Thoughts on Dunbar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what I'm trying to get at is while people can say

"I am happy in a school that is diverse"

their school choices can also mean

"I am choosing schools to avoid Black and poor people who are my neighbors."

This is frickin hilarious. Some woke white person “of means” makes a statement about how it’s important being in a school that is racially, economically, and academically diverse.

She then gets called out correctly that this is not true, her title 1 school is homogenous. Many HRCS are more diverse.

Then, unable to refute that and admit that she is wrong, she goes on to now accuse everyone of being racist.

Folks, it’s the same play every time. When challenged, instead of providing facts and support for their stance, the only defense these people have left is everyone is racist.

No, I’m not white or racist. I’m avoiding putting my kid in a failing school. Black families with options are doing the EXACT same thing.

You are conflating a few different posters. I am the PP who prefers in-class differentiation in elementary to tracking programs that pull kids out of schools and classes, but I wasn’t involved in the devolution about the relative diversity of charters vs title 1 dcps. I don’t think anyone is racist for disagreeing with me—I do think it’s a shame (but not a surprise) that we cannot discuss the merits of tracking vs grouping without going off the rails. And look, if a school is failing kids, neither approach is going to work. I still don’t think anyone has demonstrated that tracking in elementary school is actually the right move. Even in older grades you see the problem. If tracking was the answer PPs pretend it is, you wouldn’t have people worried about Dunbar (like the forgotten OP) because they would be sure their kid’s needs are being met, either in the test-in school or at Dunbar. But that’s not the case. To be clear, I’m not suggesting dcps get rid of Banneker and other test-in high schools. But why would we start that process with little kids, especially when the research does not support it. Anyway, I’m going to give this thread back to folks talking about Dunbar.
Ps I’m not white either, don’t make those assumptions.
PPs I’m not naming my school bc I like what I see there, and I don’t want it to get flamed by a bunch of people who obviously don’t go there.

Your premise is incorrect. The abysmal achievement that we have at Dunbar where 2% of the kids are on grade level in math is because there is NO tracking from an early age in elementary school. Dunbar is the typical result of not tracking, just like other poorly performing high schools in the city with similar stats.

Of course more than 2% of the thousands of kids in these poorly performing schools could have reached grade level competency. Why didn’t they? Because there is no tracking in elementary with G & T, no tracking of dedicated subjects in middle and high school. So teaching is to the lowest common denominator in these schools which is way below grade level. Then, even if kids don’t grasp concepts, everyone is socially promoted. End results are schools like Dunbar.

Look at cities where you have tracking starting in elementary, magnet or test in middle and high schools. They get low SES kids in these school who do well.

What DCPS does due to the failure of tracking then is defensive recovery in high school with Banneker. These kids come in with huge deficits which Banneker has to try to make up. That’s why all Banneker pushes is academics at the cost of all else. Even with 4 years of this, the best most of these kids can achieve is 3 on AP and low 20’s average on IB exams. These scores are not that great for a test in, heavy emphasis academic high school. But for kids who are so far behind, they do make strides.

Compare that to areas that start tracking early in elementary and beyond These low SES kids have been given higher level academics and challenged since elementary and blow the Banneker kids away. It’s not that both groups don’t have the same potential. It’s just these places tapped it early in the kids from elementary onward to the start of high school. These kids got way ahead and are performing at a much higher academic threshold.

It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


Your premise is incorrect. The abysmal achievement that we have at Dunbar where 2% of the kids are on grade level in math is because there is NO tracking from an early age in elementary school. Dunbar is the typical result of not tracking, just like other poorly performing high schools in the city with similar stats.

Of course more than 2% of the thousands of kids in these poorly performing schools could have reached grade level competency. Why didn’t they? Because there is no tracking in elementary with G & T, no tracking of dedicated subjects in middle and high school. So teaching is to the lowest common denominator in these schools which is way below grade level. Then, even if kids don’t grasp concepts, everyone is socially promoted. End results are schools like Dunbar.

Look at cities where you have tracking starting in elementary, magnet or test in middle and high schools. They get low SES kids in these school who do well.

What DCPS does due to the failure of tracking then is defensive recovery in high school with Banneker. These kids come in with huge deficits which Banneker has to try to make up. That’s why all Banneker pushes is academics at the cost of all else. Even with 4 years of this, the best most of these kids can achieve is 3 on AP and low 20’s average on IB exams. These scores are not that great for a test in, heavy emphasis academic high school. But for kids who are so far behind, they do make strides.

Compare that to areas that start tracking early in elementary and beyond These low SES kids have been given higher level academics and challenged since elementary and blow the Banneker kids away. It’s not that both groups don’t have the same potential. It’s just these places tapped it early in the kids from elementary onward to the start of high school. These kids got way ahead and are performing at a much higher academic threshold.


It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

You are missing their point. You can fully appreciate all the research about academic achievement and trauma and still believe that dedicated differentiation in early years would produce a high school with more than 2% of students on grade level. It might not be 100% on grade level, it might not even be 50% given all the effects of poverty and trauma, but it would almost certainly be above TWO. Failure to identify and provide differentiated opportunities hurts low income kids THE MOST because families with greater economic choice will bail.

[Anonymous]

Dunbar is irrelevant. Completely and totally irrelevant other than to a few UMC saints who care to tutor their students.

[Anonymous]

Yup. Imagine adding a differentiation program of some sort to some of the lower performing elementary schools and watch how quickly those schools attract higher SES families who don’t mind having their kids go to school with poorer kids but do mind their kids not receiving a quality education. Rather than fearing segregation, I think forms of strong differentiation will actually promote more integration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Your premise is incorrect. The abysmal achievement that we have at Dunbar where 2% of the kids are on grade level in math is because there is NO tracking from an early age in elementary school. Dunbar is the typical result of not tracking, just like other poorly performing high schools in the city with similar stats.

Of course more than 2% of the thousands of kids in these poorly performing schools could have reached grade level competency. Why didn’t they? Because there is no tracking in elementary with G & T, no tracking of dedicated subjects in middle and high school. So teaching is to the lowest common denominator in these schools which is way below grade level. Then, even if kids don’t grasp concepts, everyone is socially promoted. End results are schools like Dunbar.

Look at cities where you have tracking starting in elementary, magnet or test in middle and high schools. They get low SES kids in these school who do well.

What DCPS does due to the failure of tracking then is defensive recovery in high school with Banneker. These kids come in with huge deficits which Banneker has to try to make up. That’s why all Banneker pushes is academics at the cost of all else. Even with 4 years of this, the best most of these kids can achieve is 3 on AP and low 20’s average on IB exams. These scores are not that great for a test in, heavy emphasis academic high school. But for kids who are so far behind, they do make strides.

Compare that to areas that start tracking early in elementary and beyond These low SES kids have been given higher level academics and challenged since elementary and blow the Banneker kids away. It’s not that both groups don’t have the same potential. It’s just these places tapped it early in the kids from elementary onward to the start of high school. These kids got way ahead and are performing at a much higher academic threshold.


It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

You are missing their point. You can fully appreciate all the research about academic achievement and trauma and still believe that dedicated differentiation in early years would produce a high school with more than 2% of students on grade level. It might not be 100% on grade level, it might not even be 50% given all the effects of poverty and trauma, but it would almost certainly be above TWO. Failure to identify and provide differentiated opportunities hurts low income kids THE MOST because families with greater economic choice will bail.

This exactly. PP above wants to use poverty, trauma, etc… as the scapegoat as to why Dunbar has a 2% grade level rate and excuse the all the failings of DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Or is that the failings of the parents? Look - Dunbar used to be star. But it failed and part of the blame is on the shoulders of the parents. Sorry. School isn’t the place to dump your kids. School is where you go to enhance where you are and that means you make school a priority and support it. No institution survives without support of its patrons. Dunbar has no support - failure is on the horizon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

Exactly. Once we solve poverty Dunbar will be golden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yup. Imagine adding a differentiation program of some sort to some of the lower performing elementary schools and watch how quickly those schools attract higher SES families who don’t mind having their kids go to school with poorer kids but do mind their kids not receiving a quality education. Rather than fearing segregation, I think forms of strong differentiation will actually promote more integration.

It seems to be an article of faith that attracting new high SES kids to schools like Dunbar is a key outcome that that school should devote a lot of resources to. I don’t see this as an important goal at all. I’d like to see the school focus on better educating the kids who currently attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Your premise is incorrect. The abysmal achievement that we have at Dunbar where 2% of the kids are on grade level in math is because there is NO tracking from an early age in elementary school. Dunbar is the typical result of not tracking, just like other poorly performing high schools in the city with similar stats.

Of course more than 2% of the thousands of kids in these poorly performing schools could have reached grade level competency. Why didn’t they? Because there is no tracking in elementary with G & T, no tracking of dedicated subjects in middle and high school. So teaching is to the lowest common denominator in these schools which is way below grade level. Then, even if kids don’t grasp concepts, everyone is socially promoted. End results are schools like Dunbar.

Look at cities where you have tracking starting in elementary, magnet or test in middle and high schools. They get low SES kids in these school who do well.

What DCPS does due to the failure of tracking then is defensive recovery in high school with Banneker. These kids come in with huge deficits which Banneker has to try to make up. That’s why all Banneker pushes is academics at the cost of all else. Even with 4 years of this, the best most of these kids can achieve is 3 on AP and low 20’s average on IB exams. These scores are not that great for a test in, heavy emphasis academic high school. But for kids who are so far behind, they do make strides.

Compare that to areas that start tracking early in elementary and beyond These low SES kids have been given higher level academics and challenged since elementary and blow the Banneker kids away. It’s not that both groups don’t have the same potential. It’s just these places tapped it early in the kids from elementary onward to the start of high school. These kids got way ahead and are performing at a much higher academic threshold.


It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

You are missing their point. You can fully appreciate all the research about academic achievement and trauma and still believe that dedicated differentiation in early years would produce a high school with more than 2% of students on grade level. It might not be 100% on grade level, it might not even be 50% given all the effects of poverty and trauma, but it would almost certainly be above TWO. Failure to identify and provide differentiated opportunities hurts low income kids THE MOST because families with greater economic choice will bail.

This exactly. PP above wants to use poverty, trauma, etc… as the scapegoat as to why Dunbar has a 2% grade level rate and excuse the all the failings of DCPS.

I’m the PP that you are talking about. Who said anything about excusing the failing of DCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what I'm trying to get at is while people can say

"I am happy in a school that is diverse"

their school choices can also mean

"I am choosing schools to avoid Black and poor people who are my neighbors."

This is frickin hilarious. Some woke white person “of means” makes a statement about how it’s important being in a school that is racially, economically, and academically diverse.

She then gets called out correctly that this is not true, her title 1 school is homogenous. Many HRCS are more diverse.

Then, unable to refute that and admit that she is wrong, she goes on to now accuse everyone of being racist.

Folks, it’s the same play every time. When challenged, instead of providing facts and support for their stance, the only defense these people have left is everyone is racist.

No, I’m not white or racist. I’m avoiding putting my kid in a failing school. Black families with options are doing the EXACT same thing.

You are conflating a few different posters. I am the PP who prefers in-class differentiation in elementary to tracking programs that pull kids out of schools and classes, but I wasn’t involved in the devolution about the relative diversity of charters vs title 1 dcps. I don’t think anyone is racist for disagreeing with me—I do think it’s a shame (but not a surprise) that we cannot discuss the merits of tracking vs grouping without going off the rails. And look, if a school is failing kids, neither approach is going to work. I still don’t think anyone has demonstrated that tracking in elementary school is actually the right move. Even in older grades you see the problem. If tracking was the answer PPs pretend it is, you wouldn’t have people worried about Dunbar (like the forgotten OP) because they would be sure their kid’s needs are being met, either in the test-in school or at Dunbar. But that’s not the case. To be clear, I’m not suggesting dcps get rid of Banneker and other test-in high schools. But why would we start that process with little kids, especially when the research does not support it. Anyway, I’m going to give this thread back to folks talking about Dunbar.
Ps I’m not white either, don’t make those assumptions.
PPs I’m not naming my school bc I like what I see there, and I don’t want it to get flamed by a bunch of people who obviously don’t go there.

Your premise is incorrect. The abysmal achievement that we have at Dunbar where 2% of the kids are on grade level in math is because there is NO tracking from an early age in elementary school. Dunbar is the typical result of not tracking, just like other poorly performing high schools in the city with similar stats.

Of course more than 2% of the thousands of kids in these poorly performing schools could have reached grade level competency. Why didn’t they? Because there is no tracking in elementary with G & T, no tracking of dedicated subjects in middle and high school. So teaching is to the lowest common denominator in these schools which is way below grade level. Then, even if kids don’t grasp concepts, everyone is socially promoted. End results are schools like Dunbar.

Look at cities where you have tracking starting in elementary, magnet or test in middle and high schools. They get low SES kids in these school who do well.

What DCPS does due to the failure of tracking then is defensive recovery in high school with Banneker. These kids come in with huge deficits which Banneker has to try to make up. That’s why all Banneker pushes is academics at the cost of all else. Even with 4 years of this, the best most of these kids can achieve is 3 on AP and low 20’s average on IB exams. These scores are not that great for a test in, heavy emphasis academic high school. But for kids who are so far behind, they do make strides.

Compare that to areas that start tracking early in elementary and beyond These low SES kids have been given higher level academics and challenged since elementary and blow the Banneker kids away. It’s not that both groups don’t have the same potential. It’s just these places tapped it early in the kids from elementary onward to the start of high school. These kids got way ahead and are performing at a much higher academic threshold.

It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

So how do kids who are operating at the 3rd grade level make it to high school? We need to get rid of grade levels and just only let kids move forward once they master material. what is the point of DUnbar if the entire school is remedial? just turn it into vocational training

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so cruel.

Cruel is what has been done to the students who deserve better, not accurately describing it.

Done to them by their parents. Thats where the problem starts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious on people's thought on the other IB DC public high schools - obviously lots of DCUM parents send their kids to Wilson. Based on this thread, most are not comfortable with Dunbar. What about the others? Cardozo? Roosevelt? Coolidge? Eastern? I presume if folks are comfortable with Dunbar, they would not consider Woodson, Anacostia, or Ballou.

Cardozo-hard pass, just like dunbar.
Roosevelt-its out IB and no way. Also not bothering with MacFarland middle. Even though we would like to keep the spanish.
Eastern-talks a big game but still nothing impressive.
Coolidge-might have more middle class families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so cruel.

Cruel is what has been done to the students who deserve better, not accurately describing it.

Done to them by their parents. Thats where the problem starts

You can’t blame everything on the parents. Also not all parents failed their kids. There are parents who care and want the best for their kids but don’t have options financially. DCPS failed a lot of these kids. It’s really sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious on people's thought on the other IB DC public high schools - obviously lots of DCUM parents send their kids to Wilson. Based on this thread, most are not comfortable with Dunbar. What about the others? Cardozo? Roosevelt? Coolidge? Eastern? I presume if folks are comfortable with Dunbar, they would not consider Woodson, Anacostia, or Ballou.

Cardozo-hard pass, just like dunbar.
Roosevelt-its out IB and no way. Also not bothering with MacFarland middle. Even though we would like to keep the spanish.
Eastern-talks a big game but still nothing impressive.
Coolidge-might have more middle class families.

There are no great IB DCPS high schools. Wilson is the only one that is decent, but not great, especially when compared to our suburban neighbors. The overcrowding there is a big issue and affects everything. That’s it folks.

As to charters, you could play the lottery and there is Basis, Latin, and DCI. But your chances of DCI are low because of the feeder school preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what I'm trying to get at is while people can say

"I am happy in a school that is diverse"

their school choices can also mean

"I am choosing schools to avoid Black and poor people who are my neighbors."

This is frickin hilarious. Some woke white person “of means” makes a statement about how it’s important being in a school that is racially, economically, and academically diverse.

She then gets called out correctly that this is not true, her title 1 school is homogenous. Many HRCS are more diverse.

Then, unable to refute that and admit that she is wrong, she goes on to now accuse everyone of being racist.

Folks, it’s the same play every time. When challenged, instead of providing facts and support for their stance, the only defense these people have left is everyone is racist.

No, I’m not white or racist. I’m avoiding putting my kid in a failing school. Black families with options are doing the EXACT same thing.

You are conflating a few different posters. I am the PP who prefers in-class differentiation in elementary to tracking programs that pull kids out of schools and classes, but I wasn’t involved in the devolution about the relative diversity of charters vs title 1 dcps. I don’t think anyone is racist for disagreeing with me—I do think it’s a shame (but not a surprise) that we cannot discuss the merits of tracking vs grouping without going off the rails. And look, if a school is failing kids, neither approach is going to work. I still don’t think anyone has demonstrated that tracking in elementary school is actually the right move. Even in older grades you see the problem. If tracking was the answer PPs pretend it is, you wouldn’t have people worried about Dunbar (like the forgotten OP) because they would be sure their kid’s needs are being met, either in the test-in school or at Dunbar. But that’s not the case. To be clear, I’m not suggesting dcps get rid of Banneker and other test-in high schools. But why would we start that process with little kids, especially when the research does not support it. Anyway, I’m going to give this thread back to folks talking about Dunbar.
Ps I’m not white either, don’t make those assumptions.
PPs I’m not naming my school bc I like what I see there, and I don’t want it to get flamed by a bunch of people who obviously don’t go there.

Your premise is incorrect. The abysmal achievement that we have at Dunbar where 2% of the kids are on grade level in math is because there is NO tracking from an early age in elementary school. Dunbar is the typical result of not tracking, just like other poorly performing high schools in the city with similar stats.

Of course more than 2% of the thousands of kids in these poorly performing schools could have reached grade level competency. Why didn’t they? Because there is no tracking in elementary with G & T, no tracking of dedicated subjects in middle and high school. So teaching is to the lowest common denominator in these schools which is way below grade level. Then, even if kids don’t grasp concepts, everyone is socially promoted. End results are schools like Dunbar.

Look at cities where you have tracking starting in elementary, magnet or test in middle and high schools. They get low SES kids in these school who do well.

What DCPS does due to the failure of tracking then is defensive recovery in high school with Banneker. These kids come in with huge deficits which Banneker has to try to make up. That’s why all Banneker pushes is academics at the cost of all else. Even with 4 years of this, the best most of these kids can achieve is 3 on AP and low 20’s average on IB exams. These scores are not that great for a test in, heavy emphasis academic high school. But for kids who are so far behind, they do make strides.

Compare that to areas that start tracking early in elementary and beyond These low SES kids have been given higher level academics and challenged since elementary and blow the Banneker kids away. It’s not that both groups don’t have the same potential. It’s just these places tapped it early in the kids from elementary onward to the start of high school. These kids got way ahead and are performing at a much higher academic threshold.

It’s astounding to me that there’s a full grown adult who believes that Dunbar’s results are the result of not having tracking in elementary school. This person seems unaware of the mountains of research about links between academic achievement and poverty, trauma, violence, etc.

How do people this clueless make it through the day safely?

So how do kids who are operating at the 3rd grade level make it to high school? We need to get rid of grade levels and just only let kids move forward once they master material. what is the point of DUnbar if the entire school is remedial? just turn it into vocational training

I think vocational training is a good idea. Reality is if by 8th grade you are performing way below grade level, things are not going to improve too much. It’s too late. Instead of graduating with a worthless diploma and then do what, learn some useful marketable trade skill. Hvac, electrician, plumbers, etc,..can easily make 60k and up to 6 figures. There’s a big need for them too.