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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Can you please explain what positives you think I've "overstated"? I quoted direct CAPE data, which shows that non-at risk children there perform on par or better than alternative middle schools. I said there was a lot of free enrichment available at the school. I do actually agree with the PP that the school has excellent performing arts, though I didn't say that. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly disparaged SH across the board ("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") based on... anecdotal experience from a few kids you tutor? I genuinely think you should consider what your motives are here and why you think you know so much about multiple schools from a handful of struggling students (since in previous posts you also bashed EH, Jefferson and Truth).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Can you please explain what positives you think I've "overstated"? I quoted direct CAPE data, which shows that non-at risk children there perform on par or better than alternative middle schools. I said there was a lot of free enrichment available at the school. I do actually agree with the PP that the school has excellent performing arts, though I didn't say that. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly disparaged SH across the board ("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") based on... anecdotal experience from a few kids you tutor? I genuinely think you should consider what your motives are here and why you think you know so much about multiple schools from a handful of struggling students (since in previous posts you also bashed EH, Jefferson and Truth).

NP. Your experience is anecdotal of one. The tutor does both enrichment and helps struggling students from many schools who has no skin in this game, He is much ore objective than you. He can assess much better than you where kids are and should be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Can you please explain what positives you think I've "overstated"? I quoted direct CAPE data, which shows that non-at risk children there perform on par or better than alternative middle schools. I said there was a lot of free enrichment available at the school. I do actually agree with the PP that the school has excellent performing arts, though I didn't say that. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly disparaged SH across the board ("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") based on... anecdotal experience from a few kids you tutor? I genuinely think you should consider what your motives are here and why you think you know so much about multiple schools from a handful of struggling students (since in previous posts you also bashed EH, Jefferson and Truth).

NP. Your experience is anecdotal of one. The tutor does both enrichment and helps struggling students from many schools who has no skin in this game, He is much ore objective than you. He can assess much better than you where kids are and should be.

The PP actually said they hadn't worked with good SH students because SH students weren't "ambitious" enough to hire tutors for enrichment. So... a few struggling SH students. And the DC CAPE data actually isn't anecdotal. If you want to check out SH's enrichments for yourself, I'd recommend the @stuarthobsonms, @stuarthobsondramaplayers, @shms_inst_mus, @shms6grade and @stuarthobsonms_athletics accounts as a good place to start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Can you please explain what positives you think I've "overstated"? I quoted direct CAPE data, which shows that non-at risk children there perform on par or better than alternative middle schools. I said there was a lot of free enrichment available at the school. I do actually agree with the PP that the school has excellent performing arts, though I didn't say that. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly disparaged SH across the board ("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") based on... anecdotal experience from a few kids you tutor? I genuinely think you should consider what your motives are here and why you think you know so much about multiple schools from a handful of struggling students (since in previous posts you also bashed EH, Jefferson and Truth).

NP. Your experience is anecdotal of one. The tutor does both enrichment and helps struggling students from many schools who has no skin in this game, He is much ore objective than you. He can assess much better than you where kids are and should be.

The PP actually said they hadn't worked with good SH students because SH students weren't "ambitious" enough to hire tutors for enrichment. So... a few struggling SH students. And the DC CAPE data actually isn't anecdotal. If you want to check out SH's enrichments for yourself, I'd recommend the @stuarthobsonms, @stuarthobsondramaplayers, @shms_inst_mus, @shms6grade and @stuarthobsonms_athletics accounts as a good place to start.

You can’t do enrichment if you have not mastered the basics first. I think that is his point that the DCPS middle school kids in CH are not even getting the “foundational academics” to start with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Can you please explain what positives you think I've "overstated"? I quoted direct CAPE data, which shows that non-at risk children there perform on par or better than alternative middle schools. I said there was a lot of free enrichment available at the school. I do actually agree with the PP that the school has excellent performing arts, though I didn't say that. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly disparaged SH across the board ("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") based on... anecdotal experience from a few kids you tutor? I genuinely think you should consider what your motives are here and why you think you know so much about multiple schools from a handful of struggling students (since in previous posts you also bashed EH, Jefferson and Truth).

NP. Your experience is anecdotal of one. The tutor does both enrichment and helps struggling students from many schools who has no skin in this game, He is much ore objective than you. He can assess much better than you where kids are and should be.

The PP actually said they hadn't worked with good SH students because SH students weren't "ambitious" enough to hire tutors for enrichment. So... a few struggling SH students. And the DC CAPE data actually isn't anecdotal. If you want to check out SH's enrichments for yourself, I'd recommend the @stuarthobsonms, @stuarthobsondramaplayers, @shms_inst_mus, @shms6grade and @stuarthobsonms_athletics accounts as a good place to start.

You can’t do enrichment if you have not mastered the basics first. I think that is his point that the DCPS middle school kids in CH are not even getting the “foundational academics” to start with.

Yes, the PP has repeatedly asserted that despite the CAPE data that clearly demonstrates otherwise. The fact of the matter is that white kids at BASIS and Latin (the only two schools that poster speaks highly of) don't do any better than white kids at SH or Jefferson or EH on the standardized test that they all take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

The bolded above is exactly what happens at our DCPS middle school. My kid has a cool elective with other higher achieving kids and other kids have additional math or ELA courses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

So does Deal. In fact, my impression is that standardized tests are how DCPS tracks students as a general matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

So does Deal. In fact, my impression is that standardized tests are how DCPS tracks students as a general matter?

That's right. I think the DCI conversations get a little weird because virtually no family at DCI has experience with DCPS (since they all went into charter immersions feeders in ECE).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

So does Deal. In fact, my impression is that standardized tests are how DCPS tracks students as a general matter?

That's right. I think the DCI conversations get a little weird because virtually no family at DCI has experience with DCPS (since they all went into charter immersions feeders in ECE).

Yes, it's really odd. At least do a little research before you opine! DCPS definitely does track math in middle school, at least at some schools.

At ITDS, all 8th graders are in algebra (absent a compelling reason not to be) but Geometry placement is based on all available data. That means coursework, class tests, MAP, CAPE, summer school, everything. This probably wouldn't be doable for bigger schools but for a small student body it's manageable. DCI is definitely, definitely not the only middle school that uses testing in math placement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

So does Deal. In fact, my impression is that standardized tests are how DCPS tracks students as a general matter?

That's right. I think the DCI conversations get a little weird because virtually no family at DCI has experience with DCPS (since they all went into charter immersions feeders in ECE).

This whole conversation seems like a big cope for a DCI parent trying to justify to themselves that the years and years of ES and MS commutes were "worth it."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

So does Deal. In fact, my impression is that standardized tests are how DCPS tracks students as a general matter?

That's right. I think the DCI conversations get a little weird because virtually no family at DCI has experience with DCPS (since they all went into charter immersions feeders in ECE).

This whole conversation seems like a big cope for a DCI parent trying to justify to themselves that the years and years of ES and MS commutes were "worth it."

It's not a bad commute for everyone! More like convincing themselves that Mundo drama was worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again for those who missed it: Stuart-Hobson has nearly identical CAPE scores and other quantitative metrics to DCI.

DCI has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in math (60.9% to 57.2%). S-H has slightly more kids meeting or exceeding expectations in ELA (59.9% to 56.8%).

They have near identical chronic absentee rates (just under 20% for both). S-H has a better teacher retention rate (84% to 73%).

S-H is easier to get into OOB than DCI is to get into without coming from a feeder. However, it's not that hard to access a feeder for either school -- if you are willing to change schools in 3rd/4th/5th, both have feeders where you are very likely or guaranteed a spot via lottery.

The biggest advantage of DCI is the HS. For MS, there is no advantage unless the language component is very important to you. If your preferred HS is a private or application school anyway, there's no real difference.

There is a huge advantage to DCI over SH because DCI is able to meet the top students where they are and challenge them. Kids are not in classes with other kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels apart. They actually work to place kids by ability with most subjects, and the only middle school in this city that I know that uses standardized test scores as part of this placement in addition to grades and teachers recs.

So the lower performing kids are not in the same classes as the top performing kids. The top kids get more depth and challenge to meet them where they are. In addition, based on standardized test scores, the lower kids automatically get more classes in ELA, math etc.. instead of an elective so more support. It is not optional, they are placed in it.

This is how DCI is able to meet the needs of both the high and low performing students. In addition, they have high standards to be placed in the higher ability classes. For instance the highest track math class, the requirement is 90% or higher in math on standardized tests. So there are no kids in the class who should not be in it and the class can go deeper and be much more challenging. Not so with DCPS middle schools where OSSE doesn’t believe in tracking because of equity. BTW, DCI has multiple levels of math classes.

Also you should look at test scores more. I suspect lots of kids at SH are getting tutors to try to get the kids up to speed. It sounds like the tutor in this post has lots of these kids from DCPS middle schools in CH.

Lastly, the high school is even better because there are multiple official tracks for kids to actually pick where their interests lies. The school also realizes that not all kids are destined for college and has some vocational tracks that will give kids the skills they need to get jobs after high school.

This part is ironic, because SH uses standardized test scores to track students (as do EH and Jefferson per their open houses).

What standardized test?

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Can you please explain what positives you think I've "overstated"? I quoted direct CAPE data, which shows that non-at risk children there perform on par or better than alternative middle schools. I said there was a lot of free enrichment available at the school. I do actually agree with the PP that the school has excellent performing arts, though I didn't say that. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly disparaged SH across the board ("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") based on... anecdotal experience from a few kids you tutor? I genuinely think you should consider what your motives are here and why you think you know so much about multiple schools from a handful of struggling students (since in previous posts you also bashed EH, Jefferson and Truth).

NP. Your experience is anecdotal of one. The tutor does both enrichment and helps struggling students from many schools who has no skin in this game, He is much ore objective than you. He can assess much better than you where kids are and should be.

The PP actually said they hadn't worked with good SH students because SH students weren't "ambitious" enough to hire tutors for enrichment. So... a few struggling SH students. And the DC CAPE data actually isn't anecdotal. If you want to check out SH's enrichments for yourself, I'd recommend the @stuarthobsonms, @stuarthobsondramaplayers, @shms_inst_mus, @shms6grade and @stuarthobsonms_athletics accounts as a good place to start.

You can’t do enrichment if you have not mastered the basics first. I think that is his point that the DCPS middle school kids in CH are not even getting the “foundational academics” to start with.

Yes, the PP has repeatedly asserted that despite the CAPE data that clearly demonstrates otherwise. The fact of the matter is that white kids at BASIS and Latin (the only two schools that poster speaks highly of) don't do any better than white kids at SH or Jefferson or EH on the standardized test that they all take.

Not everyone thinks only white kids matter. Specifically, I said that I’m sure your privileged child will be fine regardless since you seem to have lots of daytime to post nonsense online. I am saying that people like you who can boost a school that clearly doesn’t meet the needs of its students are misrepresenting a school to less privileged children and their parents.

Your kid will be fine regardless and good for you. But lying about how “fantastic” Stuart is won’t change that it is objectively not a good school.