Ranking Ludlow-Taylor vs SWS
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
L-T and SWS both describe their school as Reggio-inspired, but it seems to be mentioned a lot more by the latter. What does that mean in practice? how do the approaches differ for these two schools?
|
Anonymous
| If for PK3, Id definitely try for LT before SWS. LT is on the upswing with a lot of parent buy-in, amazing extra curriculars and a very tight community. SWS's golden age I think has ended. My prediction is that it's going the direction of Two Rivers 4th street. |
Anonymous
What happened with Two Rivers 4th street? |
Anonymous
| It was a very sought after/highly desirable charter, and slowly families started to choose their neighborhoods schools (i.e.JO Wilson and Ludlow Taylor) instead. If you look at the historic tableau waitlist data, you can see demand declining steadily over the years. I haven't heard anything particularly derogatory, it's just that it's not the hot commodity it once was. |
Anonymous
Other things I've read here: - They don't really have a solid curriculum past ECE - The facilities are cramped - The feeder middle school (Two Rivers Young) has poor performance and behavioral problems |
Anonymous
I think it just never lived up to the initial hype, struggled with expansion, and reopened very late after covid. |
Anonymous
| Just for the record, SWS is not in that boat. The waitlist remains super long and neighborhood people choose it over other highly sought after schools. |
Anonymous
|
I think TR4 is a good analog to SWS because both schools have very nurturing ECE programs and the culture of the school is very geared toward ECE parents, but neither school is known for upper grade academics.
Whereas L-T, while it still has a loved ECE program, feels culturally more geared to 2nd-5th grade, especially with their after school clubs and the amount of family programming they have. For this reason I would lean towards L-T because it's much harder to find good programming for older kids in DC and in the long run that will be more meaningful for your kids. Plus it's not like ECE is bad and L-T -- it's a good program. |
Anonymous
|
We don’t attend LT but have proximity to it (we also have proximity to Maury and ended up there).
The LT community looks awesome. There is so much going on, the parents are really in the neighborhood and have built a super strong community. So many of our good friends are LT parents- very smart, kind, down to earth parents and kids. Many of whom are planning on Stuart Hobson. |
Anonymous
Still highly sought after, I agree, but the PK3 waitlist isn't nearly as long as it used to be: 545 at its peak in SY19-20 and 305 in SY25-26. The unique number of PK3 applicants between those years also went down, from 2,589 to 2,009, but that's still a 44% decline for SWS and only a 22% decline lottery-wide. |
Anonymous
|
I am currently planning to rank SWS over LT, but would be happy with either. I have kids entering PK3 and K this year.
OOB PK3 at LT is a mathematical impossibility, so I'm not worried about that. SWS is pretty unlikely across the board absent sibling preference, but in theory there is a slightly higher chance of getting both of my kids in there more quickly than at LT, partly because as a non-charter you are always fighting uphill against the power of in-bound preference (or a guaranteed seat after ECE). Among the reasons I'm leaning SWS over LT is that it has much nicer facilities and is closer to my house. SWS definitely makes a bigger deal about Reggio than LT, but not sure how it is implemented in practice. |
Anonymous
| PP correcting myself: SWS is a citywide school, not a charter, but same principle. |
Anonymous
|
I’d rank SWS over LT. Many Reggio inspired programs are lovely but some use it as a means to attract parents. (I am not saying LT does this)
Also SWS has better academic scores, if you care about that. I don’t think LT is a bad choice, I just think SWS is better. Also if your child has a disability SWS will also be a better choice. Some small ways you can tell if they actually care about Reggio or Red Flags: Classrooms look like typical preschools with primary colors and commercial decorations rather than natural materials, neutral tones (this doesn’t mean no colors), and children’s work displayed thoughtfully. No dedicated atelier (art studio) or atelierista (art specialist). Limited natural light, plants, or mirrors Plastic toys dominate instead of open-ended, natural materials The teaching approach: Teachers follow rigid, pre-planned curricula or themes (like ‘Buildings Study’ ) Emphasis on worksheets, small groups, or teacher-directed crafts where all projects look identical. No visible documentation panels showing children’s learning processes and thinking. |
Anonymous
You're probably right the chances are slim to none. It feels like we should at least try the lottery but many of the nearby schools seem totally out of reach without an older sibling. The majority of the kids at our daycare center leave to do PK3 elsewhere, but I don't know where they, or specifically the first-borns, end up making it work. |
Anonymous
|
For PK3 on the hill, it is really only possible to get into your own in-boundary school, SWS if you get the absolute best lottery number, AppleTree or Miner. I also know other NE hill people who have attended Two Rivers (both campuses) and Mundo Verde Cook, which are not too far away. And I know a few other NE hill people who travel farther for other language immersion schools in PK3 (Stokes, Yu Ying).
It becomes possible to get into other hill elementary schools in the lottery after PK3, but in PK3, for Peabody, LT, Maury, Brent, Chisholm and Payne, all the spots get taken by in boundary kids or kids with some other preference. |