Fun with Excel: Average vs. Attainable III

I have long insisted that the schools aim for the bottom 1%. The spreadsheet that I’ve been working on can easily be adapted to this. If the schools aim for the bottom 1%, what kinds of graduation rates would we see?


When I was comparing to average, I made several modifications to reflect inefficiencies, the difference between median and average, variations within subjects, and reasons for failure other than inability. This would be unfair this time since the median versus average is no longer irrelevant.

I have done something similar this time. I created a new spreadsheet that takes six subjects with random skill levels for 1,000 people. For calculations, I am multiplying these random values by 90% (compared to the 85% I used when comparing to average) to reflect inefficiencies and other reasons for failure. Keep in mind that this is unrealistically high, even more so than my prior comparisons. I am being far too kind to teachers. I then checked how many people were above the 1% mark in all 6 subjects.

The new spreadsheet can be found at: https://1drv.ms/x/s!Ar3VXpGA-24ugYRXv9PD-L5I7x1l0w?e=CRt9se

What were the results? Graduation percentages would be in the low to mid 90’s. This would be a good graduation rate, perhaps a target. Since I am providing kind estimates, this makes the 1% semi-realistic, and perhaps even a little on the high end. Based off the calculations that I have provided, it makes far more sense that the schools are aiming for the bottom 1% than aiming for average.