When will schools like Janney step up and do their fair share to take at-risk kids??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no room at Janney for “at risk” or O.O.B. students. Janney arguably is over-crowded as it is. However, Eaton is now being expanded to guarantee a substantial O.O.B. Population going forward into the foreseeable future. This will ensure that Ward 3/EOTP is meeting its fair obligation to offer school spots for less fortunate students.

Given that John Eaton traditionally had significant OOB, this is an appropriate solution for Ward 3.

John Eaton historically has been more of an out of bounds school. The highest performing Ward Three schools are too full to take students from outside their boundary area. It makes sense that more at-risk and OOB get places at Eaton where there will be room and it is consistent with Eaton’s mission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some low-income families who are stable enough to get their kids WOTP each day and who want to deal with the culture clashes of being in a tiny economic (and often racial) minority at an extremely rich school. I would love it if Janney and other schools had their boundaries and lottery process adjusted to make that possible.

There are probably more low-income families who do not want to bring their kids to Tenleytown each day and don't even like the policies and culture at schools like Janney. I know lots of families who would turn down a seat at Janney for a seat at KIPP or DC Prep or their IB school or a language immersion program or a scholarship to private or parochial school (and if you are a motivated and stable low-income family with a high-performing kid, those scholarships are there). And when you look at the scores for at-risk, economically disadvantaged, or African-American students at some WOTP schools, I don't necessarily think these parents are making the wrong choice.

I'm glad there are options. I want there to be better options for kids whose parents can't take them across town each day, and I want the at-risk kids whose parents are willing to take them WOTP (or who already live there) to get a boost in the lottery for PK and OOB, and I want the schools to be more welcoming to families that aren't rich (I'm looking at you, Lafayette, with your >$100 "classroom activity fee" in addition to PTA dues).

This is so baffling. You want to be able to send your kids to “those” schools but you wish there were fewer “rich” kids?! Seriously, what about those schools appears desirable to you that is fully separable from there being a lot of kids there with highly-educated parents?

NP here. Reading is fundamental. The poster said she wants the schools to be welcoming to kids who are not rich. They also said that there are plenty of parents who, given a spot at one of "those" schools, would turn it down due to culture fit. No where did he/she say that they wanted to get rid of rich kids. Furthermore, highly-educated does not equal rich. By pretty much any standard, I am highly-educated, and surely not rich. Stop being so defensive of your little enclave of schools, and try really listening (or reading in this case) to other perspectives. People like you are so afraid that any change will burst your little high-income, exclusive zip code, school bubble. This is not how we improve education for ALL kids in the district.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately the JKLM schools are quite full already and can’t accept more non-local students. So a big shout-out to the John Eaton community for serving as the designated WOTP elementary school for at-risk kids. It’s heartening that Ward 3 is doing its part to step up.

[Anonymous]

I think this is fine that Eaton will serve in this capacity WOTP. It is better to concentrate the at-risk children from OOB in one Ward 3 school so that special resources can be concentrated in that school as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Janney and other privileged schools are supposed to be at least 10 per cent "at risk" students, yet crickets so far. DC needs more opportunity, equity and inclusion for its marginalized families, and Ward 3 needs to do its part. Yet we hear crickets.

You might think that there is simple answer to this question but there isn't. What works for families that have more than enough doesn't work for families that are struggling. This is honestly a loaded question that is bigger than a thread of DCUM. Visit some schools that are in the poorest of the poor and the neediest of the needy neighborhoods. Compare. It is more than just providing equal footing. DC tried giving them the same beautiful buildings. Raising teacher salaries, etc. etc. etc. It is more than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this is fine that Eaton will serve in this capacity WOTP. It is better to concentrate the at-risk children from OOB in one Ward 3 school so that special resources can be concentrated in that school as well.

Please tell me you have a yard sign that says something like ‘all are welcome here’.
And yes- concentrating the poors at not your kids school is a great idea!
FWIW I don’t think Janey needs to ‘step up’. You all moved into an area with ‘(racist) boundaries- so fight to change that.

[Anonymous]

My kids go to Janney, and I would happily support increasing class sizes by 10 percent and saving those spots for at-risk students. That’s two kids per class. Does anyone seriously think that would be outrageously disruptive? Your kids can handle having a couple more friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Janney teachers are not prepared to take at-risk kids. The only reason Janney is high performing is the students come from families that are highly educated. The teachers are average at best and many have serious classroom management issues in the case when there is a child who is disruptive. Yes - the environment is better than most schools across DCPS - but it is not the end all be all.

And this is precisely one of the issues that people overlook when they talk about at-risk kids being assimilated into affluent schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney teachers are not prepared to take at-risk kids. The only reason Janney is high performing is the students come from families that are highly educated. The teachers are average at best and many have serious classroom management issues in the case when there is a child who is disruptive. Yes - the environment is better than most schools across DCPS - but it is not the end all be all.

And this is precisely one of the issues that people overlook when they talk about at-risk kids being assimilated into affluent schools.

Then the teachers need professional development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney teachers are not prepared to take at-risk kids. The only reason Janney is high performing is the students come from families that are highly educated. The teachers are average at best and many have serious classroom management issues in the case when there is a child who is disruptive. Yes - the environment is better than most schools across DCPS - but it is not the end all be all.

And this is precisely one of the issues that people overlook when they talk about at-risk kids being assimilated into affluent schools.

Then the teachers need professional development.

DCPS doesn't do behavior management for teachers' Professional Development

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to Janney, and I would happily support increasing class sizes by 10 percent and saving those spots for at-risk students. That’s two kids per class. Does anyone seriously think that would be outrageously disruptive? Your kids can handle having a couple more friends.

If the right supports for such kids were in place in DCPS, right, two at-risk kids won't be a problem, not at all. Problem is, the right supports aren't in place. We're at a highly gentrified DCPS EotP where two at-risk kids who work a couple years behind the grade level of the others can easily eat up around a quarter of a classroom teacher's time and energy. We've seen this happen every year in the school. At-risk kids have a way of dragging down a group of high performers, not because anybody wants this, but because DCPS doesn't have a good system in place to help them. You're WotP, so you don't know how this works. What happens at our school is that high SES parents slyly form advanced tutoring groups on the side to supplement, to help ensure that our children don't fall behind you WotP'ers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to Janney, and I would happily support increasing class sizes by 10 percent and saving those spots for at-risk students. That’s two kids per class. Does anyone seriously think that would be outrageously disruptive? Your kids can handle having a couple more friends.

If the right supports for such kids were in place in DCPS, right, two at-risk kids won't be a problem, not at all. Problem is, the right supports aren't in place. We're at a highly gentrified DCPS EotP where two at-risk kids who work a couple years behind the grade level of the others can easily eat up around a quarter of a classroom teacher's time and energy. We've seen this happen every year in the school. At-risk kids have a way of dragging down a group of high performers, not because anybody wants this, but because DCPS doesn't have a good system in place to help them. You're WotP, so you don't know how this works. What happens at our school is that high SES parents slyly form advanced tutoring groups on the side to supplement, to help ensure that our children don't fall behind you WotP'ers.

This is why it may not seem altogether fair, but it is logical to place most of the at risk students who come WoTP at John Eaton rather than scatter them at JKLM. Then hopefully throw some more resources to Eaton.

[Anonymous]

Based on personal experience and that of friends, Janney is great if your child is a go with the flow kind of kid and doesn’t require a ton of extra support. The kids I knew who had “issues” or any kind of special needs have not found the admin to be that helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to Janney, and I would happily support increasing class sizes by 10 percent and saving those spots for at-risk students. That’s two kids per class. Does anyone seriously think that would be outrageously disruptive? Your kids can handle having a couple more friends.

If the right supports for such kids were in place in DCPS, right, two at-risk kids won't be a problem, not at all. Problem is, the right supports aren't in place. We're at a highly gentrified DCPS EotP where two at-risk kids who work a couple years behind the grade level of the others can easily eat up around a quarter of a classroom teacher's time and energy. We've seen this happen every year in the school. At-risk kids have a way of dragging down a group of high performers, not because anybody wants this, but because DCPS doesn't have a good system in place to help them. You're WotP, so you don't know how this works. What happens at our school is that high SES parents slyly form advanced tutoring groups on the side to supplement, to help ensure that our children don't fall behind you WotP'ers.

My kids are at Janney now but went for four years to an EOTP charter school. If Janney suddenly started taking on an additional 10 percent of its student population with set-aside spots for at-risk kids, someone -- the PTA or DCPS or the school administration -- would make sure there were more resources in place and would handle it. I really don't think two at-risk kids would drag down a whole classroom of kids from extremely wealthy families taught by experienced, well-paid teachers.

[Anonymous]

I have no horse in this race but as someone whose kid went to a low income and then high income school I can say that kids’ needs at both are very different.
First case: lots of remedial support and ELL, lots of counseling of all kinds, lots of free and subsidized basic stuff. Ideally also tons of field trips.
Second case: support for kids who are above grade level; socioemotional learning.
It is hard to meet all needs of all students when they are so different.