What do we think about Latin second campus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

LOL. The goal for Latin was not to be a haven for middle class families, it was to provide a classical education to the children of DC. The school has gotten progressively more wealthy and middle class, and the admin wants to get the at-risk percentage back up to where it used to be. Because the entry point is only fifth grade (and a few seats at 9th), it's going to take several years before the overall at-risk percentages go up. In fact, we were apprised that the at-risk percentages might be stagnant for a while as the current cohort of middle school students has the lowest at-risk percentage yet.

And really, are there "many" DCPS that have same or better academics than Latin? I think you should start another thread with this information because we are desperate for good middle school options in this city. People will be delighted to learn that DCPS has "many"!

Instead of using coded language, why don't you just say out loud what you (and many at DCPS) really mean: You hate middle class families.

sour grapes

Or they could allow entries in other grades. Oh, but our model, our precious precious model, our culture which is so special that it would be ruined by adding more of the kids we say we want to serve!

Your cynical responses just proved my point. It's obvious you're pi$$ed that some families might do slightly better in school.

Or you're just mad that other people don't buy their rationale for delay.

No, this is not even about Latin PCS specifically. It's this general unrelenting zeal to stomp out any pockets of excellence wherever they may exist across DC schools.

"Excellence" that is achieved by excluding at-risk and special needs students is not real excellence, it's just patting yourself on the back for upper income kids on grade level. True excellence would be getting good results from a representative student populatjon

According to you. Not according to me. I believe excellence is achieved by pushing all kids as far as each one can go. That includes kids with special needs, from poor familiesm, AND kids who are smart, well-resourced, and even gifted.

And you think that can't happen if anyone with an IEP is in the room?

Of course it can. What is wrong with you. But excellence is not about just bringing the bottom up, but also pushing the top as well. All we do in DC is focus on the bottom and when there is a school who does push advantaged kids, we say its unsucessful because the gulf is too wide.

I'm not quite catching how they can't push advantaged kids if there are a few more SN or at-risk kids in the room.

I think you're being disingenuous. This is not about "a few more" SN or at-risk kids. If the majority of a classroom is academically behind, the dynamic will shift to remediating learning gaps instead of pushing advanced learners. There is a balance that you're not honest about.

Where are you getting the idea that Latin is going to be a "majority" academically behind if they set aside a few seats in each advisory for at-risk kids? What is wrong with you?

This. Come on. Listen to yourself! Latin is right now 13% at-risk. In a classroom of 25 kids that's three or four kids. I don't know what percentage at-risk Latin is trying to achieve, but say it's 20%, okay that's FIVE kids. So we're supposed to believe that everything's cool with three or four, but five or six would be a scary and school-ruining amount. Even though Latin is a great school with excellent teachers, skilled admins, and a community that is devoted to equity. And even though Latin is 100% meeting its legal requirements for SPED and totally deserves to have a second campus ideally in Ward 7/8, these few extra kids in each room will wreck it. Even though the at-risk kids might not even be below grade level or have any special needs at all. Is that really what people want us to believe? Because it doesn't reflect very well on Latin if it's true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

LOL. The goal for Latin was not to be a haven for middle class families, it was to provide a classical education to the children of DC. The school has gotten progressively more wealthy and middle class, and the admin wants to get the at-risk percentage back up to where it used to be. Because the entry point is only fifth grade (and a few seats at 9th), it's going to take several years before the overall at-risk percentages go up. In fact, we were apprised that the at-risk percentages might be stagnant for a while as the current cohort of middle school students has the lowest at-risk percentage yet.

And really, are there "many" DCPS that have same or better academics than Latin? I think you should start another thread with this information because we are desperate for good middle school options in this city. People will be delighted to learn that DCPS has "many"!

Instead of using coded language, why don't you just say out loud what you (and many at DCPS) really mean: You hate middle class families.

sour grapes

Or they could allow entries in other grades. Oh, but our model, our precious precious model, our culture which is so special that it would be ruined by adding more of the kids we say we want to serve!

Your cynical responses just proved my point. It's obvious you're pi$$ed that some families might do slightly better in school.

Or you're just mad that other people don't buy their rationale for delay.

No, this is not even about Latin PCS specifically. It's this general unrelenting zeal to stomp out any pockets of excellence wherever they may exist across DC schools.

"Excellence" that is achieved by excluding at-risk and special needs students is not real excellence, it's just patting yourself on the back for upper income kids on grade level. True excellence would be getting good results from a representative student populatjon

According to you. Not according to me. I believe excellence is achieved by pushing all kids as far as each one can go. That includes kids with special needs, from poor familiesm, AND kids who are smart, well-resourced, and even gifted.

And you think that can't happen if anyone with an IEP is in the room?

Of course it can. What is wrong with you. But excellence is not about just bringing the bottom up, but also pushing the top as well. All we do in DC is focus on the bottom and when there is a school who does push advantaged kids, we say its unsucessful because the gulf is too wide.

I'm not quite catching how they can't push advantaged kids if there are a few more SN or at-risk kids in the room.

I think you're being disingenuous. This is not about "a few more" SN or at-risk kids. If the majority of a classroom is academically behind, the dynamic will shift to remediating learning gaps instead of pushing advanced learners. There is a balance that you're not honest about.

Where are you getting the idea that Latin is going to be a "majority" academically behind if they set aside a few seats in each advisory for at-risk kids? What is wrong with you?

This. Come on. Listen to yourself! Latin is right now 13% at-risk. In a classroom of 25 kids that's three or four kids. I don't know what percentage at-risk Latin is trying to achieve, but say it's 20%, okay that's FIVE kids. So we're supposed to believe that everything's cool with three or four, but five or six would be a scary and school-ruining amount. Even though Latin is a great school with excellent teachers, skilled admins, and a community that is devoted to equity. And even though Latin is 100% meeting its legal requirements for SPED and totally deserves to have a second campus ideally in Ward 7/8, these few extra kids in each room will wreck it. Even though the at-risk kids might not even be below grade level or have any special needs at all. Is that really what people want us to believe? Because it doesn't reflect very well on Latin if it's true.

I bet you're the same troll posting again and again with the same false math. Some of the PPs already eloquently explained how the combination of sibling preference plus up to 30% at-risk preference could crowd out most other families. But you go keep on hating on Latin and stoking those jealousies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

LOL. The goal for Latin was not to be a haven for middle class families, it was to provide a classical education to the children of DC. The school has gotten progressively more wealthy and middle class, and the admin wants to get the at-risk percentage back up to where it used to be. Because the entry point is only fifth grade (and a few seats at 9th), it's going to take several years before the overall at-risk percentages go up. In fact, we were apprised that the at-risk percentages might be stagnant for a while as the current cohort of middle school students has the lowest at-risk percentage yet.

And really, are there "many" DCPS that have same or better academics than Latin? I think you should start another thread with this information because we are desperate for good middle school options in this city. People will be delighted to learn that DCPS has "many"!

Instead of using coded language, why don't you just say out loud what you (and many at DCPS) really mean: You hate middle class families.

sour grapes

Or they could allow entries in other grades. Oh, but our model, our precious precious model, our culture which is so special that it would be ruined by adding more of the kids we say we want to serve!

Your cynical responses just proved my point. It's obvious you're pi$$ed that some families might do slightly better in school.

Or you're just mad that other people don't buy their rationale for delay.

No, this is not even about Latin PCS specifically. It's this general unrelenting zeal to stomp out any pockets of excellence wherever they may exist across DC schools.

"Excellence" that is achieved by excluding at-risk and special needs students is not real excellence, it's just patting yourself on the back for upper income kids on grade level. True excellence would be getting good results from a representative student populatjon

According to you. Not according to me. I believe excellence is achieved by pushing all kids as far as each one can go. That includes kids with special needs, from poor familiesm, AND kids who are smart, well-resourced, and even gifted.

And you think that can't happen if anyone with an IEP is in the room?

Of course it can. What is wrong with you. But excellence is not about just bringing the bottom up, but also pushing the top as well. All we do in DC is focus on the bottom and when there is a school who does push advantaged kids, we say its unsucessful because the gulf is too wide.

I'm not quite catching how they can't push advantaged kids if there are a few more SN or at-risk kids in the room.

I think you're being disingenuous. This is not about "a few more" SN or at-risk kids. If the majority of a classroom is academically behind, the dynamic will shift to remediating learning gaps instead of pushing advanced learners. There is a balance that you're not honest about.

Where are you getting the idea that Latin is going to be a "majority" academically behind if they set aside a few seats in each advisory for at-risk kids? What is wrong with you?

This. Come on. Listen to yourself! Latin is right now 13% at-risk. In a classroom of 25 kids that's three or four kids. I don't know what percentage at-risk Latin is trying to achieve, but say it's 20%, okay that's FIVE kids. So we're supposed to believe that everything's cool with three or four, but five or six would be a scary and school-ruining amount. Even though Latin is a great school with excellent teachers, skilled admins, and a community that is devoted to equity. And even though Latin is 100% meeting its legal requirements for SPED and totally deserves to have a second campus ideally in Ward 7/8, these few extra kids in each room will wreck it. Even though the at-risk kids might not even be below grade level or have any special needs at all. Is that really what people want us to believe? Because it doesn't reflect very well on Latin if it's true.

I bet you're the same troll posting again and again with the same false math. Some of the PPs already eloquently explained how the combination of sibling preference plus up to 30% at-risk preference could crowd out most other families. But you go keep on hating on Latin and stoking those jealousies.

I believe the at-risk target of 30% would *include* people who would have otherwise gotten in through sibling statuts. Is that not true?

Why are you assuming all at-risk kids are behind academically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

This is so wrong. The academics are absolutely on a different plane than DCPS Middle Schools. That is the draw, not the cohort.

[Anonymous]

It seems there is one person on here who is convinced that this at-risk preference will “ruin” Washington Latin. Other folks who feel Latin already sucks because it is not having “enough” standardized-test success with at-risk students who are already there.

This is why Washington Latin will do well to continue its steadfast commitment being a school that is diverse by design while fulfilling its mission:

“Many schools are not sure what they stand for. Such is not the case at Washington Latin Public Charter School. This is a school with a particular culture and a clear mission. We believe that all students deserve a quality education that goes beyond preparation and focuses on developing knowledge, understanding and humanity. Ours is a school where words matter, ideas matter, and people matter. We strive to help our students to become thoughtful people who will contribute to the public good and continue a lifelong quest towards a fuller humanity.
We believe that education is a training of character, and character is the intersection of intellectual development and moral integrity. We aim towards an ideal in our program: developing students to be thoughtful people who will contribute to the public good and continue a life-long quest towards a fuller humanity. Our program focuses on developing each student’s ability to be thoughtful, to consider the views and needs of others, and to act with integrity. The greatest challenge comes in our expectation that students will think before they act and do what is right rather than what is expedient.”


The administration, staff, students and families should not get pulled into the morass of DC politics that tears apart anything good that pops up. Carry on, Latin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems there is one person on here who is convinced that this at-risk preference will “ruin” Washington Latin. Other folks who feel Latin already sucks because it is not having “enough” standardized-test success with at-risk students who are already there.

This is why Washington Latin will do well to continue its steadfast commitment being a school that is diverse by design while fulfilling its mission:

“Many schools are not sure what they stand for. Such is not the case at Washington Latin Public Charter School. This is a school with a particular culture and a clear mission. We believe that all students deserve a quality education that goes beyond preparation and focuses on developing knowledge, understanding and humanity. Ours is a school where words matter, ideas matter, and people matter. We strive to help our students to become thoughtful people who will contribute to the public good and continue a lifelong quest towards a fuller humanity.
We believe that education is a training of character, and character is the intersection of intellectual development and moral integrity. We aim towards an ideal in our program: developing students to be thoughtful people who will contribute to the public good and continue a life-long quest towards a fuller humanity. Our program focuses on developing each student’s ability to be thoughtful, to consider the views and needs of others, and to act with integrity. The greatest challenge comes in our expectation that students will think before they act and do what is right rather than what is expedient.”


The administration, staff, students and families should not get pulled into the morass of DC politics that tears apart anything good that pops up. Carry on, Latin.

It's not that it "sucks", it's that good test scores aren't really a high achievement with the demographics that Latin currently has. Good test scores on middle and upper income kids is not really that hard. True excellence would be getting good test scores on a student body that's representative of the demographics of the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems there is one person on here who is convinced that this at-risk preference will “ruin” Washington Latin. Other folks who feel Latin already sucks because it is not having “enough” standardized-test success with at-risk students who are already there.

This is why Washington Latin will do well to continue its steadfast commitment being a school that is diverse by design while fulfilling its mission:

“Many schools are not sure what they stand for. Such is not the case at Washington Latin Public Charter School. This is a school with a particular culture and a clear mission. We believe that all students deserve a quality education that goes beyond preparation and focuses on developing knowledge, understanding and humanity. Ours is a school where words matter, ideas matter, and people matter. We strive to help our students to become thoughtful people who will contribute to the public good and continue a lifelong quest towards a fuller humanity.
We believe that education is a training of character, and character is the intersection of intellectual development and moral integrity. We aim towards an ideal in our program: developing students to be thoughtful people who will contribute to the public good and continue a life-long quest towards a fuller humanity. Our program focuses on developing each student’s ability to be thoughtful, to consider the views and needs of others, and to act with integrity. The greatest challenge comes in our expectation that students will think before they act and do what is right rather than what is expedient.”


The administration, staff, students and families should not get pulled into the morass of DC politics that tears apart anything good that pops up. Carry on, Latin.

It's not that it "sucks", it's that good test scores aren't really a high achievement with the demographics that Latin currently has. Good test scores on middle and upper income kids is not really that hard. True excellence would be getting good test scores on a student body that's representative of the demographics of the city.

Non-sequiter, but thanks for your thoughts!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

LOL. The goal for Latin was not to be a haven for middle class families, it was to provide a classical education to the children of DC. The school has gotten progressively more wealthy and middle class, and the admin wants to get the at-risk percentage back up to where it used to be. Because the entry point is only fifth grade (and a few seats at 9th), it's going to take several years before the overall at-risk percentages go up. In fact, we were apprised that the at-risk percentages might be stagnant for a while as the current cohort of middle school students has the lowest at-risk percentage yet.

And really, are there "many" DCPS that have same or better academics than Latin? I think you should start another thread with this information because we are desperate for good middle school options in this city. People will be delighted to learn that DCPS has "many"!

Instead of using coded language, why don't you just say out loud what you (and many at DCPS) really mean: You hate middle class families.

sour grapes

Or they could allow entries in other grades. Oh, but our model, our precious precious model, our culture which is so special that it would be ruined by adding more of the kids we say we want to serve!

Your cynical responses just proved my point. It's obvious you're pi$$ed that some families might do slightly better in school.

Or you're just mad that other people don't buy their rationale for delay.

No, this is not even about Latin PCS specifically. It's this general unrelenting zeal to stomp out any pockets of excellence wherever they may exist across DC schools.

"Excellence" that is achieved by excluding at-risk and special needs students is not real excellence, it's just patting yourself on the back for upper income kids on grade level. True excellence would be getting good results from a representative student populatjon

According to you. Not according to me. I believe excellence is achieved by pushing all kids as far as each one can go. That includes kids with special needs, from poor familiesm, AND kids who are smart, well-resourced, and even gifted.

And you think that can't happen if anyone with an IEP is in the room?

Of course it can. What is wrong with you. But excellence is not about just bringing the bottom up, but also pushing the top as well. All we do in DC is focus on the bottom and when there is a school who does push advantaged kids, we say its unsucessful because the gulf is too wide.

I'm not quite catching how they can't push advantaged kids if there are a few more SN or at-risk kids in the room.

I think you're being disingenuous. This is not about "a few more" SN or at-risk kids. If the majority of a classroom is academically behind, the dynamic will shift to remediating learning gaps instead of pushing advanced learners. There is a balance that you're not honest about.

Where are you getting the idea that Latin is going to be a "majority" academically behind if they set aside a few seats in each advisory for at-risk kids? What is wrong with you?

This. Come on. Listen to yourself! Latin is right now 13% at-risk. In a classroom of 25 kids that's three or four kids. I don't know what percentage at-risk Latin is trying to achieve, but say it's 20%, okay that's FIVE kids. So we're supposed to believe that everything's cool with three or four, but five or six would be a scary and school-ruining amount. Even though Latin is a great school with excellent teachers, skilled admins, and a community that is devoted to equity. And even though Latin is 100% meeting its legal requirements for SPED and totally deserves to have a second campus ideally in Ward 7/8, these few extra kids in each room will wreck it. Even though the at-risk kids might not even be below grade level or have any special needs at all. Is that really what people want us to believe? Because it doesn't reflect very well on Latin if it's true.

I bet you're the same troll posting again and again with the same false math. Some of the PPs already eloquently explained how the combination of sibling preference plus up to 30% at-risk preference could crowd out most other families. But you go keep on hating on Latin and stoking those jealousies.

I believe the at-risk target of 30% would *include* people who would have otherwise gotten in through sibling statuts. Is that not true?

Why are you assuming all at-risk kids are behind academically?

Yes, that is true.

[Anonymous]

I hear the white hot tears of frustration for Brent parents now that there are going to be 30 non-sibling seats vs 45.

[Anonymous]

Crowding out of Brent families? I’ll Venmo you the cash for the world’s smallest violin.

[Anonymous]

OK, so what's in it for the District when UMC Capitol Hill families leave our public schools after 4th or 5th grade because they're not happy with their MS choices? How, exactly, do low SES/minority DC families accrue the benefit when UMC families reject public middle schools? Please explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, so what's in it for the District when UMC Capitol Hill families leave our public schools after 4th or 5th grade because they're not happy with their MS choices? How, exactly, do low SES/minority DC families accrue the benefit when UMC families reject public middle schools? Please explain.

I think the idea is that with multiple schools offering an at-risk preference, no one school will be overwhelmed and so people won't actually leave. Even though they say they will. And the at risk kids will be less concentrated in certain schools and the whole system will function better as a result.

[Anonymous]

There's an obvious solution that would get better results than separating UMC parents EotP into winners--those who lottery into Latin 1, Latin 2 or BASIS, where at-risk percentages are low--and losers who are stuck with DCPS EotP and iffy charters.

The solution is serious academic tracking in large public middle schools, the lesser of the evils.

Rather than driving out hundreds of UMC families EotP after failing to shame or compel them to enroll at middle schools they're not excited about, ed leaders could incentivize many more of these families to stay in the public system. Their children might not be in core classes with too many poor kids in middle schools with extensive tracking, but at least high and low SES kids could take electives and do extra curriculars together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

LOL. The goal for Latin was not to be a haven for middle class families, it was to provide a classical education to the children of DC. The school has gotten progressively more wealthy and middle class, and the admin wants to get the at-risk percentage back up to where it used to be. Because the entry point is only fifth grade (and a few seats at 9th), it's going to take several years before the overall at-risk percentages go up. In fact, we were apprised that the at-risk percentages might be stagnant for a while as the current cohort of middle school students has the lowest at-risk percentage yet.

And really, are there "many" DCPS that have same or better academics than Latin? I think you should start another thread with this information because we are desperate for good middle school options in this city. People will be delighted to learn that DCPS has "many"!

Instead of using coded language, why don't you just say out loud what you (and many at DCPS) really mean: You hate middle class families.

sour grapes

Or they could allow entries in other grades. Oh, but our model, our precious precious model, our culture which is so special that it would be ruined by adding more of the kids we say we want to serve!

Your cynical responses just proved my point. It's obvious you're pi$$ed that some families might do slightly better in school.

Or you're just mad that other people don't buy their rationale for delay.

No, this is not even about Latin PCS specifically. It's this general unrelenting zeal to stomp out any pockets of excellence wherever they may exist across DC schools.

"Excellence" that is achieved by excluding at-risk and special needs students is not real excellence, it's just patting yourself on the back for upper income kids on grade level. True excellence would be getting good results from a representative student populatjon

According to you. Not according to me. I believe excellence is achieved by pushing all kids as far as each one can go. That includes kids with special needs, from poor familiesm, AND kids who are smart, well-resourced, and even gifted.

And you think that can't happen if anyone with an IEP is in the room?

Of course it can. What is wrong with you. But excellence is not about just bringing the bottom up, but also pushing the top as well. All we do in DC is focus on the bottom and when there is a school who does push advantaged kids, we say its unsucessful because the gulf is too wide.

I'm not quite catching how they can't push advantaged kids if there are a few more SN or at-risk kids in the room.

I think you're being disingenuous. This is not about "a few more" SN or at-risk kids. If the majority of a classroom is academically behind, the dynamic will shift to remediating learning gaps instead of pushing advanced learners. There is a balance that you're not honest about.

Where are you getting the idea that Latin is going to be a "majority" academically behind if they set aside a few seats in each advisory for at-risk kids? What is wrong with you?

This. Come on. Listen to yourself! Latin is right now 13% at-risk. In a classroom of 25 kids that's three or four kids. I don't know what percentage at-risk Latin is trying to achieve, but say it's 20%, okay that's FIVE kids. So we're supposed to believe that everything's cool with three or four, but five or six would be a scary and school-ruining amount. Even though Latin is a great school with excellent teachers, skilled admins, and a community that is devoted to equity. And even though Latin is 100% meeting its legal requirements for SPED and totally deserves to have a second campus ideally in Ward 7/8, these few extra kids in each room will wreck it. Even though the at-risk kids might not even be below grade level or have any special needs at all. Is that really what people want us to believe? Because it doesn't reflect very well on Latin if it's true.

I bet you're the same troll posting again and again with the same false math. Some of the PPs already eloquently explained how the combination of sibling preference plus up to 30% at-risk preference could crowd out most other families. But you go keep on hating on Latin and stoking those jealousies.

I believe the at-risk target of 30% would *include* people who would have otherwise gotten in through sibling statuts. Is that not true?

Why are you assuming all at-risk kids are behind academically?

NP. An entire category of “at risk” is kids who are at least 1 grade level behind academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of slots will be at risk? Presumably thr total composition will be higher than that bc at risk kids could get in thru the regular lotto too.

Yes, that's the point. But it would not have been zero. It's an incremental change and not that big of a deal.

Disagree.

1) 15-30% is a big deal. Non-sibling families currently have about a 17% of getting into Latin for 5th grade through the lottery; that will go down significantly for them with the at-risk prioritization.

2) There is a lot we don't know. Is at-risk going to be prioritized over sibling? If so, that will have even more impact.

3) After the first-year, at-risk will also be able to get sibling preference for brothers and sisters, so that will give the latter a double preference starting the year after next. Given that around 50% of DCPS is at-risk that mean that 5th grade Latin slots will be fewer and fewer every year.

Incremental change? No big deal? Nah.

That's not how it works. A sibling that is at-risk doesn't get to take up two seats.

Right, but unless Latin calculates its at-risk percentage carefully ahead of time using sibling data, they’re going to offer x sibling spots and y at risk spots every year, making the at-risk percentage even higher year over year.

I wish them good luck, but it’s going to make the school an unattractive option for middle class families. People flee to Latin not for the academics (which are not any better than many DCPS) but for the cohort of high performing kids and the guaranteed feed through high school. Turn it into another Eastern or Dunbar and people simply wont go.

This is so wrong. The academics are absolutely on a different plane than DCPS Middle Schools. That is the draw, not the cohort.

The test scores say otherwise. They’re not any better than, say, Stuart Hobson.