Can anyone tell me the story of Stuart-Hobson?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

And now that the common lottery is being enforced and SWS can't cherry pick the yoga=pants wearing mafia, watch how the demographics of that school start to change to reflect what a city-wide ES should look like.

do you actually get out and meet any other parents on the Hill? This is such a stupid swing and a miss it's laughable.

It is a citywide school. Unless it was gaming the system it should not have looked like the immediate neighborhood. It should have looked like HRCS on or near the Hill. But thanks for making my point for me.

you're wrong and off topic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

And now that the common lottery is being enforced and SWS can't cherry pick the yoga=pants wearing mafia, watch how the demographics of that school start to change to reflect what a city-wide ES should look like.

do you actually get out and meet any other parents on the Hill? This is such a stupid swing and a miss it's laughable.

This person does not live on the Hill. My guess: OOB or IB for JO and doesn’t want JO kicked out of the SH feed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ NP.

Just FYI -- there are lots of students at both BASIS and Latin who do NOT live on the Hill (see page 21 and 124). You can't prove what you are trying to with these stats.

https://dcpcsb.egnyte.com/dl/wz03B5UHgG

THIS. If Hill children went to Hill elementary schools that fed into one middle school, we would have another JKLM/Deal set of schools in this city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ NP.

Just FYI -- there are lots of students at both BASIS and Latin who do NOT live on the Hill (see page 21 and 124). You can't prove what you are trying to with these stats.

https://dcpcsb.egnyte.com/dl/wz03B5UHgG

THIS. If Hill children went to Hill elementary schools that fed into one middle school, we would have another JKLM/Deal set of schools in this city.

And if I win Powerball I can retire and move away.

There is no plan for one MS. Give it up already and work with the constraints you face — unless plan on having your first kid in ten years when things may be different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

WTF do you mean "take off"???? Their scores are better than Brent's. LT re-enrolling rates are way up. The wait lists for LT show only IB this year and likely last, with a smattering the year before. Those kids are staying. Data doesn't lie. And IB is a function of the entire population, so IB percentages don't move quickly; they crawl as IB kids rise. Also, not sure where the principal garbage is coming from. LT enrollment is up, retention rates are up and scores are up, notwithstanding your noise about principals. And you clearly do not understand how a Title 1 designation is made. There's no sliding scale; it is either Title 1 or not. And, btw, schools on the cusp prefer to remain Title 1 because it dramatically increases funding.

What is so infuriating about "you people" is that you make statements that do not comport with facts in evidence and are just so smug in your knowledge of those non-facts.

You're not really asking the questions. You're looking for reasons to beat up on PPs who tout true neighborhood schools. Go away. Yes, LT is improving now that it's finally got a good principal, but, no, it's not a true neighborhood school, not yet.

I used to work at the US Dept. of Ed and know all about how Title 1 schools are designated.

Remaining Title 1 is a double-edged sword. Yes, the loss of funding hurts, but if Maury and Brent are any example, as long as a PTA offers strong leadership, works well with a principal, and moves boldly to develop robust fundraising capacity, the influx of high SES parents willing to donate to school coffers offsets the loss (around 100K annually) within a year or two. Then the sky's the limit on the fundraising front. Maury is raising more than double what it lost when it came off Title 1 status several years ago, and Brent four times that sum. Most of the funds raised pay for teachers aides at both schools, as in JKLM, which really helps all the kids. Once LT can afford to hire its own aides, neighborhood buy-in will take off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

WTF do you mean "take off"???? Their scores are better than Brent's. LT re-enrolling rates are way up. The wait lists for LT show only IB this year and likely last, with a smattering the year before. Those kids are staying. Data doesn't lie. And IB is a function of the entire population, so IB percentages don't move quickly; they crawl as IB kids rise. Also, not sure where the principal garbage is coming from. LT enrollment is up, retention rates are up and scores are up, notwithstanding your noise about principals. And you clearly do not understand how a Title 1 designation is made. There's no sliding scale; it is either Title 1 or not. And, btw, schools on the cusp prefer to remain Title 1 because it dramatically increases funding.

What is so infuriating about "you people" is that you make statements that do not comport with facts in evidence and are just so smug in your knowledge of those non-facts.

You're not really asking the questions. You're looking for reasons to beat up on PPs who tout true neighborhood schools. Go away. Yes, LT is improving now that it's finally got a good principal, but, no, it's not a true neighborhood school, not yet.

I used to work at the US Dept. of Ed and know all about how Title 1 schools are designated.

Remaining Title 1 is a double-edged sword. Yes, the loss of funding hurts, but if Maury and Brent are any example, as long as a PTA offers strong leadership, works well with a principal, and moves boldly to develop robust fundraising capacity, the influx of high SES parents willing to donate to school coffers offsets the loss (around 100K annually) within a year or two. Then the sky's the limit on the fundraising front. Maury is raising more than double what it lost when it came off Title 1 status several years ago, and Brent four times that sum. Most of the funds raised pay for teachers aides at both schools, as in JKLM, which really helps all the kids. Once LT can afford to hire its own aides, neighborhood buy-in will take off.

Do you understand how ignorant you sound? So a principal showed up and magically the cohort of kids in 3rd, 4th and 5th improved. Wow, that's some excellent principal! You are the picture of exactly what I would expect from a USDoE employee. No functional understanding of how local schools operate and kids are educated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

And now that the common lottery is being enforced and SWS can't cherry pick the yoga=pants wearing mafia, watch how the demographics of that school start to change to reflect what a city-wide ES should look like.

do you actually get out and meet any other parents on the Hill? This is such a stupid swing and a miss it's laughable.

This person does not live on the Hill. My guess: OOB or IB for JO and doesn’t want JO kicked out of the SH feed.

A lot to unpack there. Let's start with your assessment that the Hill doesn't include JO. And H street is dangerous and blah blah blah. Go back to the 90s or oughts. But the idea that JO would be "kicked out" is beyond laughable. You Brent and Maury families are HILARIOUS. Still holding out hope that what was "taken away from you" will be returned. Other than your yoga class and girlfriends at SWS and Brent pickup, no credible person has ever floated that idea. If that gets you through the night then so be it. But those parents have an improving MS option. You just have simmering anger and a sense that something that was "yours" was taken away. I'm not sure how that's going to educate your kids, but good luck to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

And now that the common lottery is being enforced and SWS can't cherry pick the yoga=pants wearing mafia, watch how the demographics of that school start to change to reflect what a city-wide ES should look like.

do you actually get out and meet any other parents on the Hill? This is such a stupid swing and a miss it's laughable.

This person does not live on the Hill. My guess: OOB or IB for JO and doesn’t want JO kicked out of the SH feed.

My daughter attends SWS and we live IB for JO. I guess I know how you all feel about me and my family. So much for the warm embrace of SWS. Why don't you sign your post so that everyone in your kid's class can see how you really feel. If you are so sure of your superiority and that the SWS community feels the same way then put your name on it.I cannot imagine how you feel about the kids who don't even live in Ward 6.

[Anonymous]

What a mean-spirited and useless thread this has become.

I've been very active in a DCPS Hill ES PTA for a decade now. I stop by DCUM once in a while and can't remember a nastier and more pointless Hill-related "discussion."

So glad we're in a position to go parochial for MS. I'm fed up with the phenomenon of Hill PTA leaders supporting myopic DCPS decisions where making by-right schools work well for all in-boundary comers goes, with endless rounds of bullying, name-calling, shaming and arm-twisting of neighborhood parents in the mix. Parents and school system leaders are still pulling in different directions after all these years, especially on the neighborhood MS improvement front. There lies the mediocrity of most of the outputs, and future outputs. The ugly dynamic is a recipe for terrible inefficiency in the face of increasingly favorable local demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

And now that the common lottery is being enforced and SWS can't cherry pick the yoga=pants wearing mafia, watch how the demographics of that school start to change to reflect what a city-wide ES should look like.

do you actually get out and meet any other parents on the Hill? This is such a stupid swing and a miss it's laughable.

This person does not live on the Hill. My guess: OOB or IB for JO and doesn’t want JO kicked out of the SH feed.

A lot to unpack there. Let's start with your assessment that the Hill doesn't include JO. And H street is dangerous and blah blah blah. Go back to the 90s or oughts. But the idea that JO would be "kicked out" is beyond laughable. You Brent and Maury families are HILARIOUS. Still holding out hope that what was "taken away from you" will be returned. Other than your yoga class and girlfriends at SWS and Brent pickup, no credible person has ever floated that idea. If that gets you through the night then so be it. But those parents have an improving MS option. You just have simmering anger and a sense that something that was "yours" was taken away. I'm not sure how that's going to educate your kids, but good luck to you.

Are you seriously arguing that north of H Street is the Hill?

I am IB for Watkins. Nice try.

[Anonymous]

The Hill has no accepted boundaries, or certainly none that make sense for school zones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Hill has no accepted boundaries, or certainly none that make sense for school zones.

Yes, the entire city is the Hill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

a few, yes, but "many" is BS?

Pp here and I stand by my assertion that SWS was a great place to put your 4-5 year olds before going private in the late 1990s, early 2000s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hill has no accepted boundaries, or certainly none that make sense for school zones.

Yes, the entire city is the Hill.

Go the RE forum, and discuss where retail is on the Hill. H Street NE will be mentioned by Hill defenders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting because the quotes got messed up:


The fact that people who live OOB for Watkins and LT (both of those schools have a majority OOB population) are choosing to attend SH is meaningless. They are doing that because their options are WORSE. What people on the Hill want is strong elementary schools and a strong middle school. They don’t have that, so they are voting with their feet. You seem to think that because there are worse DCPS schools that people are fleeing to fill Hill ES and SH, that somehow negates the fact that people who actually live IB for these schools don’t attend. It does not.

+1. We left Watkins because it's too crazy, and we're IB. It's no neighborhood school.

How do you think schools get to be IB? Overnight? Do you think Maury was always IB? Can we also address the irony that you pulled your kid out of your IB school because it was too crazy....and since you presumably didn't pull them out of school entirely, now they are not IB kids at their current school? Does your kid pull down the scores and quality of the education? Or is that just other OOB kids?

Some of the frustration expressed here emanates from the snail's pace of change at LT and SH in the last decade. I've lived IB for both for over 15 years.

Positive change hasn't even been slow but steady. SH saw a big drop in IB enrollment when many new charters were opening, and after Watkins lost Cap Hill Montessori and SWS in a two-year period, taking 7 or 8 years to recover. LT had the same problem during the Cobbs years.

Meanwhile, we've watched Maury go from around 1/4 IB/high SES to nearly 2/3 in just five years, and Brent do the same in under a decade. For its part, LT is on it's third principal in five years and stubbornly remains a Title 1 school. Parents get fed up waiting around for both LT and SH to take off despite the local buzz about impressive test scores, teaching, facility upgrades etc.

ice story, but SWS never fed SH and it topped out at K at the time. Its first graduating class last year did in fact send a cohort to SH, including mostly families who didn't jump to charters for 5th. CHML was and is a small drop in the bucket in terms of enrollment. The impact on SH was negligible.

And if you weighted LT scores against Brent or Maury to factor both economic diversity of its students LT would blow the doors off both of them.

SWS was in the cluster, had the same inbounds as Peabody/Watkins, and fed to Watkins and Stuart Hobson. It never fed to SH when it was a standalone school, it did when it was one of three pre-school options in the Cluster.

Yes, and many of the families would go private after SWS. The ones who went on to Watkins would jump ship before SH. Small percentages of SWS Kindergarden graduates ever matriculated from SH. Yes a few, but only a few. SWS has never been a big part of SH.

a few, yes, but "many" is BS?

Pp here and I stand by my assertion that SWS was a great place to put your 4-5 year olds before going private in the late 1990s, early 2000s

Are you considering it for your grandchildren?