DC's School Report Cards are up. Any surprises?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not heard good things about DCI. Their test scores are better than other public MS and HS in the city, but you would expect that based on demographics. From parents who actually have kids there, I have heard that there are staffing issues, the kids spend too much time on Chromebooks, and that beyond the language opportunities which of course are highly valued by families who attend DCI charters, people are not very impressed. There is a perception it is better than their IB MS and HS, but we are talking about families who live in Brookland, LeDroit Parks etc. -- they don't have good IB options for elementary school, much less MS and HS.

As for Capitol Hill families (of which we are one), the main advantage of DCI is the HS option, given how weak Eastern continues to be. However, for MS, DCI seems no better than Stuart-Hobson, beyond the language options. If you look at the "growth to proficiency" ratings on the report card site, S-H and DCI have similar scores. For us, S-H is much closer and offers my kids the option of attending school with neighbors, and participating in activities with kids they've known since they were in kindergarten. S-H has the clear edge.

Neither of these school is amazing, and there are both charter and DCPS options that are worse (I wouldn't send my kid to Two Rivers Young or to Wheatley Education Campus for middle, for instance).

You can find better test scores at upper NW schools though for white and students who are not economically disadvantaged, Deal and Hardy don't do much better -- they just have smaller percentages of students who are economically disadvantaged.

I don't say this to boost S-H -- we are looking at privates for MS and if we get into Latin for 5th we're going there (on the fence about BASIS, I think I'm leaning towards S-H but I don't know, it's a tough choice). Latin is appealing to me because I really like their HS program and like the overall educational approach which is academically challenging but not insanely intense, with good balance. But I don't look at DCI and wish we'd sent our kids to one of the immersion characters we did in fact get into for PK, which would have required long commutes and where I have some reluctance about foundational academics.

So from my perspective as a DC parent, charters have no real advantage over DCPS. There are some good charters but they aren't light years better than our DCPS option -- they are about the same for elementary and middle and then better for HS but not light years better.

I feel bad for the DCI families we know who live on the Hill IB for good elementaries and decent middles, who have spent the last 8 years commuting to Brookland or NW only to be disappointed in DCI. Their kids speak a second language, which is awesome and I know they value that, but it hasn't just solved education for them. All of the DCI families we know are looking at privates right now, just like we are. Which is too bad, honestly.

Public education in DC is hard.

I don’t believe anyone is really looking at privates as it is just cheaper to move and/or get a tutor or Mathnesium/Kumon etc. From my experience, kids at dci can learn 3 languages, not just 2. Math and stem is very strong at DCI, and it offers a strong arts program as well. Plus it has a great feeder with IB Diploma. I don’t know a single family at dci who is “disappointed” but I’m sure they exist. I tutor a lot of kids around the city and the language program at dci is excellent. You can take multiple classes in a foreign language, not just language classes. I do think dci caters to the top and bottom and ignores the middle. In contrast, Latin is great for a middle of the road kid academically. Not too tough but good enough. I heard amazing things about what they can do for the kids at the bottom. They’re doing some great things. Basis is great academically not great for anything else IMHO. I don’t know anything about Hill elementary schools really but I do know a ton about Hill middle schools sadly. I would not characterize them as decent. Every family I tutor is (rightly) concerned that their child is not getting the education they need. If you’re worried about “foundational academics” i would be really worried about any of the Hill middle schools. Sorry.

Good, honest post from someone who tutors kids from all different schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banneker and School Without Walls are the top high schools. Lots of DCPS elementary schools at the top of the ratings. For the charters, Latin, Friendship and Center City have campuses in the top.

The official OSSE site is here https://schoolreportcard.dc.gov/home.
It may be easier to navigate the information on the EmpowerK12 site https://www.empowerk12.org/dc-accountability-scores-dashboard.

Looks like BASIS and Walls have the best numbers. However, Basis is 100% lottery and Walls selects its students.

Is BASIS really a lottery if they kick kids out who don’t pass their many tests? Walls can’t do that…

Basis does not kick out kids, they just don't pass them unless they actually pass. I haven't heard of anyone not passing in high school at Basis. I have also not heard of Walls accepting any kids who aren't passing in middle school.

lol.

Walls only accepts straight A kids.

Yes but the cohort of kids are from mediocre schools. No I do not think a kid getting an A at dcps “honors” math is the same as a kid at basis, or the accelerated track at DCI.

Um they get higher SAT scores than DCI and have higher test scores. Mediocre, ok lol.

Walks has higher SAT scores because they are a selective school and DCI is not.

But if you actually dig deep into the details, Walls is around 1300 and DCI 1200 but DCI does not reject its kids, has higher at risk, much higher SPED and ELL.

The SAT scores at Walks will trend down as the academic cohort weakens with the new admissions screening. We already see that where almost 1/3rd of the kids are not even in grade level with CAPE.

As to the other DCPS high schoolls except JR, their SAT averages are abysmal like 900’s

Why *aren’t the ‘super bright’ kids at DCI doing better then?

Also all charters are selective, they can get rid of kids after count day and DCPS must receive them. This is a fact.

Oh and ALL the charter schools are scoring so well :roll:

You don’t have to convince me that DCPS is doing poorly but so are charters schools overall.

If charters were really the solution instead of part of the problem we’d have no need for DCPS. But the problem is the mayor, chancellor, and council members.

You are buying the kool aid my friend. Charters don’t get rid of kids. But if they can’t meet the needs of sped kids or something, then they let families know. They are not given the same money and resources for this compared to a whole school district like DCPS.

The super bright kids at DCI are doing better. This has to be true if the SAT average is 1200. That means kids are getting higher and lower scores to get that average.

BTW, here is breakdown of stats for DCI and Walls

DCI
17% at risk
19% sped
17% ELL

Walls
7% at risk
1% sped
1% ELL

DCI has more than 2 times at risk and a whooping 17-19 times more sped and ELL. Yet their SAT average is only 100 pints lower at 1200. If you filter the SAT scores and see what the average is of the top 20% of the kids at DCI, I bet it would be at least 1300 and maybe higher 1400.

You my friend, are not working in education.

It’s also not a straight 100 - it’s 150ish.

Looking at the data the top 10% are not getting better scores.

Also these are 2 schools, the schools DCI is near have DOUBLE and TRIPLE the amount of at risk kids and sped.


And do not twist my words, charters get rid of the worst kids, not all. This is easily verified and the fact that pretty much only the US does charter schools-yet we are still behind. Charters aren’t the solution. US education sucks and needs change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not heard good things about DCI. Their test scores are better than other public MS and HS in the city, but you would expect that based on demographics. From parents who actually have kids there, I have heard that there are staffing issues, the kids spend too much time on Chromebooks, and that beyond the language opportunities which of course are highly valued by families who attend DCI charters, people are not very impressed. There is a perception it is better than their IB MS and HS, but we are talking about families who live in Brookland, LeDroit Parks etc. -- they don't have good IB options for elementary school, much less MS and HS.

As for Capitol Hill families (of which we are one), the main advantage of DCI is the HS option, given how weak Eastern continues to be. However, for MS, DCI seems no better than Stuart-Hobson, beyond the language options. If you look at the "growth to proficiency" ratings on the report card site, S-H and DCI have similar scores. For us, S-H is much closer and offers my kids the option of attending school with neighbors, and participating in activities with kids they've known since they were in kindergarten. S-H has the clear edge.

Neither of these school is amazing, and there are both charter and DCPS options that are worse (I wouldn't send my kid to Two Rivers Young or to Wheatley Education Campus for middle, for instance).

You can find better test scores at upper NW schools though for white and students who are not economically disadvantaged, Deal and Hardy don't do much better -- they just have smaller percentages of students who are economically disadvantaged.

I don't say this to boost S-H -- we are looking at privates for MS and if we get into Latin for 5th we're going there (on the fence about BASIS, I think I'm leaning towards S-H but I don't know, it's a tough choice). Latin is appealing to me because I really like their HS program and like the overall educational approach which is academically challenging but not insanely intense, with good balance. But I don't look at DCI and wish we'd sent our kids to one of the immersion characters we did in fact get into for PK, which would have required long commutes and where I have some reluctance about foundational academics.

So from my perspective as a DC parent, charters have no real advantage over DCPS. There are some good charters but they aren't light years better than our DCPS option -- they are about the same for elementary and middle and then better for HS but not light years better.

I feel bad for the DCI families we know who live on the Hill IB for good elementaries and decent middles, who have spent the last 8 years commuting to Brookland or NW only to be disappointed in DCI. Their kids speak a second language, which is awesome and I know they value that, but it hasn't just solved education for them. All of the DCI families we know are looking at privates right now, just like we are. Which is too bad, honestly.

Public education in DC is hard.

I don’t believe anyone is really looking at privates as it is just cheaper to move and/or get a tutor or Mathnesium/Kumon etc. From my experience, kids at dci can learn 3 languages, not just 2. Math and stem is very strong at DCI, and it offers a strong arts program as well. Plus it has a great feeder with IB Diploma. I don’t know a single family at dci who is “disappointed” but I’m sure they exist. I tutor a lot of kids around the city and the language program at dci is excellent. You can take multiple classes in a foreign language, not just language classes. I do think dci caters to the top and bottom and ignores the middle. In contrast, Latin is great for a middle of the road kid academically. Not too tough but good enough. I heard amazing things about what they can do for the kids at the bottom. They’re doing some great things. Basis is great academically not great for anything else IMHO. I don’t know anything about Hill elementary schools really but I do know a ton about Hill middle schools sadly. I would not characterize them as decent. Every family I tutor is (rightly) concerned that their child is not getting the education they need. If you’re worried about “foundational academics” i would be really worried about any of the Hill middle schools. Sorry.

This is the sad truth for a lot of the middle of the road DCPS schools (it's obviously true for the worst ones). We also know parents who are just pushing through, kind of worried, and hoping for an application high school on the other side. and I talked to a teacher at one of these mediocre DCPS schools who said that her hands are tied for various reasons, and she knows they are sending kids to Walls and Banneker who are totally unprepared for rigorous work.

Parents and teachers seem to be on the same side of this (wanting more challening work from DCPS for the middle school students who can handle it) and for some reason central office is taking the opposite side.

How do we solve that problem?

[Anonymous]

Im the tutor from above. I will say I also tutor kids who are EXCELLENT and want further enrichment. So just because I tutor at your school doesn’t necessarily mean the kids are behind. But generally, sadly, dcps middle schools are not producing kids who are doing so well that they need enrichment, they’re producing kids who are so behind their parents notice and are rightly worried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Im the tutor from above. I will say I also tutor kids who are EXCELLENT and want further enrichment. So just because I tutor at your school doesn’t necessarily mean the kids are behind. But generally, sadly, dcps middle schools are not producing kids who are doing so well that they need enrichment, they’re producing kids who are so behind their parents notice and are rightly worried.

I don’t disagree that there is room for continued improvement, but we chose our local middle school after talking to parents of advanced kids who felt like their kids got a solid education there, and are now doing well and felt prepared at select high schools. I have had multiple conversations with the math and ELA teachers this year where they’ve met to discuss a plan for my student and other top students to ensure they are being sufficiently challenged and my student is on track to take geometry in 8th. Do I think my kid could be pushed even harder and do even more? Sure, but they are happy and enjoy going to school, have good friends (that are racially and socioeconomically diverse), involved in lots of extracurriculars, and have the autonomy to get to and from school easily. There are lots of happy families at DCPS middle schools—there are also unhappy families and families in between, but this is why test scores only give you some information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im the tutor from above. I will say I also tutor kids who are EXCELLENT and want further enrichment. So just because I tutor at your school doesn’t necessarily mean the kids are behind. But generally, sadly, dcps middle schools are not producing kids who are doing so well that they need enrichment, they’re producing kids who are so behind their parents notice and are rightly worried.

I don’t disagree that there is room for continued improvement, but we chose our local middle school after talking to parents of advanced kids who felt like their kids got a solid education there, and are now doing well and felt prepared at select high schools. I have had multiple conversations with the math and ELA teachers this year where they’ve met to discuss a plan for my student and other top students to ensure they are being sufficiently challenged and my student is on track to take geometry in 8th. Do I think my kid could be pushed even harder and do even more? Sure, but they are happy and enjoy going to school, have good friends (that are racially and socioeconomically diverse), involved in lots of extracurriculars, and have the autonomy to get to and from school easily. There are lots of happy families at DCPS middle schools—there are also unhappy families and families in between, but this is why test scores only give you some information.

+1 and my/(my high achieving) DC's experience at a middle school that most on this thread would try to disparage. The school has gone beyond my expectations for middle school both academically and socially. DC is thriving academically, is involved in school activities, and also commutes with autonomy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have a solution to the problem with schools in this city. But as an educated UMC family EOTP, charters are what kept us in the city to make it work.

We were at an immersion charter and now at DCI as a new family this year. We were at an event this weekend and met a number of other DCI families and wow the backgrounds of these families were impressive - lawyers, CIO, educational executives, etc…. It was also a very diverse group with blacks, white, asians.

It is quite obvious to me now that educated UMC families of all backgrounds and ethnicities are congregating and coalescing among the few acceptable charters for middle school EOTP. It is not by chance that there were so many accomplished families in one event.

If I could send my kid to Stuart-Hobson I totally would. DC is at a supposedly desirable EOTP charter but meh.

I think this is the same Stuart Hobson booster but if it’s a real post I invite you do so some research on the school. It’s objectively a poor performing school.

It’s really not. It has a good OSSE report card with solid performance and growth scores. Its top kids do well on tests and in HS admissions, while having a very robust MS experience with great ECs and truly excellent performance arts. It’s not an accident that SH got over 20 kids into Duke last year. I’m not sure why anyone thinks there’s on SH booster.

Duke Ellington is a performing arts school. It’s not an academic powerhouse. I mean I am thrilled if kids who are good at performance do well here, but the reality is that SH has very little to do with it. Furthermore, the “honors” classes are not even grade level. Kids do really poorly on standardized tests. “Truly excellent” performing arts is 100% in the eye of the booster. I’m glad you’re happy but I’m really glad my kids don’t attend Stuart Hobson.

SH doesn't have "honors" classes; it does track kids, but not like that. So it's interesting that you have opinions on classes that literally don't exist. Why do people come on DCUM to post nonsense about schools they have no connection to? Look, obviously demographics (and, particularly, at risk %age) play into overall test scores and SH is 29% at risk, but if you look at just white kids (since they are virtually certainly to be close to 0% at risk at any DC school), SH actually outperforms BASIS and Hardy and DCI and Latin on ELA CAPE (looking at 4s + 5s); in Math, it's still ahead of all of those schools except for BASIS, which is only at 2% more. Tell me again about the non-grade level classes and kids doing "really poorly"...

I want to be clear that I am not trashing any of those schools. I would have sent me DD to Latin if she lotteried in, because I would love to have a HS plan. She has friends who are very happy at BASIS and if we lived IB for Hardy, I assume she'd go there happily. Also, there are other unnamed schools doing equally well or even better by the metric I just looked at, like Jefferson and Elliot Hine and ITS and Truth. The point is that there are actually a bunch of MS out there working for kids all of which have various pluses and minuses and this weird DCUM line that UMC Hill kids at a school like SH are looking for "easy classes" and or somehow not getting fundamentals is crazy. People hire tutors in MS because their kids aren't doing well... so it's not shocking to hear that the tutor works with kids who aren't doing well at Hill MSes. I'm sure there are plenty of those too! (And it's fair to say that I don't know any parents at SH who hire an individual tutor for "enrichment" given all of the free enrichment offered by the school, so that doesn't really surprise me either. Maybe there are MSes with less on offer where that's more attractive?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have a solution to the problem with schools in this city. But as an educated UMC family EOTP, charters are what kept us in the city to make it work.

We were at an immersion charter and now at DCI as a new family this year. We were at an event this weekend and met a number of other DCI families and wow the backgrounds of these families were impressive - lawyers, CIO, educational executives, etc…. It was also a very diverse group with blacks, white, asians.

It is quite obvious to me now that educated UMC families of all backgrounds and ethnicities are congregating and coalescing among the few acceptable charters for middle school EOTP. It is not by chance that there were so many accomplished families in one event.

If I could send my kid to Stuart-Hobson I totally would. DC is at a supposedly desirable EOTP charter but meh.

I think this is the same Stuart Hobson booster but if it’s a real post I invite you do so some research on the school. It’s objectively a poor performing school.

It’s really not. It has a good OSSE report card with solid performance and growth scores. Its top kids do well on tests and in HS admissions, while having a very robust MS experience with great ECs and truly excellent performance arts. It’s not an accident that SH got over 20 kids into Duke last year. I’m not sure why anyone thinks there’s on SH booster.

Duke Ellington is a performing arts school. It’s not an academic powerhouse. I mean I am thrilled if kids who are good at performance do well here, but the reality is that SH has very little to do with it. Furthermore, the “honors” classes are not even grade level. Kids do really poorly on standardized tests. “Truly excellent” performing arts is 100% in the eye of the booster. I’m glad you’re happy but I’m really glad my kids don’t attend Stuart Hobson.

SH doesn't have "honors" classes; it does track kids, but not like that. So it's interesting that you have opinions on classes that literally don't exist. Why do people come on DCUM to post nonsense about schools they have no connection to? Look, obviously demographics (and, particularly, at risk %age) play into overall test scores and SH is 29% at risk, but if you look at just white kids (since they are virtually certainly to be close to 0% at risk at any DC school), SH actually outperforms BASIS and Hardy and DCI and Latin on ELA CAPE (looking at 4s + 5s); in Math, it's still ahead of all of those schools except for BASIS, which is only at 2% more. Tell me again about the non-grade level classes and kids doing "really poorly"...

I want to be clear that I am not trashing any of those schools. I would have sent me DD to Latin if she lotteried in, because I would love to have a HS plan. She has friends who are very happy at BASIS and if we lived IB for Hardy, I assume she'd go there happily. Also, there are other unnamed schools doing equally well or even better by the metric I just looked at, like Jefferson and Elliot Hine and ITS and Truth. The point is that there are actually a bunch of MS out there working for kids all of which have various pluses and minuses and this weird DCUM line that UMC Hill kids at a school like SH are looking for "easy classes" and or somehow not getting fundamentals is crazy. People hire tutors in MS because their kids aren't doing well... so it's not shocking to hear that the tutor works with kids who aren't doing well at Hill MSes. I'm sure there are plenty of those too! (And it's fair to say that I don't know any parents at SH who hire an individual tutor for "enrichment" given all of the free enrichment offered by the school, so that doesn't really surprise me either. Maybe there are MSes with less on offer where that's more attractive?)

I am thrilled you are so optimistic about Stuart Hobson. However for those who have actual children and are thinking about it you should be aware that the offerings are poor, grade level at Stuart Hobson is considered doing really well, and kids are not being taught well there. Sorry not sorry. Same applies for Truth (actually Stuart would probably be better than truth). Hine has an IB program which is a good curriculum. Finally the reason you don’t know any kids who get a tutor for further enrichment is my biggest issue with SH- kids are just not ambitious. I’m seeing kids who are struggling and not motivated. But if that’s okay with you, fantastic. But lie to less privileged kids who don’t know they’ll be okay. It’s not a good school. It won’t meet your kids needs. If you know your privileged kids will be totally fine whatever happens- go for it. Enjoy the easy commute. But for those less sure, do everything you can to get into another school including moving.

[Anonymous]

same person as above, I would send my kid to Truth only as a last resort. Almost any DCPS is better than Truth.

[Anonymous]

I am so disappointed people use their energy boosting their very mediocre schools instead of demanding more. Dcps has the funds to do it. Demand more and advocate for your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have a solution to the problem with schools in this city. But as an educated UMC family EOTP, charters are what kept us in the city to make it work.

We were at an immersion charter and now at DCI as a new family this year. We were at an event this weekend and met a number of other DCI families and wow the backgrounds of these families were impressive - lawyers, CIO, educational executives, etc…. It was also a very diverse group with blacks, white, asians.

It is quite obvious to me now that educated UMC families of all backgrounds and ethnicities are congregating and coalescing among the few acceptable charters for middle school EOTP. It is not by chance that there were so many accomplished families in one event.

If I could send my kid to Stuart-Hobson I totally would. DC is at a supposedly desirable EOTP charter but meh.

I think this is the same Stuart Hobson booster but if it’s a real post I invite you do so some research on the school. It’s objectively a poor performing school.

It’s really not. It has a good OSSE report card with solid performance and growth scores. Its top kids do well on tests and in HS admissions, while having a very robust MS experience with great ECs and truly excellent performance arts. It’s not an accident that SH got over 20 kids into Duke last year. I’m not sure why anyone thinks there’s on SH booster.

Duke Ellington is a performing arts school. It’s not an academic powerhouse. I mean I am thrilled if kids who are good at performance do well here, but the reality is that SH has very little to do with it. Furthermore, the “honors” classes are not even grade level. Kids do really poorly on standardized tests. “Truly excellent” performing arts is 100% in the eye of the booster. I’m glad you’re happy but I’m really glad my kids don’t attend Stuart Hobson.

SH doesn't have "honors" classes; it does track kids, but not like that. So it's interesting that you have opinions on classes that literally don't exist. Why do people come on DCUM to post nonsense about schools they have no connection to? Look, obviously demographics (and, particularly, at risk %age) play into overall test scores and SH is 29% at risk, but if you look at just white kids (since they are virtually certainly to be close to 0% at risk at any DC school), SH actually outperforms BASIS and Hardy and DCI and Latin on ELA CAPE (looking at 4s + 5s); in Math, it's still ahead of all of those schools except for BASIS, which is only at 2% more. Tell me again about the non-grade level classes and kids doing "really poorly"...

I want to be clear that I am not trashing any of those schools. I would have sent me DD to Latin if she lotteried in, because I would love to have a HS plan. She has friends who are very happy at BASIS and if we lived IB for Hardy, I assume she'd go there happily. Also, there are other unnamed schools doing equally well or even better by the metric I just looked at, like Jefferson and Elliot Hine and ITS and Truth. The point is that there are actually a bunch of MS out there working for kids all of which have various pluses and minuses and this weird DCUM line that UMC Hill kids at a school like SH are looking for "easy classes" and or somehow not getting fundamentals is crazy. People hire tutors in MS because their kids aren't doing well... so it's not shocking to hear that the tutor works with kids who aren't doing well at Hill MSes. I'm sure there are plenty of those too! (And it's fair to say that I don't know any parents at SH who hire an individual tutor for "enrichment" given all of the free enrichment offered by the school, so that doesn't really surprise me either. Maybe there are MSes with less on offer where that's more attractive?)

I am thrilled you are so optimistic about Stuart Hobson. However for those who have actual children and are thinking about it you should be aware that the offerings are poor, grade level at Stuart Hobson is considered doing really well, and kids are not being taught well there. Sorry not sorry. Same applies for Truth (actually Stuart would probably be better than truth). Hine has an IB program which is a good curriculum. Finally the reason you don’t know any kids who get a tutor for further enrichment is my biggest issue with SH- kids are just not ambitious. I’m seeing kids who are struggling and not motivated.But if that’s okay with you, fantastic. But lie to less privileged kids who don’t know they’ll be okay. It’s not a good school. It won’t meet your kids needs. If you know your privileged kids will be totally fine whatever happens- go for it. Enjoy the easy commute. But for those less sure, do everything you can to get into another school including moving.

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. I thought I made it clear that my "actual" kid is at SH now. I'm not "optimistic," I am literally experiencing it. An individual tutor is an extremely poor form of enrichment in my book -- sorry to trash your business model if that's who you're trying to sucker in by saying smart kids doing well who don't have tutors aren't "ambitious" (what??). My kid does tons of enrichment, both in the school and outside it. None of it involves a tutor. Less privileged kids don't hire a private tutor either, so I am not sure how you can speak for them at a school you don't have kids at. You seem to have a very weird axe to grind with DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have a solution to the problem with schools in this city. But as an educated UMC family EOTP, charters are what kept us in the city to make it work.

We were at an immersion charter and now at DCI as a new family this year. We were at an event this weekend and met a number of other DCI families and wow the backgrounds of these families were impressive - lawyers, CIO, educational executives, etc…. It was also a very diverse group with blacks, white, asians.

It is quite obvious to me now that educated UMC families of all backgrounds and ethnicities are congregating and coalescing among the few acceptable charters for middle school EOTP. It is not by chance that there were so many accomplished families in one event.

If I could send my kid to Stuart-Hobson I totally would. DC is at a supposedly desirable EOTP charter but meh.

I think this is the same Stuart Hobson booster but if it’s a real post I invite you do so some research on the school. It’s objectively a poor performing school.

It’s really not. It has a good OSSE report card with solid performance and growth scores. Its top kids do well on tests and in HS admissions, while having a very robust MS experience with great ECs and truly excellent performance arts. It’s not an accident that SH got over 20 kids into Duke last year. I’m not sure why anyone thinks there’s on SH booster.

Duke Ellington is a performing arts school. It’s not an academic powerhouse. I mean I am thrilled if kids who are good at performance do well here, but the reality is that SH has very little to do with it. Furthermore, the “honors” classes are not even grade level. Kids do really poorly on standardized tests. “Truly excellent” performing arts is 100% in the eye of the booster. I’m glad you’re happy but I’m really glad my kids don’t attend Stuart Hobson.

SH doesn't have "honors" classes; it does track kids, but not like that. So it's interesting that you have opinions on classes that literally don't exist. Why do people come on DCUM to post nonsense about schools they have no connection to? Look, obviously demographics (and, particularly, at risk %age) play into overall test scores and SH is 29% at risk, but if you look at just white kids (since they are virtually certainly to be close to 0% at risk at any DC school), SH actually outperforms BASIS and Hardy and DCI and Latin on ELA CAPE (looking at 4s + 5s); in Math, it's still ahead of all of those schools except for BASIS, which is only at 2% more. Tell me again about the non-grade level classes and kids doing "really poorly"...

I want to be clear that I am not trashing any of those schools. I would have sent me DD to Latin if she lotteried in, because I would love to have a HS plan. She has friends who are very happy at BASIS and if we lived IB for Hardy, I assume she'd go there happily. Also, there are other unnamed schools doing equally well or even better by the metric I just looked at, like Jefferson and Elliot Hine and ITS and Truth. The point is that there are actually a bunch of MS out there working for kids all of which have various pluses and minuses and this weird DCUM line that UMC Hill kids at a school like SH are looking for "easy classes" and or somehow not getting fundamentals is crazy. People hire tutors in MS because their kids aren't doing well... so it's not shocking to hear that the tutor works with kids who aren't doing well at Hill MSes. I'm sure there are plenty of those too! (And it's fair to say that I don't know any parents at SH who hire an individual tutor for "enrichment" given all of the free enrichment offered by the school, so that doesn't really surprise me either. Maybe there are MSes with less on offer where that's more attractive?)

I am thrilled you are so optimistic about Stuart Hobson. However for those who have actual children and are thinking about it you should be aware that the offerings are poor, grade level at Stuart Hobson is considered doing really well, and kids are not being taught well there. Sorry not sorry. Same applies for Truth (actually Stuart would probably be better than truth). Hine has an IB program which is a good curriculum. Finally the reason you don’t know any kids who get a tutor for further enrichment is my biggest issue with SH- kids are just not ambitious. I’m seeing kids who are struggling and not motivated.But if that’s okay with you, fantastic. But lie to less privileged kids who don’t know they’ll be okay. It’s not a good school. It won’t meet your kids needs. If you know your privileged kids will be totally fine whatever happens- go for it. Enjoy the easy commute. But for those less sure, do everything you can to get into another school including moving.

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. I thought I made it clear that my "actual" kid is at SH now. I'm not "optimistic," I am literally experiencing it. An individual tutor is an extremely poor form of enrichment in my book -- sorry to trash your business model if that's who you're trying to sucker in by saying smart kids doing well who don't have tutors aren't "ambitious" (what??). My kid does tons of enrichment, both in the school and outside it. None of it involves a tutor. Less privileged kids don't hire a private tutor either, so I am not sure how you can speak for them at a school you don't have kids at. You seem to have a very weird axe to grind with DCPS.

No axe to grind and I take several clients pro bono. What I do find irritating are parents like yourself who overstate the positives about how great their child’s school is to make themselves feel good about their choices. Less privileged families with less opportunities feel that this school is good if privileged families are there. I am genuinely profoundly glad you’re happy there and optimistic about the school in general but the grim reality is that if you want to send your child to a school that will properly prepare them for high school and college, Stuart Hobson is not it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so disappointed people use their energy boosting their very mediocre schools instead of demanding more. Dcps has the funds to do it. Demand more and advocate for your kids.

How about the person in this thread who has been spending a tremendous amount of energy trashing a particular school and the students who attend it? Is that helping make DC schools better?

How do you know parents with children attending the school aren't advocating for more? Seems way more likely to be effective than people aimlessly yelling about it from the outside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so disappointed people use their energy boosting their very mediocre schools instead of demanding more. Dcps has the funds to do it. Demand more and advocate for your kids.

How about the person in this thread who has been spending a tremendous amount of energy trashing a particular school and the students who attend it? Is that helping make DC schools better?

How do you know parents with children attending the school aren't advocating for more? Seems way more likely to be effective than people aimlessly yelling about it from the outside.

Parents are in the best position to advocate for their child.

No one is spending time trashing a school. What is true is that there is a particularly annoying booster from Stuart Hobson who is spouting off straight up lies and it needs to be corrected. You’re welcome

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so disappointed people use their energy boosting their very mediocre schools instead of demanding more. Dcps has the funds to do it. Demand more and advocate for your kids.

How about the person in this thread who has been spending a tremendous amount of energy trashing a particular school and the students who attend it? Is that helping make DC schools better?

How do you know parents with children attending the school aren't advocating for more? Seems way more likely to be effective than people aimlessly yelling about it from the outside.

I think you’re talking about me and as a reminder I said a lot of critical things about several schools including Stuart Hobson. Here’s more criticism: teachers at basis don’t seem to be hired based on their ability to teach they seem to be hired on their knowledge on the subject. This hurts students. Overall a great place for super motivated students. Latin is not rigorous enough for top performers in my opinion. Does a FANTASTIC job getting kids up to speed. DCI really takes care of the kids at the top and the kids at the bottom but is lacking when it comes to the kids in the middle. Truth is so great if your kid loves chickens and independence and ok with absolutely not remotely meeting children’s needs. Stuart Hobson is a better choice than Truth in my opinion and is located close to a metro.