Language instruction at CMI in the upper elementary grades

[Anonymous]

A majority of CMI's upper grade students have not achieved proficiency in national tests
let alone international. My DC actually lost ground on core skills while at CMI and not a single student tested
"advanced" in math on the PARCC. So talking about IB at this point seems premature to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

IB Programs require two language exposure ONE BEING NATIVE LANGUAGE.
Just want to clarify.
English dominant (HL) and Spanish/Mandarin/French/etc (SL) satisfies this requirement.

This is the first time I've heard the goal of CMI is to send children on to IB high school. What's the leap from IPC to IB? What are the differentiators?

Thanks for the clarification on language.

IPC is the elementary school program/IMYC is for middle school. http://www.greatlearning.com/imyc/

With similar goals to grow international minded, critical thinkers - its not a leap to think that successful graduates of either an IB or IMYC middle school program would go on to an IB curriculum (which technically starts in 10th grade, no?) I think most parents at CMI who are interested in the middle school would envision their children continuing a college prep/international curriculum. The CMI administration argues that the IMYC program is particularly attuned to how to motivate the teenage brain. British International School is also using the IMYC curriculum to prep students for its IB High School.

I see what you did there. Seriously though, most people haven't even heard of IMYC, and if they have they should know it's not IB. IMYC Prep doesn't measure up to IB standards.

Good luck though, booster!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a charter school advocate, I'd be against this.

There are already too many "preferences" as it is. I sense frustrations with so many families trying to get into schools.

I'm a charter advocate and I'd be for it. Schools that have designed a curriculum, services, and supports for SN students should be allowed to use their expensive high-needs classrooms to actually serve them.

You wouldn't put snowflake in a high needs room anyway, so how ugly do you need to be to want those seats to be empty?

Do you understand how the services work in DC?

Yes, I do, all too well. NT children don't end up in Level 4 classrooms. But children who need those classrooms don't get to bunnyhop into them.

So NT kids aren't in them and SN kids aren't in them....

Sounds like an argument for SN students getting preference for SN classrooms that NT students won't fill anyway. Or, keep paying for $60K seats in private schools and the $100 million transportation to get them there, courtesy of DC taxpayers.

Your call, Einstein.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP-- it appears that the IPC is the bootleg/knock-off version of the IB program. Is it also cheaper than the IB? If so, that pretty much explains everything.

It appears you've hit the nail on the head. Both are pay-to-play programs to impress people like yourself.

Well, I'm way more impressed with the IB program. I wouldn't waste my time or money on the "IPC" (AKA the poor man's IB).


Same here. It's like buying sushi at a gas station.

[Anonymous]

I am so effing lost here. Somewhere I read that a parent of a current student thinks their kid is doing well in Chinese, not as well in Spanish. Thank you for a useful post. Otherwise, this thread is ABSURD. Excellent work DCUM!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A majority of CMI's upper grade students have not achieved proficiency in national tests
let alone international. My DC actually lost ground on core skills while at CMI and not a single student tested
"advanced" in math on the PARCC. So talking about IB at this point seems premature to me.

Maybe your kid is not smart?

[Anonymous]

Wow. I'm not the poster you're referring to, but that's a low blow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

IB Programs require two language exposure ONE BEING NATIVE LANGUAGE.
Just want to clarify.
English dominant (HL) and Spanish/Mandarin/French/etc (SL) satisfies this requirement.

This is the first time I've heard the goal of CMI is to send children on to IB high school. What's the leap from IPC to IB? What are the differentiators?

Thanks for the clarification on language.

IPC is the elementary school program/IMYC is for middle school. http://www.greatlearning.com/imyc/

With similar goals to grow international minded, critical thinkers - its not a leap to think that successful graduates of either an IB or IMYC middle school program would go on to an IB curriculum (which technically starts in 10th grade, no?) I think most parents at CMI who are interested in the middle school would envision their children continuing a college prep/international curriculum. The CMI administration argues that the IMYC program is particularly attuned to how to motivate the teenage brain. British International School is also using the IMYC curriculum to prep students for its IB High School.

I see what you did there. Seriously though, most people haven't even heard of IMYC, and if they have they should know it's not IB. IMYC Prep doesn't measure up to IB standards.

Good luck though, booster!

I'm not sure I'd make any favorable comparison to the British School.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. I'm not the poster you're referring to, but that's a low blow.

I didn't think it was a low blow. It makes sense. If posters kid lost core skills maybe the kid was just dumb. Not necc the fault of CMI.

[Anonymous]

The following link compares the IPC to the IB's PYP http://www.expatarrivals.com/article/international-school-curricula

As a CMI parent, I think what some of you don't get is that no one at CMI is comparing IPC to the IB program or touting it as an alternative to the IB program. If we wanted an IB program, they are out there at both DC public and private schools. The CMI founders chose IPC for a specific reason--not because it was cheaper. I like the IPC because it is essentially expeditionary learning, which is the same thing that made ITS, Two Rivers, Mundo Verde, Cap City and Lowell attractive to me. I know for a fact that there are families at CMI that are inbound for these IB public schools (Shepherd Elementary, for example), but instead are at CMI. The curriculum is great, but that is only a small part of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The following link compares the IPC to the IB's PYP http://www.expatarrivals.com/article/international-school-curricula

As a CMI parent, I think what some of you don't get is that no one at CMI is comparing IPC to the IB program or touting it as an alternative to the IB program. If we wanted an IB program, they are out there at both DC public and private schools. The CMI founders chose IPC for a specific reason--not because it was cheaper. I like the IPC because it is essentially expeditionary learning, which is the same thing that made ITS, Two Rivers, Mundo Verde, Cap City and Lowell attractive to me. I know for a fact that there are families at CMI that are inbound for these IB public schools (Shepherd Elementary, for example), but instead are at CMI. The curriculum is great, but that is only a small part of it.[/quote

Good points. What I think started this tangent was someone asserting that IPC would prepare students well for an IB high school program. Given that CMI doesn't have any students that old yet I think the jury is still out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The following link compares the IPC to the IB's PYP http://www.expatarrivals.com/article/international-school-curricula

As a CMI parent, I think what some of you don't get is that no one at CMI is comparing IPC to the IB program or touting it as an alternative to the IB program. If we wanted an IB program, they are out there at both DC public and private schools. The CMI founders chose IPC for a specific reason--not because it was cheaper. I like the IPC because it is essentially expeditionary learning, which is the same thing that made ITS, Two Rivers, Mundo Verde, Cap City and Lowell attractive to me. I know for a fact that there are families at CMI that are inbound for these IB public schools (Shepherd Elementary, for example), but instead are at CMI. The curriculum is great, but that is only a small part of it.

I think you are maybe the only actual CMI parent posting here.

[Anonymous]

I am a CMI parent who posted much earlier, before this thread deteriorated. Thank you CMI parent for trying to inject facts here.

I will say that pretty much all of the CMI parents I know, from every economic/racial background imaginable, feels extremely lucky to be at this school and is generally happy with the academics. People have minor issues, but the school is very responsive, and we have a robust PTA that advocates well for the parents. None of us are thrilled about the PARCC scores, but we understand that the top grade is small which skews the numbers. We expect those scores to improve significantly over the next couple of years.

Some people on this thread have a problem with the school. And that's fine. You can choose not to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a CMI parent who posted much earlier, before this thread deteriorated. Thank you CMI parent for trying to inject facts here.

I will say that pretty much all of the CMI parents I know, from every economic/racial background imaginable, feels extremely lucky to be at this school and is generally happy with the academics. People have minor issues, but the school is very responsive, and we have a robust PTA that advocates well for the parents. None of us are thrilled about the PARCC scores, but we understand that the top grade is small which skews the numbers. We expect those scores to improve significantly over the next couple of years.

Some people on this thread have a problem with the school. And that's fine. You can choose not to go.

A small sample size can increase variability, but it doesn't skew numbers. It could just as easily be too high as too low. Unless you're saying that the top grade is filled with lower achievers...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a CMI parent who posted much earlier, before this thread deteriorated. Thank you CMI parent for trying to inject facts here.

I will say that pretty much all of the CMI parents I know, from every economic/racial background imaginable, feels extremely lucky to be at this school and is generally happy with the academics. People have minor issues, but the school is very responsive, and we have a robust PTA that advocates well for the parents. None of us are thrilled about the PARCC scores, but we understand that the top grade is small which skews the numbers. We expect those scores to improve significantly over the next couple of years.

Some people on this thread have a problem with the school. And that's fine. You can choose not to go.

A small sample size can increase variability, but it doesn't skew numbers. It could just as easily be too high as too low. Unless you're saying that the top grade is filled with lower achievers...

The top grade has a lot of kids with significant special needs.