Ludlow-Taylor getting a new a new Principal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you mom, your child is Asian, you are not, and you're very happy with L-T. What will make a difference over time is school leadership that sees value in attracting neighborhood families of all races and classes. We're finally likely to get that now. Neighborhood parents have never been the problem at LT. No in-boundary parent should have to walk on egg shells at a neighborhood elementary school for not being part of the "in" crowd.

And a school principal shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because they're not white enough, don't live in the neighborhood, and don't judge any one of their students by their address.

It's fine and understandable for families to want to increase neighborhood enrollment. But the principal should not ever have - nor be expected to have - a preference for some families in their school over others, based on where they live, neighborhood or not.

+1

[Anonymous]

Please let this thread die already!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting and racist? That would have been Cobbs biting my head off for asking how many Asian children were at L-T past PreK in front of other prospective parents. I'm told the answer was one. Her answer was WHAT AN INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION (at high volume). My ill feelings about Cobb were surely passed down to my own kids, who were standing right there. Any wonder that some of us are surprised and pleased that DCPS has selected a white principal? We may be disappointed in her stewardship of the school, but, hey, it's a new day for now.

Although the principal could have addressed it better, is an inappropriate question for that forum. Imagine if a white person did that.

In which forum? In what sense was it an inappropriate question when DCPS itself publishes demographic data? Yes, I am an Asian parent. I asked the question to Cobbs politely and in a low voice, while she barked her answer. The DCPS L-T school profile page had reported 0% Asian that year, and I wanted to know if the figure was accurate. She was so unpleasant to me that we didn't put in for a L-T preschool slot, although we're in-bounds. Ech, glad we landed at a welcoming charter and that Cobbs is history at L-T. Hello, the neighborhood kids are mostly white now. If the new principal makes L-T another Maury (er, more than half white and IB) within 5 years, hurray.

can the new principal get an order of fried wings and rice with mumbo sauce on the side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you mom, your child is Asian, you are not, and you're very happy with L-T. What will make a difference over time is school leadership that sees value in attracting neighborhood families of all races and classes. We're finally likely to get that now. Neighborhood parents have never been the problem at LT. No in-boundary parent should have to walk on egg shells at a neighborhood elementary school for not being part of the "in" crowd.

And a school principal shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because they're not white enough, don't live in the neighborhood, and don't judge any one of their students by their address.

It's fine and understandable for families to want to increase neighborhood enrollment. But the principal should not ever have - nor be expected to have - a preference for some families in their school over others, based on where they live, neighborhood or not.

+1

This attitude helps explain why the Ludlow PTA is practically broke. Brent PTA parents raised 240K this past school year, and not just because their little district has grown affluent as a result of gentrification. The fact remains that DC's best elementary schools are neighborhood schools with majority IB populations, and by a long shot. Ludlow and Cobbs have been scaring high SES neighborhood families away for six years, often even before pres3. Yet some gentrifiers have defended the miserable arrangement tooth and nail.

The new principal has her work cut out for her - the neighborhood has yet to rally to support a cohesive, effective parent group, or to retain nearly enough white kids for Ludlow's CAS scores to be published by subgroup (25+ kids per grade). Even if the new principal proves highly effective, she's not going to be able to manage all the tensions associated with rapid change. The longstanding OOB population with a strong (and warped) sense of ownership is going to be feel increasingly threatened as the school culture evolves to become more high SES friendly, possibly at warp speed as at Maury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you mom, your child is Asian, you are not, and you're very happy with L-T. What will make a difference over time is school leadership that sees value in attracting neighborhood families of all races and classes. We're finally likely to get that now. Neighborhood parents have never been the problem at LT. No in-boundary parent should have to walk on egg shells at a neighborhood elementary school for not being part of the "in" crowd.

And a school principal shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because they're not white enough, don't live in the neighborhood, and don't judge any one of their students by their address.

It's fine and understandable for families to want to increase neighborhood enrollment. But the principal should not ever have - nor be expected to have - a preference for some families in their school over others, based on where they live, neighborhood or not.

+1

This attitude helps explain why the Ludlow PTA is practically broke. Brent PTA parents raised 240K this past school year, and not just because their little district has grown affluent as a result of gentrification. The fact remains that DC's best elementary schools are neighborhood schools with majority IB populations, and by a long shot. Ludlow and Cobbs have been scaring high SES neighborhood families away for six years, often even before pres3. Yet some gentrifiers have defended the miserable arrangement tooth and nail.

The new principal has her work cut out for her - the neighborhood has yet to rally to support a cohesive, effective parent group, or to retain nearly enough white kids for Ludlow's CAS scores to be published by subgroup (25+ kids per grade). Even if the new principal proves highly effective, she's not going to be able to manage all the tensions associated with rapid change. The longstanding OOB population with a strong (and warped) sense of ownership is going to be feel increasingly threatened as the school culture evolves to become more high SES friendly, possibly at warp speed as at Maury.

You lost me when you described OOB families as having a warped sense of ownership. They are a part of your community too. Perhaps it's not their sense of ownership, but your sense of entitlement that's warped.

One more note. Some of you seem to view the new principal as "the great white hope." But you should be mindful that good and bad leaders come in all colors. Everything white that falls from the sky isn't snow. Sometimes it's hail and ice.

I wish you well. Signed-- not a LT parent.

[Anonymous]

^^^ You need buy-in from the neighborhood. Strong neighborhood schools are a must. I'm not IB to L-T either, but wish them well in making a strong neighborhood school, fast, and building their community as a cohesive group. I get your second para. and agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ You need buy-in from the neighborhood. Strong neighborhood schools are a must. I'm not IB to L-T either, but wish them well in making a strong neighborhood school, fast, and building their community as a cohesive group. I get your second para. and agree.

I get that you need buy in from the neighborhood. But some of the sentiments expressed here lead me to believe that some LT IB parents may not have been as sensitive to the history of the neighborhood and the school as they could have been. It "sounds" like they may have wanted change; wanted it quickly; and perhaps were not respectful of the parents and staff who were at the school long before they arrived, and who had been working to move LT forward to the best of their abilities and the resources available.

Approach is everything. This clash of cultures is happening all across the city. However, some communities are handling it much better than others.

If the comments here are any indication, LT has a looooong way to go.

The new principal will have her work cut out for her bringing these two worlds together.

[Anonymous]

+1. As the many parents in the neighborhood who've rejected L-T know, along with countless prospective home owners who bought elsewhere on the Hill over concerns about the school, much of the OOB population is comprised of families who used to live in the Stanton Park neighborhood. This isn't the normal OOB population one finds in Hill elementary schools (e.g. a family residing in the Payne or Miner Districts who lotteries into Peabody or Maury).

The dominant OOB crowd moved elsewhere in the city when gentrification pushed property values and rents up, or to PG County, but continued to use L-T, often by borrowing the addresses of elderly in-boundary relatives to enroll. DCPS hasn't cracked down because in-boundary demand has been weak. But with demand picking up fast, and leadership that is likely to be far more neighborhood friendly than it's been for a decade, the OOB group's glory days are numbered.

Rapid change will engender a great deal of conflict at L-T, but at the end of the day, maybe five years from now, true in-boundary parents will call the shots there. They can't run off to SWS, Cap Hill Montessori or charters like they could just a few years ago. I don't doubt that in-boundary parents will ultimately reinvent L-T as high SES friendly to the upper grades. Good luck to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you mom, your child is Asian, you are not, and you're very happy with L-T. What will make a difference over time is school leadership that sees value in attracting neighborhood families of all races and classes. We're finally likely to get that now. Neighborhood parents have never been the problem at LT. No in-boundary parent should have to walk on egg shells at a neighborhood elementary school for not being part of the "in" crowd.

And a school principal shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because they're not white enough, don't live in the neighborhood, and don't judge any one of their students by their address.

It's fine and understandable for families to want to increase neighborhood enrollment. But the principal should not ever have - nor be expected to have - a preference for some families in their school over others, based on where they live, neighborhood or not.

+1

This attitude helps explain why the Ludlow PTA is practically broke. Brent PTA parents raised 240K this past school year, and not just because their little district has grown affluent as a result of gentrification. The fact remains that DC's best elementary schools are neighborhood schools with majority IB populations, and by a long shot. Ludlow and Cobbs have been scaring high SES neighborhood families away for six years, often even before pres3. Yet some gentrifiers have defended the miserable arrangement tooth and nail.

The new principal has her work cut out for her - the neighborhood has yet to rally to support a cohesive, effective parent group, or to retain nearly enough white kids for Ludlow's CAS scores to be published by subgroup (25+ kids per grade). Even if the new principal proves highly effective, she's not going to be able to manage all the tensions associated with rapid change. The longstanding OOB population with a strong (and warped) sense of ownership is going to be feel increasingly threatened as the school culture evolves to become more high SES friendly, possibly at warp speed as at Maury.

You lost me when you described OOB families as having a warped sense of ownership. They are a part of your community too. Perhaps it's not their sense of ownership, but your sense of entitlement that's warped.

One more note. Some of you seem to view the new principal as "the great white hope." But you should be mindful that good and bad leaders come in all colors. Everything white that falls from the sky isn't snow. Sometimes it's hail and ice.

I wish you well. Signed-- not a LT parent.

+1000

The sense of PP's entitlement is appalling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+1. As the many parents in the neighborhood who've rejected L-T know, along with countless prospective home owners who bought elsewhere on the Hill over concerns about the school, much of the OOB population is comprised of families who used to live in the Stanton Park neighborhood. This isn't the normal OOB population one finds in Hill elementary schools (e.g. a family residing in the Payne or Miner Districts who lotteries into Peabody or Maury).

The dominant OOB crowd moved elsewhere in the city when gentrification pushed property values and rents up, or to PG County, but continued to use L-T, often by borrowing the addresses of elderly in-boundary relatives to enroll. DCPS hasn't cracked down because in-boundary demand has been weak. But with demand picking up fast, and leadership that is likely to be far more neighborhood friendly than it's been for a decade, the OOB group's glory days are numbered.

Rapid change will engender a great deal of conflict at L-T, but at the end of the day, maybe five years from now, true in-boundary parents will call the shots there. They can't run off to SWS, Cap Hill Montessori or charters like they could just a few years ago. I don't doubt that in-boundary parents will ultimately reinvent L-T as high SES friendly to the upper grades. Good luck to them.

Again. Comments like this really don't build community. But apparently, you're not interested in building a unified community. I'm going to have to call this one the way it sounds...you just want the black families out. But here's a newsflash for you--many of those little black children are IB for LT, and they aren't going anywhere. I know newcomers think that every black person they see at their school is sneaking in here from PG county, but that is an urban myth. It happens, but not on a level anywhere near DCUMers believe it does. When it does, it's a case of separation or divorce. Moreover, there aren't a whole lot of PG county residents who are sneaking into DC schools to attend LT. No offense, but I can name two dozen other schools (including charters) that they would go to before they would ever think of LT.

Seriously, you guys IB for LT need to tamp down your rhetoric. It's ugly and counterproductive. If you really want a great IB school, spend your energy working on a solution that benefits children of every race and socio-economic level. And stop with the IB/OOB distinction. LT is NOT a Ward 3 school, and if you want to emulate Ward 3 schoosl, the whole "I'm IB and you're not" attitude is the last thing you would want to take from them.

[Anonymous]

So, I'm new to this thread. But from reading it, it seems like people didn't like the previous principal (Cobbs?) because she was black, and that people are glad that the new principal is white?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, I'm new to this thread. But from reading it, it seems like people didn't like the previous principal (Cobbs?) because she was black, and that people are glad that the new principal is white?

*Some* people didn't like the previous principal, Cobbs, b/c they felt she wasn't "welcoming enough" to IB families, which they assumed was because the complaining families are white and Cobbs is black. Some of those people are glad that the new principal is white.

I observed Cobbs to be very friendly to many (if not all) white families; I do think she had a relatively low tolerance for any parent, black or white, who came across as entitled; there may have been a class aspect to this, I don't know.

I also think Cobbs heard a lot of talk from white parents about "sticking together" to create a future cohort of white kids in the upper grades, and I think she was deeply offended by the idea that a classroom of black children is a less desirable outcome than a classroom with white kids in it. I'm not sure she was good at getting past (or at least masking) her distaste for parents who made those statements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, I'm new to this thread. But from reading it, it seems like people didn't like the previous principal (Cobbs?) because she was black, and that people are glad that the new principal is white?

It's not as simple as "white vs. black." It's more "white culture" vs. "black culture." In addition to the culture class, there is an economic class that breeds a lot of resentment. This resentment comes from both 1) entitled white people who want to attend their school of right and make it a high-SES and tier 1 (like the other gentrified schools in nearby communities) and 2) disenfranchised black people who have deep ties to the school community and feel the heat coming from white people who clearly want them out. The principal was in group 2 and was very defensive about it, which group 1 used to further their cause.

Meanwhile, there are plenty of people in the middle (lie myself) that don't fit either stereotype who are frustrated by the race discussion and just want everyone to focus on educating our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, I'm new to this thread. But from reading it, it seems like people didn't like the previous principal (Cobbs?) because she was black, and that people are glad that the new principal is white?

*Some* people didn't like the previous principal, Cobbs, b/c they felt she wasn't "welcoming enough" to IB families, which they assumed was because the complaining families are white and Cobbs is black. Some of those people are glad that the new principal is white.

I observed Cobbs to be very friendly to many (if not all) white families; I do think she had a relatively low tolerance for any parent, black or white, who came across as entitled; there may have been a class aspect to this, I don't know.

I also think Cobbs heard a lot of talk from white parents about "sticking together" to create a future cohort of white kids in the upper grades, and I think she was deeply offended by the idea that a classroom of black children is a less desirable outcome than a classroom with white kids in it. I'm not sure she was good at getting past (or at least masking) her distaste for parents who made those statements.

If they said to her face (or anywhere in her vicinity), some of the comments that have been written here...I understand the former principal's annoyance at "some" parents. It's insulting to read much of the anonymous commentary about black children on this forum. That's bad enough. But I can't even imagine being the principal of a school (who is an African American) and having to listen to some of this stuff come directly out of people's mouths. I'm a very patient person, but I am also human. There's no way I could brush comments like these off. My distaste would be apparent to all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's not as simple as "white vs. black." It's more "white culture" vs. "black culture." In addition to the culture class, there is an economic class that breeds a lot of resentment. This resentment comes from both 1) entitled white people who want to attend their school of right and make it a high-SES and tier 1 (like the other gentrified schools in nearby communities) and 2) disenfranchised black people who have deep ties to the school community and feel the heat coming from white people who clearly want them out. The principal was in group 2 and was very defensive about it, which group 1 used to further their cause.

Meanwhile, there are plenty of people in the middle (lie myself) that don't fit either stereotype who are frustrated by the race discussion and just want everyone to focus on educating our kids.

"White culture vs Black culture"? What is this 1955? In the age where we have a African-American President & a First Lady who are both Ivy League educated with Law degrees, it's interesting how some people still want to look at white people as being entitled, higher SES type people, and black people as "disenfranchised".

It's also interesting how on this thread people are genuinely expressing there desire for more white kids at this school, when I think what people really want is more kids at the school that come from higher SES. If not, then would the people on this thread, who claim to want more white families at the school, welcome a more white kids from families like "Honey Boo Boo"? I think not. Alternatively, what if the school was majority black, but the black kids came from families like the Obamas (Ivy league educated lawyers)? Would this not be Ok?

In my opinion, if you want higher SES families at your school, then just say that. Don't say "Black", "White", "Latino", "Asian", etc.

BTW, I'm an African-American currently doing my master's at Johns Hopkins Univ and my wife is an African-American with a master's from George Washington University, we have two kids, and hopefully we won't be looked down upon if we decide to enroll our kids at Ludlow-Taylor Elementary School.