Can anyone tell me the story of Stuart-Hobson?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it is, although active Watkins and SH parents tend not to see the forest for the trees on this one (or at least to admit to seeing it).

With 40 kids at Brent staying for 5th grade this year (up from 1/4 that number as recently as SY 2015-16) 5th grade PARCC scores are set to rise this year.

Are those the same rising 4th graders whose scores LT outperformed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood schools primarily serve families in the catchment area, not kids from outside.

In the case of LT and SH, the overwhelming majority of kids in the catchment area are high SES with professional parents while the majority of the students are low SES.

We were thrilled to lottery into Maury for K from LT in PreK. We're happy to have avoided LT in favoring of attending a real neighborhood school within biking riding distance of our home. If that makes us racist, classist jerks, so be it. We're planning to stay at Maury through 5th. If LT had been majority IB, we'd have stayed.

We hardly care about test scores. To each her own.

You don't see the irony of opting out of your IB to get into Maury OOB and then praise the latter for being a real neighborhood school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood schools primarily serve families in the catchment area, not kids from outside.

In the case of LT and SH, the overwhelming majority of kids in the catchment area are high SES with professional parents while the majority of the students are low SES.

We were thrilled to lottery into Maury for K from LT in PreK. We're happy to have avoided LT in favoring of attending a real neighborhood school within biking riding distance of our home. If that makes us racist, classist jerks, so be it. We're planning to stay at Maury through 5th. If LT had been majority IB, we'd have stayed.

We hardly care about test scores. To each her own.

You don't see the irony of opting out of your IB to get into Maury OOB and then praise the latter for being a real neighborhood school?

Yeah, I have to say that's kind of weird. Is Maury a shorter walk from your house? Everything I have read about LT makes it seem the equal of Maury (and facilities wise, better!) I'm a happy Maury parent but the choice to enroll OOB from L-T seems odd. Also Maury is not majority IB at the upper grades so GL with that.

[Anonymous]

A lot of Brent haters on this thread! We absolutely love the school and the community; sincerely hope you enjoy your time at LT and Watkins as much as we have enjoyed our years at Brent!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood schools primarily serve families in the catchment area, not kids from outside.

In the case of LT and SH, the overwhelming majority of kids in the catchment area are high SES with professional parents while the majority of the students are low SES.

We were thrilled to lottery into Maury for K from LT in PreK. We're happy to have avoided LT in favoring of attending a real neighborhood school within biking riding distance of our home. If that makes us racist, classist jerks, so be it. We're planning to stay at Maury through 5th. If LT had been majority IB, we'd have stayed.

We hardly care about test scores. To each her own.

You don't see the irony of opting out of your IB to get into Maury OOB and then praise the latter for being a real neighborhood school?

No, she doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood schools primarily serve families in the catchment area, not kids from outside.

In the case of LT and SH, the overwhelming majority of kids in the catchment area are high SES with professional parents while the majority of the students are low SES.

We were thrilled to lottery into Maury for K from LT in PreK. We're happy to have avoided LT in favoring of attending a real neighborhood school within biking riding distance of our home. If that makes us racist, classist jerks, so be it. We're planning to stay at Maury through 5th. If LT had been majority IB, we'd have stayed.

We hardly care about test scores. To each her own.

You don't see the irony of opting out of your IB to get into Maury OOB and then praise the latter for being a real neighborhood school?

Yeah, I have to say that's kind of weird. Is Maury a shorter walk from your house? Everything I have read about LT makes it seem the equal of Maury (and facilities wise, better!) I'm a happy Maury parent but the choice to enroll OOB from L-T seems odd. Also Maury is not majority IB at the upper grades so GL with that.

There's one little difference...
64.9, 22.7, 5.1 vs. 33.2, 54.3, 5.7

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Improving, right, but, as has been said, turning SH into a Deal, or even a Hardy, is a 10-20 year project without Brent, Maury and SWS when it could have been a 3-5 year project.

Many of us on the Hill are fed up with losing dear friends to the burbs because Hill schools aren't attractive to most in-boundary families after elementary. Many of us feel that DCPS made a terrible mistake four years ago in refusing to respond to high local demand for a change in the Ward 6 middle school elementary-to-middle school feed situation.

I'm in-bounds for SH and won't enroll my child in a couple years on current trends, like most of our friends. Our children are well-behaved students who easily score 5s on both PARCC sections. Arguably, SH won't be better off without us.

Christ, it's been said by YOU about 1000 times on any SH related post. Give it a rest.

We got it -- you're going elsewhere. From your condescending tone alone I can promise you that you would not be missed at SH.

NP here and this is a real problem. You have tons of high SES parents IB for Hill schools opting out of DCPS because the middle school situation is a mess on the Hill. Some of those families are moving but many more are going to charters. DCPS could easily fix this by adjusting the feeder patterns and it’s so stupid that they refuse to do it.

Yes, it is. I'm going elsewhere, too, and haven't posted on other SH threads. Hundreds like us will in fact be missed at SH by any stakeholder with a thinking brain who cares about educating poor kids (um, all things being equal, poor kids don't do better without lots of higher SES classmates in their schools than they do with lots of high SES classmates in their schools).

I see even greater stupidity in how some IB Cluster parents defend the mess tooth and nail. Over the years, they've become their own worst enemies where Hill middle schools go.

The fact that YOU don't have feeder rights to SH doesn't a "mess"make. Brent isn't the only IB school with high SES, you obnoxious self centered "me-monster". And as the numbers actually show, LT and other SH feeders are improving (and in some cases outpacing Brent). While the number of OOB lottery spots matching in the lottery is falling to near zero. So the fact that you want to believe nothing is changing doesn't mean nothing is changing.

As others have said, and contrary to your belief, you will in fact not be missed.

New to this thread. Brent's scores drop (by Brent standards - which are higher than DCPS's and LT's) in 5th because so many families leave for Latin or Basis.

Which is really what all of this is about. Honestly, even if they could get into SH, Basis and Latin are better anyway. And THAT is what Hill families wanted. DCPS didn't deliver on rigor and quality so charters stepped in and filled a need. Now they offer something better than what DCPS has to offer. Ultimately, it's DCPS's and the Cluster's loss.

Where to begin.

What on earth does it mean to say that Brent's standards are higher than LT's or DCPS? The numbers aren't adjusted for Brent families; you get that right? They are the same for all schools, and LT's scores are higher, and not just in 4th (see below). Why do you assume non-Brent families don't want exceptional outcomes? Is your premise that the poors and dark people accept less good outcomes because they neither know better nor want to improve those outcomes? And how do you think things improve? The only thing better than self centered a-holes with superiority complexes is when they expose their ignorance while espousing those world views.

Brent's scores aren't higher than LT's in 5th or in 4th. I know that Brent parents like to use the "kids leaving in 5th" excuse, but the data doesn't lie. Repeating a falsehood with conviction doesn't make it any truer. I even pasted the scores in a prior post. Take a look; the LT kids outperform your kids.

Why do you think that Latin and Basis are by-right schools for Brent? And why do you think that Latin is mostly Brent; it isn't. That data is public too.

Follow along, my dear. This isn't a DCPS vs Charter discussion. If I thought you had the capacity I'd accuse you of trolling. But I'm betting you sincerely think your comment contributes to the discussion here. It is not as "charters stepped in to solve the problem". Setting aside the gross oversimplification, it does nothing to advance how we get from where we are to improved outcomes. If you think things are set in stone and nothing can and will change then, with all do respect, go somewhere else and let the adults talk. I vehemently disagree with many of the Brent posters. And I object to the veiled racism of some. But it feels to me at least like even those families truly desire to improve outcomes. I just happen to disagree with how they think that is accomplished. You, on the other hand, are a child who screams "charters" and thinks education on the Hill is a static concept.

There is no magic bullet that takes a school from poor to great overnight. I know Brent parents think the inclusion of your kids will accomplish that, but it won't. The path is improved educational outcomes for kids that are there, which in turn yields buy-in from younger kids and IB families, which in turn feeds MS. LT/JO/Peabody families used lottery into Maury because it was an objectively better school. Those families wanted to invest in their IB schools, but there was another Hill school with objectively better educational outcomes. As that school became more IB, those families were willing to give their IB a try. And as educational outcomes improve those families commit. The challenge in talking to people like you is that you seem to ignore data unless it confirms your belief. Just look at your post! You incorrectly state that Brent is better in 4th and only outperformed in 5th. That just isn't so.

No one is arguing that SH is superior to Deal or Latin right now. The issue is whether the trajectory of the feeders and SH itself portent positive things. Many of us think it does. And that is in the absence of you and your Brent friends, not all of whom are going to Latin or Basis (which, by the way, works 100% through their WL and is not a viable curriculum for many kids.)

We get it. You live OOB and want to preserve the pipeline to SH for OOB kids. Some of us want neighborhood schools. We can agree to disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

WTF do you mean "take off"???? Their scores are better than Brent's. LT re-enrolling rates are way up. The wait lists for LT show only IB this year and likely last, with a smattering the year before. Those kids are staying. Data doesn't lie. And IB is a function of the entire population, so IB percentages don't move quickly; they crawl as IB kids rise. Also, not sure where the principal garbage is coming from. LT enrollment is up, retention rates are up and scores are up, notwithstanding your noise about principals. And you clearly do not understand how a Title 1 designation is made. There's no sliding scale; it is either Title 1 or not. And, btw, schools on the cusp prefer to remain Title 1 because it dramatically increases funding.

What is so infuriating about "you people" is that you make statements that do not comport with facts in evidence and are just so smug in your knowledge of those non-facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Improving, right, but, as has been said, turning SH into a Deal, or even a Hardy, is a 10-20 year project without Brent, Maury and SWS when it could have been a 3-5 year project.

Many of us on the Hill are fed up with losing dear friends to the burbs because Hill schools aren't attractive to most in-boundary families after elementary. Many of us feel that DCPS made a terrible mistake four years ago in refusing to respond to high local demand for a change in the Ward 6 middle school elementary-to-middle school feed situation.

I'm in-bounds for SH and won't enroll my child in a couple years on current trends, like most of our friends. Our children are well-behaved students who easily score 5s on both PARCC sections. Arguably, SH won't be better off without us.

Christ, it's been said by YOU about 1000 times on any SH related post. Give it a rest.

We got it -- you're going elsewhere. From your condescending tone alone I can promise you that you would not be missed at SH.

NP here and this is a real problem. You have tons of high SES parents IB for Hill schools opting out of DCPS because the middle school situation is a mess on the Hill. Some of those families are moving but many more are going to charters. DCPS could easily fix this by adjusting the feeder patterns and it’s so stupid that they refuse to do it.

Yes, it is. I'm going elsewhere, too, and haven't posted on other SH threads. Hundreds like us will in fact be missed at SH by any stakeholder with a thinking brain who cares about educating poor kids (um, all things being equal, poor kids don't do better without lots of higher SES classmates in their schools than they do with lots of high SES classmates in their schools).

I see even greater stupidity in how some IB Cluster parents defend the mess tooth and nail. Over the years, they've become their own worst enemies where Hill middle schools go.

The fact that YOU don't have feeder rights to SH doesn't a "mess"make. Brent isn't the only IB school with high SES, you obnoxious self centered "me-monster". And as the numbers actually show, LT and other SH feeders are improving (and in some cases outpacing Brent). While the number of OOB lottery spots matching in the lottery is falling to near zero. So the fact that you want to believe nothing is changing doesn't mean nothing is changing.

As others have said, and contrary to your belief, you will in fact not be missed.

New to this thread. Brent's scores drop (by Brent standards - which are higher than DCPS's and LT's) in 5th because so many families leave for Latin or Basis.

Which is really what all of this is about. Honestly, even if they could get into SH, Basis and Latin are better anyway. And THAT is what Hill families wanted. DCPS didn't deliver on rigor and quality so charters stepped in and filled a need. Now they offer something better than what DCPS has to offer. Ultimately, it's DCPS's and the Cluster's loss.

Where to begin.

What on earth does it mean to say that Brent's standards are higher than LT's or DCPS? The numbers aren't adjusted for Brent families; you get that right? They are the same for all schools, and LT's scores are higher, and not just in 4th (see below). Why do you assume non-Brent families don't want exceptional outcomes? Is your premise that the poors and dark people accept less good outcomes because they neither know better nor want to improve those outcomes? And how do you think things improve? The only thing better than self centered a-holes with superiority complexes is when they expose their ignorance while espousing those world views.

Brent's scores aren't higher than LT's in 5th or in 4th. I know that Brent parents like to use the "kids leaving in 5th" excuse, but the data doesn't lie. Repeating a falsehood with conviction doesn't make it any truer. I even pasted the scores in a prior post. Take a look; the LT kids outperform your kids.

Why do you think that Latin and Basis are by-right schools for Brent? And why do you think that Latin is mostly Brent; it isn't. That data is public too.

Follow along, my dear. This isn't a DCPS vs Charter discussion. If I thought you had the capacity I'd accuse you of trolling. But I'm betting you sincerely think your comment contributes to the discussion here. It is not as "charters stepped in to solve the problem". Setting aside the gross oversimplification, it does nothing to advance how we get from where we are to improved outcomes. If you think things are set in stone and nothing can and will change then, with all do respect, go somewhere else and let the adults talk. I vehemently disagree with many of the Brent posters. And I object to the veiled racism of some. But it feels to me at least like even those families truly desire to improve outcomes. I just happen to disagree with how they think that is accomplished. You, on the other hand, are a child who screams "charters" and thinks education on the Hill is a static concept.

There is no magic bullet that takes a school from poor to great overnight. I know Brent parents think the inclusion of your kids will accomplish that, but it won't. The path is improved educational outcomes for kids that are there, which in turn yields buy-in from younger kids and IB families, which in turn feeds MS. LT/JO/Peabody families used lottery into Maury because it was an objectively better school. Those families wanted to invest in their IB schools, but there was another Hill school with objectively better educational outcomes. As that school became more IB, those families were willing to give their IB a try. And as educational outcomes improve those families commit. The challenge in talking to people like you is that you seem to ignore data unless it confirms your belief. Just look at your post! You incorrectly state that Brent is better in 4th and only outperformed in 5th. That just isn't so.

No one is arguing that SH is superior to Deal or Latin right now. The issue is whether the trajectory of the feeders and SH itself portent positive things. Many of us think it does. And that is in the absence of you and your Brent friends, not all of whom are going to Latin or Basis (which, by the way, works 100% through their WL and is not a viable curriculum for many kids.)

We get it. You live OOB and want to preserve the pipeline to SH for OOB kids. Some of us want neighborhood schools. We can agree to disagree.

That makes zero sense. How does one preserve OOB for a school with IB preference? And how could you possibly have taken that from all that has been written in this forum? Where did anyone argue against neighborhood schools? I've expended an insane amount of energy trying to talk sense into those of you who see no value or improvement in SH and the feeders. Help me to understand how supporting and defending these schools is designed to keep IB families out? The irony here is fools like you who talk about wanting neighborhood schools but proudly yell about how your kids don't go to IB schools. Go back to yoga.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

Your timeline for Maury and Brent's changes is way off. Community members, Tommy Wells, DCPS (albeit reluctantly) started engaging with those schools in 2003 or 2004 - 13-14 years ago! The single best thing to happen to Maury and Brent was the creation of the 3-year-old program piloted at Maury, Brent and Tyler. LT's principal at the time stood in the way of LT having a 3-year-old program. Had LT had a 3-year-old program, LT and Stuart-Hobson would be on a different trajectory. Without that 3-year-old program, IB LT families found their way into Brent and Maury when anyone could get in; their siblings followed which then further slowed IB attendance at LT. So now you have IB LT families building up Brent and Maury and at the same time further weakening LT because of the word on the street about the school - families with older children IB for LT talk up Brent and Maury but not LT.

LT has risen above the challenges that it faced 13-14 years ago. Some would say that even back then, the teaching was good, but hard to decipher because of demographics - I can't speak to that. What is clear is that currently LT is educating well - the past several principals have done a lot to improve staff morale and engage parents and then DCPS and facilities have also made the school a more attractive option.

But please don't make it out that Brent and Maury saw their changes in five years - they were a long time coming and the environment they came up in had fewer charters and fewer IB families attending other DCPS. Also - Brent was the first ES to be modernized - that was not a coincidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

I'm not particularly interested in taking a side in the argument you two PPs are having, but technically SWS didn't feed any middle school (because there wasn't a graduating class) until last year when the first class had feeder rights to EH (and some reclaimed their in-bounds pref at SH). My understanding is that years ago SWS feed back into Watkins (prior to SWS adding a grade each year) so it would have fed SH indirectly, though the kids that age would only have started arriving at SH last year so any effect til now would have been on the upper grades at watkins rather than SH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Improving, right, but, as has been said, turning SH into a Deal, or even a Hardy, is a 10-20 year project without Brent, Maury and SWS when it could have been a 3-5 year project.

Many of us on the Hill are fed up with losing dear friends to the burbs because Hill schools aren't attractive to most in-boundary families after elementary. Many of us feel that DCPS made a terrible mistake four years ago in refusing to respond to high local demand for a change in the Ward 6 middle school elementary-to-middle school feed situation.

I'm in-bounds for SH and won't enroll my child in a couple years on current trends, like most of our friends. Our children are well-behaved students who easily score 5s on both PARCC sections. Arguably, SH won't be better off without us.

Christ, it's been said by YOU about 1000 times on any SH related post. Give it a rest.

We got it -- you're going elsewhere. From your condescending tone alone I can promise you that you would not be missed at SH.

NP here and this is a real problem. You have tons of high SES parents IB for Hill schools opting out of DCPS because the middle school situation is a mess on the Hill. Some of those families are moving but many more are going to charters. DCPS could easily fix this by adjusting the feeder patterns and it’s so stupid that they refuse to do it.

Yes, it is. I'm going elsewhere, too, and haven't posted on other SH threads. Hundreds like us will in fact be missed at SH by any stakeholder with a thinking brain who cares about educating poor kids (um, all things being equal, poor kids don't do better without lots of higher SES classmates in their schools than they do with lots of high SES classmates in their schools).

I see even greater stupidity in how some IB Cluster parents defend the mess tooth and nail. Over the years, they've become their own worst enemies where Hill middle schools go.

The fact that YOU don't have feeder rights to SH doesn't a "mess"make. Brent isn't the only IB school with high SES, you obnoxious self centered "me-monster". And as the numbers actually show, LT and other SH feeders are improving (and in some cases outpacing Brent). While the number of OOB lottery spots matching in the lottery is falling to near zero. So the fact that you want to believe nothing is changing doesn't mean nothing is changing.

As others have said, and contrary to your belief, you will in fact not be missed.

New to this thread. Brent's scores drop (by Brent standards - which are higher than DCPS's and LT's) in 5th because so many families leave for Latin or Basis.

Which is really what all of this is about. Honestly, even if they could get into SH, Basis and Latin are better anyway. And THAT is what Hill families wanted. DCPS didn't deliver on rigor and quality so charters stepped in and filled a need. Now they offer something better than what DCPS has to offer. Ultimately, it's DCPS's and the Cluster's loss.

Where to begin.

What on earth does it mean to say that Brent's standards are higher than LT's or DCPS? The numbers aren't adjusted for Brent families; you get that right? They are the same for all schools, and LT's scores are higher, and not just in 4th (see below). Why do you assume non-Brent families don't want exceptional outcomes? Is your premise that the poors and dark people accept less good outcomes because they neither know better nor want to improve those outcomes? And how do you think things improve? The only thing better than self centered a-holes with superiority complexes is when they expose their ignorance while espousing those world views.

Brent's scores aren't higher than LT's in 5th or in 4th. I know that Brent parents like to use the "kids leaving in 5th" excuse, but the data doesn't lie. Repeating a falsehood with conviction doesn't make it any truer. I even pasted the scores in a prior post. Take a look; the LT kids outperform your kids.

Why do you think that Latin and Basis are by-right schools for Brent? And why do you think that Latin is mostly Brent; it isn't. That data is public too.

Follow along, my dear. This isn't a DCPS vs Charter discussion. If I thought you had the capacity I'd accuse you of trolling. But I'm betting you sincerely think your comment contributes to the discussion here. It is not as "charters stepped in to solve the problem". Setting aside the gross oversimplification, it does nothing to advance how we get from where we are to improved outcomes. If you think things are set in stone and nothing can and will change then, with all do respect, go somewhere else and let the adults talk. I vehemently disagree with many of the Brent posters. And I object to the veiled racism of some. But it feels to me at least like even those families truly desire to improve outcomes. I just happen to disagree with how they think that is accomplished. You, on the other hand, are a child who screams "charters" and thinks education on the Hill is a static concept.

There is no magic bullet that takes a school from poor to great overnight. I know Brent parents think the inclusion of your kids will accomplish that, but it won't. The path is improved educational outcomes for kids that are there, which in turn yields buy-in from younger kids and IB families, which in turn feeds MS. LT/JO/Peabody families used lottery into Maury because it was an objectively better school. Those families wanted to invest in their IB schools, but there was another Hill school with objectively better educational outcomes. As that school became more IB, those families were willing to give their IB a try. And as educational outcomes improve those families commit. The challenge in talking to people like you is that you seem to ignore data unless it confirms your belief. Just look at your post! You incorrectly state that Brent is better in 4th and only outperformed in 5th. That just isn't so.

No one is arguing that SH is superior to Deal or Latin right now. The issue is whether the trajectory of the feeders and SH itself portent positive things. Many of us think it does. And that is in the absence of you and your Brent friends, not all of whom are going to Latin or Basis (which, by the way, works 100% through their WL and is not a viable curriculum for many kids.)

We get it. You live OOB and want to preserve the pipeline to SH for OOB kids. Some of us want neighborhood schools. We can agree to disagree.

That makes zero sense. How does one preserve OOB for a school with IB preference? And how could you possibly have taken that from all that has been written in this forum? Where did anyone argue against neighborhood schools? I've expended an insane amount of energy trying to talk sense into those of you who see no value or improvement in SH and the feeders. Help me to understand how supporting and defending these schools is designed to keep IB families out? The irony here is fools like you who talk about wanting neighborhood schools but proudly yell about how your kids don't go to IB schools. Go back to yoga.

I note that you don’t deny that you’re OOB.