Monthly is desperate to retain it's circulation. To do so, they would be crazy to continue to list the same towns in, or even close to the same order each year - regardless of what the data reveals. Same with school rankings. They sell more magazines by moving the schools around each year. And if you are relying on NJ Monthly or the Dept. of Education to give you an honest and carefully calculated evaluation of our schools, then you simply have no idea about the agenda and motives of either entity.

The school ranking is falling and the district continues to utilize student instructional time for teacher inservices. An added asset to high SAT scores is that parents are taking their children to outside SAT prep courses. Falling ranking cannot be ignored and proactive steps must be taken. Chat5 and Charley 2 appear to work for the district and are trying to defend the decline, but there is nothing to defend and the district needs to step up to the plate and look at their curriculums. If you interview all the tutoring places in and around this town, you will see the amount of time and money parents are investing in their children's education, because Chatham is not adequately fulfilling the educational needs. The district needs to accept the responsibility and not argue with the facts. If parents in town did not invest so much of their own time and money, the town would truly see where the school is lacking. That is why they are able to use the children's time for teachers, becaue they know that the parents will pick up the slack. This is not a small fall, it is significant and cannot be ignored. Great job Chatham!!

Well said SJ99. Our school's ranking is in free fall at the time we as parents spending more and more of our time and energy picking up the slack. We need to hire more and better teachers. We need to stop pandering to a few and we need to wake up. This train, I am afraid, has already left the station. Time to pack up and move on!!!!!!!!!!

Is is the best school or the best children that we strive for? School are walls and mortar; a child can change the world. Many Ivy League grads are unemployed in this economy. Humble schools can be excellent without being in the top 10 or 20. Some families can't afford tutors and expensive ivy league colleges, and some parents are too smart to waste their life savings on 4 years at a top college. So if NJ Monthly is measuring a high school based on SAT Scores and college choices they are missing a huge slice of America's sparkling future. The best teachers make a difference in a a child's future, not because of the zip code but because of the confidence and support they instill. Maybe it's time for NJ Monthly to honor real faces in state public education and put real people on pedestals instead of town budgets and standardized data.

Please do move on! New Providence would LOVE to have you! In 2008 CHS ranked in top 4% of all schools. 2010 top 3%. 2012 top 6%. Hardley a call to panic. The only significant change was NJ Monthly changing the criteria in an attempt to boost underperforming schools. And SJ99 - I do not work for the district. However, your inability to understand the numbers shows you are NOT a grad of CHS.

Chat5 Surprise, surprise, I am a Chatham graduate! I do understand the numbers, thank you, but I have seen the decline in the passion of the teachers from when I attended the Chatham schools until now. Years ago, we did not all have to run out and get tutors to understand the basics of math and reading. The math teaches a concept, leaves it, revisits it, leaves it and revisits it again. This is not ideal to reach all learners and the proof is the thriving tutoring centers helping to fill the gap, even in this difficult economy. It is disheartening to see the decline, so I am glad you are no seeing it. How much further should we fall before we decide to be proactive and recognize that something has to change within the school? Any and all declines should be acknowledged.

chat5 I am a chatham parent and so get with the program. you can rationalize all you want but the school is still #20. keep in denial and just continue to blindly think that our little stepford town is so wonderful. no matter what NJ Monthly says we are alwayds behind Milburn who consistently rank above lovely little Chatham. I can tell you from first hand expereince that for the most part the teachers at the HS are lazy and don't teach, and are underqualified. Wake up and stop drinking the same old koolaid.

chat5 is right to point out the reasons for the fall in ranking - I think a followup article pointing out the reasons for the fall in ranking is warranted since most parents will not have the time to look up 20 different school "report cards" and analyze them. A very large concern is that the students taking the SATs and HSPA tests last year had experienced much lower student/teacher ratios for most of their school careers than the students currently in the lower grades in Chatham. The full impact of these worsening ratios will be felt in future years. As to the impact of the tutoring programs provided by parents, while this is huge parents in most of the districts listed provide the exact same extras to their children - that is not a phenomenon that is unique to Chatham but has more to do with the socio-economic group of the parents. And no, I am not an employee of the district. I am a concerned parent.

Any child that is leaving the elementary without the proper foundation for reading and math that needs additional tutoring is an indication that something is wrong. It does not have to do with the socio-economics of the community, but the need for these centers. Parents are not utilizing these centers for children to excel, but to develop the lacking skill that the teacher and district are not properly developing. Summit has a phenomenal reading program and I am sure Milburn has the same class sizes. Chatham class sizes may be bigger, but they are not overcrowded. Chatham is filling the schools with young teachers lacking past experience and focused on their weddings and new families they are starting, with teachers in/out on maternity leave and children falling behind. New teachers with a BA are more cost effective then experienced teachers with a MA or MS. Children are more than what is written in the text book from college and experience in the classroom is the true learning experience. My children’s best teachers have been the older more experienced teachers. I am not seeing a burn out, but a genuine joy for teaching and understanding the whole child. Now, lets bring back the instructional time we are losing during inservice time, look at the curriculums and hire experienced individuals.

I agree about the inservice, but disagree about the tutoring. I have subbed in Summit and Bernards Township and the same tutoring goes on there. I disagree about the crowding - hopefully the new classrooms in the HS will help, but the last time a visited a class there, the only space for a visitor was on the radiator! There was no room for an extra seat. I also agree that we should be emphasizing hiring new teachers with higher levels of education, esp. at the high school level. As for the burn out, the worst teacher either of my kids ever had was a 30 year veteran who referred to my then 1st grade, dyslexic, dysgraphic son as "lazy" and "manipulative" and claimed he had no real issues but just had us all wrapped around his finger. I should probably point out at this point that I am now a trained teacher, in part because of this, and I certainly understand about the teacher pay scale and that teachers with more education or teaching experience do cost more. I have also spoken to Chatham administrators who claim that they do not focus on the lower pay grades for new hires - to verify that, someone would have to analyze the experience and education of all the new hires over the past several years! If you have the time, it could be a worthwhile item to check into.

As a former teacher for one of the special magnet public schools where only the best and brightest attend. There was a lot of test prep and tutoring going on. Many former students were test prepped to get into the school, had tutors while in school, and were also prepped for the SAT's. Were they bright students? Yes. But if parents have the money and they want an extra edge many opt for extra tutoring. I have a friend who told me she spent $1000's every year to have her daughter tutored while at Millburn HS and she said that most of the parents there did the same. A friend from Summit, told me the same things. But she also told me that many of the students are stressed out over there by all the pressure put on them by the parents and teacher to excel (but that is a whole other story). I am not sure what the answer is, but the schools that have the highest scores are the not in the poor districts for a reason. Low income and socially disadvantaged students cannot afford the extra help. And as a former teacher, I am really tired of parents blaming the teachers for students that don't do well. Just because we live in Chatham doesn't mean we all have given birth to geniuses. All students are the same, the students are only as motivated as their parents want them to be.

What's the purpose of having all those expensive supervisors at the High School? Do they even teach any classes? Better off putting them back in classrooms or just getting more teachers.

I can't say i'm thrilled at the decisions that are being made. If money is an issue, then why spend it on new parking lots, security cameras, and other wastes of money. Use it to hire more teachers. No other district in the top 50 dropped by as much as ours did, which concerns me.

I agree about the parking and the security cameras - teachers, teacher training that does not decrease class time (and I'm a teacher!) and more classrooms are needed, not parking for students esp when they have colony pool just 3 blocks away. Walking is good for them and might even help wake them up for class!

LeAnn I agree that Chatham continues to need a significant amount more training for working with children with special needs. Inclusion is new to Chatham, even though it has been around since the 1970's in accordance with IDEA laws. This is another demonstration of how Chatham needs to strengthen our schools. – Thank you for this important input.
CC72 - you should reread your post. I am hoping you did not mean to come across as you did. You sound like the burned out teacher LeAnn discussed with your negativity and derogatory comment towards the children and parents. I am so glad you were never my children’s teacher. Teachers truly have to be sensitive to the needs of the family and child. When children have an average IQ and are not adequate with their reading/literacy skills along with basic math, the districts and teachers ARE failing them. Your post hurt teachers more than helped them and made me wonder if you even like children or teaching.
I too don’t understand using the student’s instructional time for teacher in-service. I guess since we are not in a low socio-economic community, it is assumed that we will be utilizing tutors anyway, so it is OK to use our children’s class time.

Has anyone noticed that no one from the HS or the superintendant has responded to this? That's the problem - they're in it for a paycheck and lack any passion for grooming our children for a bright future. Or, at best, they're simply amateurs. From the terrible handling of "Homecoming- gate" to a one and done AD to poor college counseling, your kid better be a superstar athlete if you want him/her to attend a top college.

Inclusion in Chatham's not that new - but it may have been at the time. The incident I mentioned happened 8 years ago. Hopefully by now it's better. To Elvis, teachers can be frustrated with getting all the blame without being burnt out. She's on target with the correlation between achievement and $ - the only low income school in the top regularly is Mcnair Academy. Check the listings https://www.box.com/s/7c300516930c32f71a8e . Look at the column marked "DFG" which is an economic grouping. A is the lowest avg income level, J the highest. Interesting? Nothing else lower than an "F" until #90. Oh, and Mcnair has competitive admissions -you have to qualify to attend, like a private school, they do not take all students in the district. She also said nothing about the use of class time for teacher training. I was substituting in Summit, and liked the way they handled it - they called in every sub they had and had teachers do rotating 2 hour training while subs took those classes. Same lesson plan as the other classes, teachers in the building to back up the subs, kids in school and working - and parents not inconvenienced by having to find morning child care! Each sub covered 2.5 different teachers during the day. More expensive than Chatham's handling of the situation, but I think it was better for the kids. Throw some of the blame at the state - more inservice required (not a bad thing) but rather suddenly and no time to renegotiate contracts etc.

LeAnn - You made an excellent point that Chatham thought of their teachers first and the children second when negotiating their teacher contracts and deciding to utilize the student's instructional time. It sounds like Summit thought of the well being of their students first. Thank you for bringing that to our attention.
Inclusion was not in my children's school 3 years ago, so that is WAY behind the times in keeping up with the IDEA laws. Obviously the teacher your child had was not properly trained to identify a child and I&RS them, and again the district and teacher failed your child. Another great point you made!
The more I read your posts, the more I am seeing that Chatham has to look long and hard at making some changes. Your child lost precious developmental and learning time in first grade because of a poorly trained teacher. Chatham did not know this after her being in the district for 30 years and giving her additional training? You have brought up some excellent points that the school should focus on the best well being of the children. I am not promoting merit pay, but I am saying that the district needs to look long and hard at the significant amount of elementary children that REQUIRE tutoring to keep up. I am talking to too many parents at the tutoring centers who have STRUGGLING students and are not seeking high achievers. FUNNY, many have the same teacher. What does that tell you?

Let's review this year when our 6 and 8 grade students lost the Battle of the Books to Union. That had not happened in over 10 years. It was not just one grade, but two and the 7th grade truly struggled to beat them.

Did anyone read how New Providence approved over a 100 teachers and is implementing new curriculums? Could that have helped lead to number 1? I guess not, as CC72 claimed, it is the lack of intelligence of the students and the denial of the parents.

Well, as our district is falling, I did discover what one school in our district is doing about it: Great use of staff time. Is this during instructional time or the district inservice training?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFA-WUILAX0

WOW! You have to go back to the Board and Superintendent and wonderful how they allowed all this to happen. Obviously they agreed upon the negotiations to put the teachers first and approved what was being done during the in-service training. What I don't understand is that everyone is talking about the additional training and demands the state is requiring and that is why we are losing instructional time, but LAS had to put in a great deal of time creating this video so why not give it back to the students learning?

Instead of complain about statewide budget cuts, like former Superintendent Jim O'Neill did at the time, New Providence asked themselves what is a schools main function? Spend money on sports programs, parking lots, etc, like Chatham did? Or spend money on getting more teaching resources to our students. Simply put, we were in no different financial position than NP. All they did was prioritize what was really important to a school...and it worked!

The results aren't surprising considering the lack of experience among administrative staff. Correct me if im wrong but, a high school principal with no prior principle experience, a superintendent with no prior superintendent experience, an assistant superintendent with no prior experience as an AS, an athletic director with no prior AD experience, a new middle school principle with no prior experience. It seems as if you are over age 45, do not consider applying to Chatham because experience doesn't seem to matter. Us old timers ain't happy.

NJ Monthly changed its rating methodology putting more emphasis on student performance and less emphasis on teacher accomplishment and class size. With that in mind, the reason for the lower standing for CHS may have to do with the adjusted cohort four year graduation rate of 96.83%. That's approximately 7 students who did not graduate in four years from a class of 245 students. That appears to be too many students lost in the shuffle, if in fact that happened. The High School Guidance Department needs to take a careful look at that number to determine if there is legitimate reason for concern.

The other aspect of this ranking is to look at it in a proper manner. Individual ranking has more to do with bragging rights than a clear indication of academic prowess. I suggest you break the 100 schools down into quartiles with the understanding there is little difference between the top ranked schools. NJ Monthly would do better to list schools accordingly in my opinion. Can NJ Monthly say without reservation the top ranked school is far superior than any of the top 25 schools listed? I doubt it.

Ok, I'm a total nerd and this downgrade was really bugging me. So I took all the data on the top 20 schools and entered it in a spreadsheet to analyze. I can't replicate the "environment" calculation the mag used, b/c they have some method of assigning a numerical value to avg class size rank, faculty student ratio etc. But by their method of calculation "student outcomes" and "student performance", we rate 4th! Of the 19 schools listed above us, only 1 beat us on HSPA language arts scores, only 4 on combined SAT scores, 5 on HSPA math scores and 5 on AP scores. Only 1, Mcnair Academy, beat us in all of these categories and they require admissions tests to get in! No other school beat us in more than 2 of these measures. Where we are falling short is in the "environment" category and this could be a direct result of our low budget and tight space constraints: we had the worst faculty student ratio of the bunch, 9 had lower avg class size, 9 had higher % of teachers with grad degrees and 13 offered more AP tests. All of these can be addressed by hiring.

Thank you , LeAnn and Chatham Own, for making excellent points!

I am sorry, but 7 is too many. I don't care what anyone says. That is a disgrace. This must be addressed and it breaks my heart to hear that with all the opportunities available these seven students were unable to graduate. I would have to say that someone in this district did not adequately do their job and maybe these students needed alternative schools or something that was not provided.
LeAnn, you just confirmed that we need more experienced teachers. These new hires with inexperience in the classroom is one of the reasons we may be seeing classroom management issues. Trust me, we are!!! Are they truly devoted to the classroom when they are working on their higher level of education? A masters program takes a great deal of time to complete and energy, so something has to fall short and with the tutoring I am reading about, it sounds like our children. It would be interesting to see how the scores will be with the younger grades who are struggling and needing tutors.m One year at Southern, the entire second grade was out on maternity leave. Let's see how that group is doing.
Chatham should spend their money wisely then and invest in the teachers and classroom, not a parking lot. PRIORITIZE and use common sense. No matter how you analyze it, a fall is a fall and there is no excuse. That is the bottom line.

As for the graduation rate, the new calculation sounds good on paper but has some major shortfalls. I read an article on this last spring, pointing out that if a student moves after the beginning of 9th grade, even if it's Oct of 9th grade, that student counts as not graduating senior year unless the administration can track the student and prove they graduated somewhere else. That is a very onerous task. So some of those 7 students may not all have "dropped out", whether because they wanted to join a trade, take over a family business, or hated school and couldn't deal with it anymore, they may simply have moved away.

Thank you Ms. Tavtigian. it is frankly appalling that people can sit back and quote sources they don't fully comprehend while insulting teachers and students alike.

People often hear or understand only what they think confirms what they themselves already believe. I never said Chatham considered the teachers first, before the students with the new continuing ed requirements for the teachers, only that, in my opinion, they didn't handle it as well as Summit did. Both schools were already locked into contracts and had to work within that reality. Summit apparently had more flexibility in it's budget. Chatham is working really close to the bone budget wise, or was a little less creative in dealing with the situation. People have to decide if they are willing to spend a little more money to lower the student / faculty ratio, provide for more substitutes for training days etc.

Chatham Own~Just because you have chosen a trade does not mean you do not need a HS diploma. No matter what field you enter, employers are looking for a minimum of a HS diploma. Hating school and dropping out is an issue that guidance should have properly addressed. By your improper grammar and punctuation, it is apparent that the district failed to properly educate you. Sorry the district failed you too.
LeAnn~ The district not being creative enough to figure this out IS a problem. I hope we don't fall too much over the years with people still in denial and defending the problem. There IS a problem. You demonstrated that time and time again in your posts.

CR132 i would love to know where you received your diploma in education from. A trade fellowship is not based upon a high school diploma what so ever. Feel free to insult yourself with shallow and pedantic comments, but you know nothing of my education, and how dare you insult me in such a manner. you know nothing about me, and taking such potshots does not help make your point. it only serves to distinguish you from those who know how to handle themselves in polite society as well as hold some form of decorum even in heated debate.

Chatham Own~

I said that EMPLOYERS are looking for HS diplomas. It was not an insult, but a concern. I am sorry you viewed it that way.

No one had said a child had left to pursue a trade with a common employer. Nor was your comment even remotely from a place of concern for my personal well being.

LeAnn~ I don't see this as a win win for students, just teachers, and that was their decision to agree on such a contract.
Chatham~ I am sorry, but when posting you should have thought about how it appeared, even with capitalizing the first letter of a sentence. That is not my fault for being concerned. Future employers ARE looking for HS diplomas.

The teacher contract was in place in advance, stipulating the amount of training days, no. of days to work, etc based on the then existing state requirements. It was not the teacher's fault that the state requirements changed unexpectedly mid stream. Next contract will account for the training time. The old one was unable to do so. That was not the teachers' fault. Everyone agreed to a contract that covered all known requirements. If I sign a contract stipulating a price I'm paying for a service, and the price of the materials changes, the service provider has to eat the difference. Don't blame the teachers for not wanting to work overtime for free.

LeAnn - I think you should check the accuracy of your information.

I also noticed that that this year’s calendar did not have the delayed openings or half days until after the budget went through and was modified on 4/30.

I checked the 2012-13 district calendar on the district website.
There are two full-day teacher inservices: Sept. 4 and October 8. Sept. 5 is a day for building meetings, department meetings, etc. It is not considered as professional hours for teachers.
On Nov. 7 there is an early dismissal for students. Teachers attend inservice in the afternoon. This early dismissal is right before a four day weekend.
On Jan. 18 there is an early dismissal for students. Teachers attend inservice in the afternoon. This early dismissal is right before a three day weekend.
On Feb. 15 there is an early dismissal for students. Teachers attend inservice in the afternoon. This early dismissal is right before a three day weekend.
On May 28 there is a delayed opening for students. Teachers attend an inservice. This delayed opening follows a three day weekend (possibly a four day weekend due to snow day giveback) .
The additional inservice hours were dictated by the NJDOE to accommodate what the state education department calls PLC's (Professional Learning Communities). These additional requirements by the state education department had many districts reorganizing calendars to be compliant with state mandates.

I am really tired of people trying to justify the drop. Let's face the facts. It dropped, now fix it.

As I teacher, I will tell you that I do receive hourse for the opening day before school and PLC is done during staff required meetings after school. We have a meeting and then PLC. If there is block scheduling it is built into the school day. In addition, the delayed openings and half days are still equaling the same amount of time as the two inservice days. All my hours were done within the same given amount of time as in past years without taking away from the children. Again, this goes back to seasoned professionals who know how to make the schedules and figure things out the correct way so that it is fair for the teachers and children.

PLC hours are done during common planning time among the grades and after school for the departments.

Thank you, Charley2 for explaining the specifics of the new requirements. I knew the outline, but not the detail.
Susan, the drop does need to be fixed. It is bad. But I've looked at all the measures of student performance included in the ratings (combined SAT scores, HSPA scores and AP exam scores) and even included the "student outcomes" (i.e. the 7 who didn't graduate from Chatham) and we still ranked 4th out of the schools listed in the top 20 by those measures. The reason for the fall then lies in the "school environment" category - esp. the faculty / student ratio. We had the worst ratio of those 20 schools! I pointed all of this out above. We can fix it by hiring more teachers who have graduate degrees and lowering our avg class sizes. When were the new class rooms completed at the high school? Are they done now?

Thanks LJrocket for explaining that the total time is the same either way. I'm glad there are more early dismissals vs delayed openings this year at least - delayed openings, esp 5 of them like last year, are particularly difficult for working parents as early morning childcare is difficult to come by

These ranking are based on more than test scores for a reason. There is more to life than test scores. You can't just take the categories that Chatham is the best in and declare that these are the only things that count and give us a ranking of four. By the way, even with the limited parameters that were picked there are at least 3 schools currently ranked below 20 that might be ranked above Chatham (Princeton, west Windsor and Haddonfield ).

All schools use the same for formula for graduation rate , whether you agree with it or not, it is what it is and all schools have to deal with it. That graduation rate is lower in Chatham and it should be counted toward the rankings.

The same goes for class size, it is a very important factor. Now is there a significant difference between in learning for a child if they have 17 or 19 kids in their class? Probably not, but there is a difference between 20 and 25. If you were moving to a new school district wouldn't you want to know how many kids were going to be in your child's class?

Profiency in advanced math is the only category which, seemed to me, that Chatham could use improvement in as the were several schools with significantly higher percentages.

Chatham is a very good school our children will not be at a disadvantage graduatiing from there. Is it the best school in the state? No, but it is certainly one of the best.

AAM - I agree with your posting. I am just concerned that we will begin to drop even more without having more teachers with advanced degrees and smaller class sizes.

I am reading about individuals analyzing how our ranking dropped, but no one discussing how the Chatham schools was or is exceptional for their child. The district still does not offer a full day kindergarten program, is new to inclusion and should truly analyize and value the video "A Race to Nowhere." When parents dread children's homework, there is a problem. If you can do 5 problems, you can do 25. If you do all 25 wrong, you have just instilled the wrong concept 25 times! If you do the 5 wrong you can intervene and reteach. The abundance of HW needs to be addressed, because it is getting "out of control" and after school activities and family time must be encouraged for a well rounded child.

My child doesn't play on a travel team and yes, I would be willing to pay more for higher qualified teachers. It is well worth it, especially at the middle school level and HS. I would rather put the money into teachers and building classrooms than a parking lot.

Have you seen the statistics about HW? I have attached a website that I think everyone might find interesting. There is a significant amount of research on the negative effects of HW. What about religious education classes, Hebrew lessons or better yet, visiting grandma at the nursing home?
http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/rethinkinghomework.htm

By the way, Duncan, my child also does a significant amount of volunteer work and I encourage that, but sometimes he can not volunteer if he has an abundance of HW.

Also, I had my MA and 5 years of experience when my district hired me.

Duncan: Of course if a teacher has a higher qualifications they get higher pay than another. This Patch Article was written last year listing the teachers in the districts pay. http://chatham.patch.com/articles/avg-chatham-teacher-makes-68k

I agree about hiring more teachers and more teachers with advanced degrees. And that ratio may have improved somewhat at the HS already if the new classrooms weren't open yet when this ratio was calculated. But the problem of more teachers has an additional kink in it - classroom space. They couldn't hire more at the hs until the addition b/c there was no physical space for additional classrooms and the existing classrooms were fully utilized. This district has grown so rapidly that we keep literally busting our seams by outgrowing the buildings. We may still have to look into adding a school....I'm very worried, as I mentioned above, that these ratios are "leading indicators" and that we could be in for falling student performance in years to come as the younger kids have had higher classroom ratios in their early years than the graduating seniors experienced.

Also, I am NOT complaining about the rules - just analyzing them. To fix a problem, you need to understand it first. If our graduation rate is hurting us AND part of that lower rate is students who moved out of district during the 4 year period now included in the calculation, then how can we track those students etc. so that families that move away don't hurt us in the future? Can we ask them to sign a form stating that they were leaving the district? The other ratios we can change by our hiring patterns etc. this we have to look at more.

Also, I didn't go "lower" than us in the ratings partly out of time considerations. I'm sure there are other schools in our same situation, some of which may have had better student outcomes than Chatham did.

I'm still concerned that the new classrooms at the HS won't be enough, as well. The classes included on the NJ "School Report Card" that these ratings were based on were all under 300 students (the report cards come out a year after the data produced, so this is based on the 2010-2011 report card that just came out this spring). Last year's freshman class and, I think, all of the classes in the younger grades are at or above the 300 mark. So even with the new classrooms, we may be just treading water as far as the student / faculty raio is concerned.

Seven students from that "graduating" class did not get a rudimentary high school diploma from a school system in an upscale socio-economic community rich with human and physical capital. Yes, there will always be a need for trade occupations. And yes, those are respectable careers. The Guidance Department should be encouraging and assisting interested students in pursuing those careers after graduation, not before. Anyone suggesting a high school diploma is ivy tower snobbery nonsense suited for some students and not others, needs to rethink their priorities. Just what century do you think you live in?

That statistic, not the actual school rank, is "THE" concern. As I indicated, the difference in those top ranked schools is marginal. Losing seven students on the other hand is catastrophic. The notion of one student, much less seven, not getting a high school diploma in Chatham should be unthinkable; not rationalized or dismissed.

Not rationalizing - however, while the "assumption" is that these kids did not get a high school diploma, that could be inaccurate because of the way the rate is calculated. If a student started freshman year here, then moved to Alaska in sophmore year and finished HS there, they would count as not having graduated from Chatham and show up in this calculation. The old calculation only covered senior year, so it compared students that started senior year in chatham to those that finished that year in Chatham - clearly, less students would simply "move away" in a one year span (especially in the middle of senior year!), so students moving out of district during the school year was less of an issue. the change was made because students who drop out sometimes do so earlier than senior year. However, the new calculation automatically captures more students who simply move. Since this is the first year that this calculation has been used, methods to minimize the impact of issues such as students moving away still need to be developed.

I have to agree that while the trades can provide a very good living, it would be better for students to get their HS diploma first. And the administration probably knows, or can find out, how many students ACTUALLY dropped out (unless they moved away first, then dropped out).

I didn't see all of Duncan's post above. Glad there is a method to document those moving away; it's worth asking if the correct documentation took place and if there really were 7 that "dropped out".

LJ Rocket - I don't think Dunkin read your article, because I found it fascinating and have done additional research. Everything I am reading proves the negative impact of homework and there is no evidence that I could find supporting it. Absolutely, in the higher levels we need more teachers with higher degrees. The problem is that Chatham has a very high salery guide compared to other districts I was looking at and searching. They are getting large increments for only a BA. Math, Science and English at HS should at least have a MA.

I suppose everyone forgets that this year the US News and World Report ranked Chatham # 7 in the state, the highest rated traditional public high school (non magnet, etc.). So obviously there must be differences in how these rankings are calculated, and there are. You can't even compare this year's NJ Monthly rankings to the previous ones because the criteria has changed. And if you bothered to look up the numbers, Chatham's HSPA scores and SAT scores have only increased. Sure, class size has too. If you notice, none of the "top" high schools in NJ Monthly are large districts. I went to a high school twice the size of Chatham and was in large classes, but most of us still did well. Large class sizes aren't optimal, but aren't the worst for a high school. I did better in college because I was used to being one of many and working hard to stand out, while the private school kids who were used to being one of fifteen did poorly because no one was there to hold their hand. Regarding the $ spent on the security system...if there were some school shooting or tragedy, I guarantee that some of you would be quick to bemoan the fact that CHS didn't have good security. And compared to many other high schools, ours has been traditionally lax.
As for the graduation rate, again, it sounds like the way it was calculated was questionable. Plus, would you rather CHS just "push kids through" even if they are not meeting standards like many other high schools just to look good?

Aesop, who did not attend Chatham High School, warned that Pride Preceeds a Fall.
This inconsequential drop by a generalist state magazine lacking teeth is the best thing that could happen to Chatham High School. Coasting at the top is never the way to excellence.

So what the concern here is about the seven students who don't receive diplomas? I mean I agree with the idea of those seven students dropping out of school for a family business or a plumbing job, but still losing seven students is the catastrophic thing here. Chatham is a fantastic school district for every grade. Back to the last topic, the idea of hiring teachers with higher degrees is terrible because those teachers tend to be the those teachers who are the rude and strict ones that the students hate. Using the salary of these teachers compared to their reviews on a website that is popular to Chatham district students. The website is www.ratemyteachers.com, but the teachers who have the bigger pay usually have the lower rankings. But most of these teachers have tenure.