Middle and high school on Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the parent moving to MoCo, but not sure I'm staying either. OK, how are you defining "rich" in this context? Not FARMs? If yes, wonderful, this single mom had no idea she was rich making less than six-figures annually.

I've seen a good deal of evidence that, at the ES level, the most important developments in a child's education take place at home. But the balance shifts away from home and toward what's happening at school the farther the kids progress. That said, I'm sure that some kids can do well in almost any sort of school. Others will need this and that to thrive...a certain amount of special attention, support, structure, encouragement, open space, arts training, certain types of intellectual challenge, being kept away from temptation, other...girls, boys, Jews, Asians, whites, AAs, Latinos, poor students, international students, handicapped students, bilingual students etc. etc. to feel at home and to thrive academically. You sound like a Jefferson Academy booster. Sorry, when I visited last year, I didn't want to return.

PP here. I agree with everything you say. But none of that has anything to do with the ridiculous proposal to gerrymander most of the rich (err, "high SES") kids on Capitol Hill into a single middle school that I have been seeing on here.

And yes, I do believe that, as a general matter, white kids on Capitol Hill are relatively rich. That doesn't mean I think your kids are.

The proposal discussed upthread to feed all Ward 6 ESes to a single MS or all Ward 6 ESes minus the Cluster (if it chooses not to play ball) could hardly be called grrrymanderinng. It's sort of the opposite: it makes intra Ward 6 boundaries irrelevant.

Gerrymandering makes things worse. A pan Ward 6 MS with a full menu of at and above grade-level offerings would make them dramatically better for hundreds of families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

Truth. Read the story about Jefferson in today's Post. It may not be geared for the high SES families (e.g. a washer and dryer for family use is now in the school basement) but they are doing good things with the kids (and their families) but maybe, just maybe, they can start to turn around multi-generational poverty. And there are ways to make it work for your kids -- charters, Hardy, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the parent moving to MoCo, but not sure I'm staying either. OK, how are you defining "rich" in this context? Not FARMs? If yes, wonderful, this single mom had no idea she was rich making less than six-figures annually.

I've seen a good deal of evidence that, at the ES level, the most important developments in a child's education take place at home. But the balance shifts away from home and toward what's happening at school the farther the kids progress. That said, I'm sure that some kids can do well in almost any sort of school. Others will need this and that to thrive...a certain amount of special attention, support, structure, encouragement, open space, arts training, certain types of intellectual challenge, being kept away from temptation, other...girls, boys, Jews, Asians, whites, AAs, Latinos, poor students, international students, handicapped students, bilingual students etc. etc. to feel at home and to thrive academically. You sound like a Jefferson Academy booster. Sorry, when I visited last year, I didn't want to return.

PP here. I agree with everything you say. But none of that has anything to do with the ridiculous proposal to gerrymander most of the rich (err, "high SES") kids on Capitol Hill into a single middle school that I have been seeing on here.

And yes, I do believe that, as a general matter, white kids on Capitol Hill are relatively rich. That doesn't mean I think your kids are.

I think you need to understand what gerrymandering is. Capitol Hill is a neighborhood and putting the kids in one school would not be gerrymandering. Putting them in three different middle schools is gerrymandering. By slicing up a neighborhood like this, you're manipulating the boundaries of the neighborhood so as to favor one party or class, that being the out of bound students.

The problem with that logic is that it does not reflect the reality of geography. The closest elementary schools to Jefferson are Amidon and Brent (not taking into account Van Ness, which, doesn't feed into any middle school yet). Are you suggesting that Amidon should be the sole feeder into Jefferson, while all of the schools on Capitol Hill should feed into another single school?

No, the idea is that ALL Ward 6 elementaries (minus the Cluster because they refuse) would feed into one MS. That would be either Elliot Hine or Jefferson. There's enough public transportation on the Hill to make it work out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

Truth. Read the story about Jefferson in today's Post. It may not be geared for the high SES families (e.g. a washer and dryer for family use is now in the school basement) but they are doing good things with the kids (and their families) but maybe, just maybe, they can start to turn around multi-generational poverty. And there are ways to make it work for your kids -- charters, Hardy, etc.

There is nothing to prove it won't work for high SES families other than the fact few have gone there in recent years. With mostly OOB kids, their PARCC scores are similar to SH (yes, still really low but still remarkable since one is the "good" school). If high SES families had been bailing after a year, that would be one thing but the fact is we don't know how the school would handle them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

Truth. Read the story about Jefferson in today's Post. It may not be geared for the high SES families (e.g. a washer and dryer for family use is now in the school basement) but they are doing good things with the kids (and their families) but maybe, just maybe, they can start to turn around multi-generational poverty. And there are ways to make it work for your kids -- charters, Hardy, etc.

There is nothing to prove it won't work for high SES families other than the fact few have gone there in recent years. With mostly OOB kids, their PARCC scores are similar to SH (yes, still really low but still remarkable since one is the "good" school). If high SES families had been bailing after a year, that would be one thing but the fact is we don't know how the school would handle them.

I'm the PP. And yes, I agree. Looks like the current JA administration is thinking out of the box for their current students. No reason they couldn't adapt to wealthier Capital Hill families too but no one is willing to take the risk. Maybe Henderson and Grosso were right last year when discussing the neighborhood's shunning of this school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

Truth. Read the story about Jefferson in today's Post. It may not be geared for the high SES families (e.g. a washer and dryer for family use is now in the school basement) but they are doing good things with the kids (and their families) but maybe, just maybe, they can start to turn around multi-generational poverty. And there are ways to make it work for your kids -- charters, Hardy, etc.

There is nothing to prove it won't work for high SES families other than the fact few have gone there in recent years. With mostly OOB kids, their PARCC scores are similar to SH (yes, still really low but still remarkable since one is the "good" school). If high SES families had been bailing after a year, that would be one thing but the fact is we don't know how the school would handle them.

I'm the PP. And yes, I agree. Looks like the current JA administration is thinking out of the box for their current students. No reason they couldn't adapt to wealthier Capital Hill families too but no one is willing to take the risk. Maybe Henderson and Grosso were right last year when discussing the neighborhood's shunning of this school.

I don't think that is a fair statement and neither were the comments from Henderson and Grosso. Until the recent boundary changes, Jefferson's feeder pattern was A-B, half of Brent, and maybe part of another school. How can the "neighborhood" reject a school that it was barely IB for?

Yes there wasn't a flood of people last year but I think it will increase. It wont' work for every family but I think it is too early to suggest it won't work for high SES families. And don't get me started on Grosso...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to sound inflammatory, but a lot of high SES parents pull their kids out after elementary school and move to NW or the burbs. Is there movement afoot to improve middle and high school choices? Can anyone forecast the outlook over the next 10 years?

Within the next 3 years it will sink in with everyone that Hardy MS is now desirable. That will do a few things - it will show that DCPS can turn a middle school in addition to Deal. It will mean fewer OOB slots at Hardy for the Hill. OTOH it might mean a few more slots at the desirable charter middle schools.

Not at all clear what will happen at McFarland. DCPS will continue to work on unraveling the EC's.

Meanwhile gentrification on the Hill and in nearby areas will proceed apace. This will increase the number of high SES kids at a range of Hill area elementaries. By ten years from now the demographic situation impacting the three middle schools will be very different.

What are the feeders to Hardy and what are their 5th grade test scores? I am sure they are not in the teens as are most of the feeders to Jefferson and Eliot Hine. Totally different situation. Apples and oranges.

Hardy feeders 5th grade PARCC:

Eaton 81/65 (ELA/Math)
Hyde 73/78
Key 80/66
Mann 88/74
Stoddert 54/51

Hardy 6th grade PARCC
42/27

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

Truth. Read the story about Jefferson in today's Post. It may not be geared for the high SES families (e.g. a washer and dryer for family use is now in the school basement) but they are doing good things with the kids (and their families) but maybe, just maybe, they can start to turn around multi-generational poverty. And there are ways to make it work for your kids -- charters, Hardy, etc.

There is nothing to prove it won't work for high SES families other than the fact few have gone there in recent years. With mostly OOB kids, their PARCC scores are similar to SH (yes, still really low but still remarkable since one is the "good" school). If high SES families had been bailing after a year, that would be one thing but the fact is we don't know how the school would handle them.

I'm the PP. And yes, I agree. Looks like the current JA administration is thinking out of the box for their current students. No reason they couldn't adapt to wealthier Capital Hill families too but no one is willing to take the risk. Maybe Henderson and Grosso were right last year when discussing the neighborhood's shunning of this school.

I reject this characterization. It's not about the school's ability to adapt to "wealthy" students. It's about any school's ability to direct resources and meet the basic needs of students coming in at hugely different academic levels--and often hugely different expectations about what the school will and won't provide. Every dollar that comes in the school needs to be allocated. Kids way below grade level and kids way above grade level NEED vastly different things. Where will those dollars be allocated? Where will teachers attention be focused. Where should the attention and funding go? Unfortunately, as mentioned in the article Jeffereson already struggles to get the support it needs from central office. It's a legitimate concern and legitimate to expect a well thought out answer to how exactly the school, its teachers and DCPS will deal with students at far ends of the academic spectrum in a small school. Your facile and flippant characterization of wealthy and poor is not helpful and doesn't get to answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to sound inflammatory, but a lot of high SES parents pull their kids out after elementary school and move to NW or the burbs. Is there movement afoot to improve middle and high school choices? Can anyone forecast the outlook over the next 10 years?

Within the next 3 years it will sink in with everyone that Hardy MS is now desirable. That will do a few things - it will show that DCPS can turn a middle school in addition to Deal. It will mean fewer OOB slots at Hardy for the Hill. OTOH it might mean a few more slots at the desirable charter middle schools.

Not at all clear what will happen at McFarland. DCPS will continue to work on unraveling the EC's.

Meanwhile gentrification on the Hill and in nearby areas will proceed apace. This will increase the number of high SES kids at a range of Hill area elementaries. By ten years from now the demographic situation impacting the three middle schools will be very different.

What are the feeders to Hardy and what are their 5th grade test scores? I am sure they are not in the teens as are most of the feeders to Jefferson and Eliot Hine. Totally different situation. Apples and oranges.

Hardy feeders 5th grade PARCC:

Eaton 81/65 (ELA/Math)
Hyde 73/78
Key 80/66
Mann 88/74
Stoddert 54/51

Hardy 6th grade PARCC
42/27

Stoddert scores are 72/76, where did you get those figures?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to sound inflammatory, but a lot of high SES parents pull their kids out after elementary school and move to NW or the burbs. Is there movement afoot to improve middle and high school choices? Can anyone forecast the outlook over the next 10 years?

Within the next 3 years it will sink in with everyone that Hardy MS is now desirable. That will do a few things - it will show that DCPS can turn a middle school in addition to Deal. It will mean fewer OOB slots at Hardy for the Hill. OTOH it might mean a few more slots at the desirable charter middle schools.

Not at all clear what will happen at McFarland. DCPS will continue to work on unraveling the EC's.

Meanwhile gentrification on the Hill and in nearby areas will proceed apace. This will increase the number of high SES kids at a range of Hill area elementaries. By ten years from now the demographic situation impacting the three middle schools will be very different.

What are the feeders to Hardy and what are their 5th grade test scores? I am sure they are not in the teens as are most of the feeders to Jefferson and Eliot Hine. Totally different situation. Apples and oranges.

Hardy feeders 5th grade PARCC:

Eaton 81/65 (ELA/Math)
Hyde 73/78
Key 80/66
Mann 88/74
Stoddert 54/51

Hardy 6th grade PARCC
42/27

Stoddert scores are 72/76, where did you get those figures?

72/76 are the combined 3rd to 5th grade scores.

The 54/51 is 5th grade only. Source is OSSE's PARCC results website http://results.osse.dc.gov (search Stoddert, scroll to bottom of page and filter by grade)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A real question. My IB MS has a proficiency pass rate in the teens. At this rate, we'll be moving to MoCo.

I don't doubt you will. And I don't doubt your house will be sold to either a household without kids, or to a family with young that will take their own chances on the lottery when the time comes. Of course if that family has only an infant, the situation may be resolved by the time it matters to them.

Point is that the Hill MS problem just isn't that big a deal in the larger picture for the District. Its not even holding back gentrification on the Hill. That is why pretty much everyone other than the families directly involved is willing to wait to let the situation resolve itself.

Watch were you move in MoCo, honestly I would say at least half their schools are as bad as DC. Same for fairfax county, these counties are really struggling with budget to serve the growing ELL population and have not yet quite figured out how to serve everyone really well.

[Anonymous]

Yes, we know - we go on SchoolDigger.com, visit schools, talk to old friends who've moved to MD. We are aware that MoCo is in the grip of a social upheaval. But at least MoCo offers test-in GT at the MS level to a select few, and doesn't seem to fight high SES parents amalgamating around high-performing schools across the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the parent moving to MoCo, but not sure I'm staying either. OK, how are you defining "rich" in this context? Not FARMs? If yes, wonderful, this single mom had no idea she was rich making less than six-figures annually.

I've seen a good deal of evidence that, at the ES level, the most important developments in a child's education take place at home. But the balance shifts away from home and toward what's happening at school the farther the kids progress. That said, I'm sure that some kids can do well in almost any sort of school. Others will need this and that to thrive...a certain amount of special attention, support, structure, encouragement, open space, arts training, certain types of intellectual challenge, being kept away from temptation, other...girls, boys, Jews, Asians, whites, AAs, Latinos, poor students, international students, handicapped students, bilingual students etc. etc. to feel at home and to thrive academically. You sound like a Jefferson Academy booster. Sorry, when I visited last year, I didn't want to return.

PP here. I agree with everything you say. But none of that has anything to do with the ridiculous proposal to gerrymander most of the rich (err, "high SES") kids on Capitol Hill into a single middle school that I have been seeing on here.

And yes, I do believe that, as a general matter, white kids on Capitol Hill are relatively rich. That doesn't mean I think your kids are.

I think you need to understand what gerrymandering is. Capitol Hill is a neighborhood and putting the kids in one school would not be gerrymandering. Putting them in three different middle schools is gerrymandering. By slicing up a neighborhood like this, you're manipulating the boundaries of the neighborhood so as to favor one party or class, that being the out of bound students.

The problem with that logic is that it does not reflect the reality of geography. The closest elementary schools to Jefferson are Amidon and Brent (not taking into account Van Ness, which, doesn't feed into any middle school yet). Are you suggesting that Amidon should be the sole feeder into Jefferson, while all of the schools on Capitol Hill should feed into another single school?

Absolutely. You're not taking into account natural boundaries. Eliot-Hine is 2 miles away. Jefferson is 1.5 miles away. You're literally crossing under I-95 to reach Jefferson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely. You're not taking into account natural boundaries. Eliot-Hine is 2 miles away. Jefferson is 1.5 miles away. You're literally crossing under I-95 to reach Jefferson.

Oh, the horror. Literally having to cross a freeway to get someplace? How could people possibly get past such a natural barrier?!?