DC middle school list

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

[Anonymous]

Most of the ECs will be transitioning to ES’s in the next few years (Brightwood, Takoma, Whittier, etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

The context of the conversations was working at one of the schools on the list in a mental health capacity and talking to the students and their parents about high school choices and their satisfaction level with the school itself.

The students have been expressing all year concern about other students not focusing on their work, behaving in ways that prevent learning from happening, etc. They have concerns about specific teachers, but honestly, a 7th grader doesn't care if his 6th grade teacher doesn't come back after he finishes 6th grade. He also doesn't necessarily know what his teacher's professional history is like, whether the teacher is a "top performer" or anything else like that. They don't know anything about at-risk funding, and frankly, it's not always obvious within the school specifically what those funds are being used for.

Things the students cared about as communicated to me: presence of gangs in area high schools (e.g., boys very worried about MS-13 at Roosevelt), specific academic focus (e.g., can I take French instead of Spanish? Can I take a media production class instead of music?), how difficult it was to get to the school from their current address, whether or not the school has a uniform. Obviously kids were also interested in going to schools where their friends go/were planning to go, so that was also part of what they were interested in and (in a couple cases) an example of something their parents wanted to avoid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

School resources being more ‘equitably expended’ would be opposite of than what you are aiming for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:72 is a lot though, right? Some of these schools must be tiny, or have tiny middle school grades.

My initial reaction also is - wow, there are 72 schools offering 7th grade!!!! This really speaks to my concern about the duplication and wasted resources as a result of having two sectors that don't work together to figure out what is actually needed before schools are opened/closed.

[Anonymous]

Several of them (the ones offering PK-5 and 7&8) are phasing out middle school and kids will go to MacFarland. New North will also consolidate more middle schools.

I would like to see the following middle schools close as well:
* Adams (send kids to MacFarland, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for bilingual elementary school at Oyster-Adams)
* Francis-Stevens (send kids to Cardozo, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for elementary students)
* CHM@L (just stop at 5th grade so the school can accommodate more little kids....the school doesn't provide middle school the way Maria Montessori envisioned it at all, and since they insist on prior Montessori experience it's doomed to be a tiny middle school going forward).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

School resources being more ‘equitably expended’ would be opposite of than what you are aiming for.

English?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

The context of the conversations was working at one of the schools on the list in a mental health capacity and talking to the students and their parents about high school choices and their satisfaction level with the school itself.

The students have been expressing all year concern about other students not focusing on their work, behaving in ways that prevent learning from happening, etc. They have concerns about specific teachers, but honestly, a 7th grader doesn't care if his 6th grade teacher doesn't come back after he finishes 6th grade. He also doesn't necessarily know what his teacher's professional history is like, whether the teacher is a "top performer" or anything else like that. They don't know anything about at-risk funding, and frankly, it's not always obvious within the school specifically what those funds are being used for.

Things the students cared about as communicated to me: presence of gangs in area high schools (e.g., boys very worried about MS-13 at Roosevelt), specific academic focus (e.g., can I take French instead of Spanish? Can I take a media production class instead of music?), how difficult it was to get to the school from their current address, whether or not the school has a uniform. Obviously kids were also interested in going to schools where their friends go/were planning to go, so that was also part of what they were interested in and (in a couple cases) an example of something their parents wanted to avoid.

So they're not at all interested in why Deal provides these options but not their school?

They don't know what they're missing in terms of teacher quality and maybe more experienced/qualified teachers could better handle disruptive peers. They don't know anything about at-risk funding because the schools are forced to absorb the funding into admin budget rather than providing the specific intended supports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

The context of the conversations was working at one of the schools on the list in a mental health capacity and talking to the students and their parents about high school choices and their satisfaction level with the school itself.

The students have been expressing all year concern about other students not focusing on their work, behaving in ways that prevent learning from happening, etc. They have concerns about specific teachers, but honestly, a 7th grader doesn't care if his 6th grade teacher doesn't come back after he finishes 6th grade. He also doesn't necessarily know what his teacher's professional history is like, whether the teacher is a "top performer" or anything else like that. They don't know anything about at-risk funding, and frankly, it's not always obvious within the school specifically what those funds are being used for.

Things the students cared about as communicated to me: presence of gangs in area high schools (e.g., boys very worried about MS-13 at Roosevelt), specific academic focus (e.g., can I take French instead of Spanish? Can I take a media production class instead of music?), how difficult it was to get to the school from their current address, whether or not the school has a uniform. Obviously kids were also interested in going to schools where their friends go/were planning to go, so that was also part of what they were interested in and (in a couple cases) an example of something their parents wanted to avoid.

So they're not at all interested in why Deal provides these options but not their school?

They don't know what they're missing in terms of teacher quality and maybe more experienced/qualified teachers could better handle disruptive peers. They don't know anything about at-risk funding because the schools are forced to absorb the funding into admin budget rather than providing the specific intended supports.

I'm not convinced Deal has better quality teachers than other schools. It has more compliant students who are more likely to come in at or above grade level. If you switched the teaching staff at Deal with, let's say, Eliot-Hine, I doubt the PARCC scores would change much at all. In fact, the skills and attitudes you need to teach rich kids and handle rich parents might be quite different for what you need to be good at a Title I school. Just look at the former Janney principal, who didn't do much for Brookland Middle and asked to be transferred to Brent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

School resources being more ‘equitably expended’ would be opposite of than what you are aiming for.

English?

More like simple math. Equitable distribution would send less resources to the schools that need it. How do you not know this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP said schools families WANT their kids to attend- there are plenty of families who send their kids to certain schools that they absolutely dislike and are stuck and feel that they have no choice. I think the statement that there is a small handful of middle schools and high schools that all the families in the city would want their kids to attend is absolutely correct.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don't talk to many families outside of your bubble. Remember, DCUM is pretty extreme bubble.

+1. This spring, I had a lot of conversations with 8th graders at a school that almost certainly none of the people on DCUM would send their kids to, and the things that they were worried about for middle and high school were things that wouldn't even occur to most of the people on this board. For example, they did not care AT ALL if there were no white kids at the school.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit but I'm curious about your framing in those discussions. I'd be very interested to know how students at struggling schools view systemic inequity like lack of top performing teachers, or insufficient funding to address high at-risk populations, etc.

These students would be 100% correct be skeptical of white students' presence as any sort of benefit or panacea, but I suspect they'd be far more interested in school resources being equitably expended for everyone regardless of address.

The context of the conversations was working at one of the schools on the list in a mental health capacity and talking to the students and their parents about high school choices and their satisfaction level with the school itself.

The students have been expressing all year concern about other students not focusing on their work, behaving in ways that prevent learning from happening, etc. They have concerns about specific teachers, but honestly, a 7th grader doesn't care if his 6th grade teacher doesn't come back after he finishes 6th grade. He also doesn't necessarily know what his teacher's professional history is like, whether the teacher is a "top performer" or anything else like that. They don't know anything about at-risk funding, and frankly, it's not always obvious within the school specifically what those funds are being used for.

Things the students cared about as communicated to me: presence of gangs in area high schools (e.g., boys very worried about MS-13 at Roosevelt), specific academic focus (e.g., can I take French instead of Spanish? Can I take a media production class instead of music?), how difficult it was to get to the school from their current address, whether or not the school has a uniform. Obviously kids were also interested in going to schools where their friends go/were planning to go, so that was also part of what they were interested in and (in a couple cases) an example of something their parents wanted to avoid.

So they're not at all interested in why Deal provides these options but not their school?

They don't know what they're missing in terms of teacher quality and maybe more experienced/qualified teachers could better handle disruptive peers. They don't know anything about at-risk funding because the schools are forced to absorb the funding into admin budget rather than providing the specific intended supports.

I'm not convinced Deal has better quality teachers than other schools. It has more compliant students who are more likely to come in at or above grade level. If you switched the teaching staff at Deal with, let's say, Eliot-Hine, I doubt the PARCC scores would change much at all. In fact, the skills and attitudes you need to teach rich kids and handle rich parents might be quite different for what you need to be good at a Title I school. Just look at the former Janney principal, who didn't do much for Brookland Middle and asked to be transferred to Brent.

+1000, not only that according to the very confusing new website at OSSE they don't have more highly effective teachers than the DC average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Several of them (the ones offering PK-5 and 7&8) are phasing out middle school and kids will go to MacFarland. New North will also consolidate more middle schools.

I would like to see the following middle schools close as well:
* Adams (send kids to MacFarland, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for bilingual elementary school at Oyster-Adams)
* Francis-Stevens (send kids to Cardozo, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for elementary students)
* CHM@L (just stop at 5th grade so the school can accommodate more little kids....the school doesn't provide middle school the way Maria Montessori envisioned it at all, and since they insist on prior Montessori experience it's doomed to be a tiny middle school going forward).

Adams is a seperate building though, so it would split the Oyster elementary school among two campuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Several of them (the ones offering PK-5 and 7&8) are phasing out middle school and kids will go to MacFarland. New North will also consolidate more middle schools.

I would like to see the following middle schools close as well:
* Adams (send kids to MacFarland, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for bilingual elementary school at Oyster-Adams)
* Francis-Stevens (send kids to Cardozo, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for elementary students)
* CHM@L (just stop at 5th grade so the school can accommodate more little kids....the school doesn't provide middle school the way Maria Montessori envisioned it at all, and since they insist on prior Montessori experience it's doomed to be a tiny middle school going forward).

Adams is a seperate building though, so it would split the Oyster elementary school among two campuses.

That's the least of the issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Several of them (the ones offering PK-5 and 7&8) are phasing out middle school and kids will go to MacFarland. New North will also consolidate more middle schools.

I would like to see the following middle schools close as well:
* Adams (send kids to MacFarland, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for bilingual elementary school at Oyster-Adams)
* Francis-Stevens (send kids to Cardozo, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for elementary students)
* CHM@L (just stop at 5th grade so the school can accommodate more little kids....the school doesn't provide middle school the way Maria Montessori envisioned it at all, and since they insist on prior Montessori experience it's doomed to be a tiny middle school going forward).

Adams is a seperate building though, so it would split the Oyster elementary school among two campuses.

That's the least of the issues.

Yes, closing the middle schools that seem to working is the solution! And getting rid of the Education Campus model for 3 schools is not going to make a dent in the number of middle schools. Why not focus efforts on under-enrolled schools and see what the problems are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Several of them (the ones offering PK-5 and 7&8) are phasing out middle school and kids will go to MacFarland. New North will also consolidate more middle schools.

I would like to see the following middle schools close as well:
* Adams (send kids to MacFarland, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for bilingual elementary school at Oyster-Adams)
* Francis-Stevens (send kids to Cardozo, raising the school size and test scores there and allowing more space for elementary students)
* CHM@L (just stop at 5th grade so the school can accommodate more little kids....the school doesn't provide middle school the way Maria Montessori envisioned it at all, and since they insist on prior Montessori experience it's doomed to be a tiny middle school going forward).

The idea that you can "send" kids to X or Y middle school is delusional ... families with choices will bleed to upper NW, charters, privates and the burbs unless the destination MS is attractive which Cardozo and MacFarland are not for the moment.