ludlow-taylor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DCPS has shown zero appetite for investigating extremely suspect testing gains and erasure rates. A push for a real investigation might be the fastest way to get LT a new principal.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-27-school-test-table_N.htm

DCPS can't help LT because they'd have to admit there was a cheating problem, which would make them look bad, which they want to avoid more than they want to help kids learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there really much difference in how the FARM kids are testing at the various Hill schools (excluding Amidon, unmitigated disaster)? What do the scores really tell us, other than than some schools have a lot more upper-middle-class kids and/or more poor kids in the upper elementary grades than others.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 1/3 - 1/2 the white kids score advanced in 3rd grade everywhere they land, right, but only a tiny fraction of the blacks (0-6%). The white kids do a bit better at Watkins, and the black kids at Brent, where a good number come from military families/Bollilng Air Force base. There haven't been any white kids testing yet at Payne, Miner, or Ludlow-Taylor and this is the first year that any will have taken the test at Tyler SI and Maury. Is that right?

The DC school profiles used to break the scores down to show exact numbers of test takers by grade and race, but seemed to have stopped doing that several months ago. Wonder why.

We are at Brent and while I don't know any AA military kids from Bolling or otherwise (but there could be some I guess), both my children have a number of black/AA/mixed race kids in their classes who are from high SES families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really much difference in how the FARM kids are testing at the various Hill schools (excluding Amidon, unmitigated disaster)? What do the scores really tell us, other than than some schools have a lot more upper-middle-class kids and/or more poor kids in the upper elementary grades than others.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 1/3 - 1/2 the white kids score advanced in 3rd grade everywhere they land, right, but only a tiny fraction of the blacks (0-6%). The white kids do a bit better at Watkins, and the black kids at Brent, where a good number come from military families/Bollilng Air Force base. There haven't been any white kids testing yet at Payne, Miner, or Ludlow-Taylor and this is the first year that any will have taken the test at Tyler SI and Maury. Is that right?

The DC school profiles used to break the scores down to show exact numbers of test takers by grade and race, but seemed to have stopped doing that several months ago. Wonder why.

We are at Brent and while I don't know any AA military kids from Bolling or otherwise (but there could be some I guess), both my children have a number of black/AA/mixed race kids in their classes who are from high SES families.

There is a bus that goes from Bolling to Brent. The kids on the bus are diverse.

[Anonymous]

So, long term options and making a difference in the school aside, does anyone consider this a good option for ps and pk? I like the neighborhood aspect and the art and music curriculum a lot. We have also been accepted into Apple Tree, but am thinking to stay at LT. Would this be a mistake?

[Anonymous]

Yes, I think it would be a mistake, but not a big one if you just want 2 or 3 years there for a little one. LT isn't a very happy school these days, with more than half of the middle class pres 3 families running to Peabody for ps4, a crumbling building, an embattled PTA, and a thriving culture of address cheaters. We're IB and avoiding it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, long term options and making a difference in the school aside, does anyone consider this a good option for ps and pk? I like the neighborhood aspect and the art and music curriculum a lot. We have also been accepted into Apple Tree, but am thinking to stay at LT. Would this be a mistake?

Can you observe at LT and Appletree preschool for a couple of hours? Appletree has a very academic curriculum - it's almost the BASIS for the preschool set. I know lots of people love it but its not for everyone. I actually think for a kid from a high poverty, uneduated family, it would be a no-brainer because that kid would need major academic reinforcement of Appletree. I don't know how much the DCPS preschool curriculum is consitent school-to-school, but I've had children at two different Hill DCPS schools for preschool and both were absolutely wonderful for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, long term options and making a difference in the school aside, does anyone consider this a good option for ps and pk? I like the neighborhood aspect and the art and music curriculum a lot. We have also been accepted into Apple Tree, but am thinking to stay at LT. Would this be a mistake?

The neighborhood aspect sounds of iffy value, depending on your family commute logisitcs, at a time most affluent IB families are bailing, or not getting involved, now that Peabody has a lot more room and the more upscale half of the LT district gets proximity preference.

If you're the sort of person who can resist the pressure to attend meetings and campaign to "turn the school around" you'll be OK. The pk teachers are fine, the curriculum is fun, and the prek and k classrooms are nicer than the rest. But the peer pressure won't necessarily be easy to resist, with a dozen gung ho PTA parents dying to see the next Maury emerge, giving neighborhood compatriots not-so-subtle guilt trips about involvement left and right. I didn't even enroll my kid and still get the guilt trips ("LT will only become a great school if all of us with young kids line up behind it! Write a grant proposal why don't you?").

[Anonymous]

I picture watching LT struggle mightily for at least another 5 years before the lack of broad-based IB enthusiasm relative to Maury gets DCPS to wake up and listen. But I don't see this as a forever situation - too many annoyed and alienated parents and too few zealous ones. As long as a Hill school can't get upper middle-class kids into the testing grades, it's long-term prospects probably aren't the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: But the peer pressure won't necessarily be easy to resist, with a dozen gung ho PTA parents dying to see the next Maury emerge, giving neighborhood compatriots not-so-subtle guilt trips about involvement left and right.

Hmm, interesting observation. Come to think of it, you are almost better off being OOB than IB at LT. We're leaving. It's become fashionable for those going to say "Oh, but really, we would have been fine with another year, or two, or more."

[Anonymous]

00:21 here, and yes we are going to take a look at apple tree next week. I have heard that they are very academic and am not sure thats whats best for my little one, but we will see. We have been to a site visit at LT and liked what we saw in the PS/PK classes. Either place would be a 2 year choice for us. Apple Tree b/c it doesn't offer more and LT because of reasons posted here.

[Anonymous]

I want to know just how much space everyone thinks Peabody has. The Cluster boundary lines are not just drawn around Stanton Park. Do not forget that there are many IB families (some with sibling preference) on the waitlist for Peabody PS3. Now, if all of the ones who don't get in at PS or PK wait it out and enroll for their guaranteed K slot, I am curious just where all these 5 year olds are going to fit in the Peabody building.

Then again, if you are like many of the IB families who have no intention of sending your little dears to Watkins, I guess you won't bother switching from whatever school you used for PS and PK, so I guess I may have answered my own question. . .

My point is, having looked into both schools and experienced the Cluster through elementary, L-T only seems 3-4 years behind Watkins and Peabody as it now stands.

[Anonymous]

My point is, having looked into both schools and experienced the Cluster through elementary, L-T only seems 3-4 years behind Watkins and Peabody as it now stands.

I used to think that, but LT isn't moving the way Watkins is, even in the lower elementary grades. Look at this year's 2nd grade, after around five years of waiting lists for prek (getting longer and longer), hardly a white kid, dare I mention it, there. We've been waiting for LT to "take off" for some time. Watkins seems to have real momentum by comparison, for accelerated learning, garden/kitchen, nice playground etc.. LT remains rundown and sluggish, with middle-class parents, IB and OOB, constantly looking for outs above prek. The principal is obviously a big part of the problem. If she goes, maybe the momentum will pick up, but I wouldn't count on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want to know just how much space everyone thinks Peabody has. The Cluster boundary lines are not just drawn around Stanton Park. Do not forget that there are many IB families (some with sibling preference) on the waitlist for Peabody PS3. Now, if all of the ones who don't get in at PS or PK wait it out and enroll for their guaranteed K slot, I am curious just where all these 5 year olds are going to fit in the Peabody building.

Then again, if you are like many of the IB families who have no intention of sending your little dears to Watkins, I guess you won't bother switching from whatever school you used for PS and PK, so I guess I may have answered my own question. . .

My point is, having looked into both schools and experienced the Cluster through elementary, L-T only seems 3-4 years behind Watkins and Peabody as it now stands.

Good q about the space, although the answer remains shrouded in mystery. All I know is that the LT IB families far fared better in getting kids into Peabody this spring than they have since 2009. And LT IB families don't just head to Peabody, they head to Maury and charters. Your 3-4 years behind theory may hold up, but I don't see the momentum for change.

[Anonymous]

IB parent here, going private from LT K. I would wager that LT WILL turn around, in around 10 years, once there's a critical mass of well-educated parents in DCPS and most of the address cheating facilitator grannies are out of the picture.

I'd bet money that nobody posting will get a kid beyond 3rd. Save your pennies for St. Peter, CHD, have lottery luck or go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want to know just how much space everyone thinks Peabody has. The Cluster boundary lines are not just drawn around Stanton Park. Do not forget that there are many IB families (some with sibling preference) on the waitlist for Peabody PS3. Now, if all of the ones who don't get in at PS or PK wait it out and enroll for their guaranteed K slot, I am curious just where all these 5 year olds are going to fit in the Peabody building.

Then again, if you are like many of the IB families who have no intention of sending your little dears to Watkins, I guess you won't bother switching from whatever school you used for PS and PK, so I guess I may have answered my own question. . .

My point is, having looked into both schools and experienced the Cluster through elementary, L-T only seems 3-4 years behind Watkins and Peabody as it now stands.

Good q about the space, although the answer remains shrouded in mystery. All I know is that the LT IB families far fared better in getting kids into Peabody this spring than they have since 2009. And LT IB families don't just head to Peabody, they head to Maury and charters. Your 3-4 years behind theory may hold up, but I don't see the momentum for change.

Next year Peabody will have 5 K classes, 4 PK, and 3 PK3. I believe PK3 will be entirely IB next year, but lots of OOB spots in K, fewer in PK4. And definitely spaces available in 1st at Watkins with SWS's departure. Kind of a one-off situation this year, though. It will be harder to lottery in after this.