Latin v. BASIS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But by enlarge they're all trying to be everything to everybody (just look at the Basis' marketing for example). We only need to look around us to see where that's headed, namely for all of them to be average. For analogies, think about your phone company, internet service providers, cable TV, your grocery stores, your department store, your online suppliers etc.
With few exceptions, the only way they can claim to do better is by "adverse selection"; in plain terms, by helping those somehow performing better self-select out of the rest of the lot. So be it, you may say. But there is actually no added benefit to the individual child, it's just a statistical artifact. In other words, one and the same kid may not do any better here or there, they just sort themselves out into different pockets, which we then equate with "better school".

No, by and large, they are specializing their programs and succeeding beyond what DCPS can do. You have this completely ass-backwards.

Sounds like someone hit a nerve. There is some truth to this if you look beyond the facade and beyond the realm of specials. Completely anecdotal and randomly picking out an example from your list: My child brings home the same math worksheets from the neighborhood school as the neighbor who goes to Two Rivers with an emphasis on "expeditionary learning". So maybe when we unpack what's happening in classrooms on core subjects, it's really not all that different. Just more options of the same thing, with few laudable exceptions.

I don't know anything about expeditionary learning, but it sounds like all that means is that they're using the same math curriculum, probably Everyday Math (KIPP uses Singapore Math, btw which is far superior, but you won't find that in DCPS). In any event that hardly covers the rest of the program, unless all your child does is math worksheets.

Mine brings home Chinese books, btw. I'm relatively confident that's not available at our neighborhood DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But by enlarge they're all trying to be everything to everybody (just look at the Basis' marketing for example). We only need to look around us to see where that's headed, namely for all of them to be average. For analogies, think about your phone company, internet service providers, cable TV, your grocery stores, your department store, your online suppliers etc.
With few exceptions, the only way they can claim to do better is by "adverse selection"; in plain terms, by helping those somehow performing better self-select out of the rest of the lot. So be it, you may say. But there is actually no added benefit to the individual child, it's just a statistical artifact. In other words, one and the same kid may not do any better here or there, they just sort themselves out into different pockets, which we then equate with "better school".

No, by and large, they are specializing their programs and succeeding beyond what DCPS can do. You have this completely ass-backwards.

Sounds like someone hit a nerve. There is some truth to this if you look beyond the facade and beyond the realm of specials. Completely anecdotal and randomly picking out an example from your list: My child brings home the same math worksheets from the neighborhood school as the neighbor who goes to Two Rivers with an emphasis on "expeditionary learning". So maybe when we unpack what's happening in classrooms on core subjects, it's really not all that different. Just more options of the same thing, with few laudable exceptions.

Lets try that again with the correct formatting:

I don't know anything about expeditionary learning, but it sounds like all that means is that they're using the same math curriculum, probably Everyday Math (KIPP uses Singapore Math, btw which is far superior, but you won't find that in DCPS). In any event that hardly covers the rest of the program, unless all your child does is math worksheets.

Mine brings home Chinese books, btw. I'm relatively confident that's not available at our neighborhood DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: -- and the involuntary displacement has been going on for as long as there have been people struggling to make their rent. --

Right -- and this is not what could be called "a rising tide lifts all boats."

Go out and gentrify, but don't try to turn it into a benefit for the people who don't fit and can't afford the new lifestyle.

Don't romanticize the idea that concentrations of poverty are acceptable.

This x1,000,000.

The level of involuntary displacement is exactly the same, with or without "gentrification". The difference is that those who stay benefit from a huge increase in quality of life.

I'm curious: if we were talking about a return of black middle-class professionals to these neighborhoods, would we hear even a peep of protest? No. There's very little evidence that gentrification makes things worse, and some evidence that it makes things better for folks who remain. What seems to upset some people is that gentrification does not fix every existing social ill.

[Anonymous]

Many people assume that poor people "naturally" live in poor neighborhoods, and that anti-poverty programs — like emergency food banks, job training centers, and affordable housing — should be concentrated there as well. But in fact, the vast majority of the Washington region's poor people live in non-poor neighborhoods. They may need information and assistance finding the support services they need, especially if they live in car-dependent suburban communities or if they don't understand English well. But poor families generally benefit from living in well-off neighborhoods where streets and parks are safe, grocery stores sell healthy, affordable food, and the public schools perform well.
High-poverty neighborhoods — like those east of the Anacostia River in D.C. — didn't occur "naturally" nor do they reflect the "choices" of poor families about where to live. Instead, these places represent the legacy of decades of racial discrimination, legally sanctioned segregation, and public housing policies. And our map shows just how stubborn this legacy is; despite dramatic demographic and economic changes sweeping the Washington region over the past two decades, poor black families have remained highly concentrated in D.C. neighborhoods east of the Anacostia River.
Tackling poverty in the Washington region poses multiple challenges for area policymakers. It's not just a city problem; suburban communities need to deliver support and opportunity too. It's not just a neighborhood revitalization problem, although overcoming the legacy of segregation in the District's poorest neighborhoods is critical. It's not just an English-speaking problem; communities across the region have to reach out to a growing population of immigrants, many of whom speak little English. And it's not somebody else's problem; explore our map and you'll likely see that poor people are among your neighbors.

http://dcist.com/2012/02/where_poverty_lived_then_and_lives.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious: if we were talking about a return of black middle-class professionals to these neighborhoods, would we hear even a peep of protest? No. There's very little evidence that gentrification makes things worse, and some evidence that it makes things better for folks who remain. What seems to upset some people is that gentrification does not fix every existing social ill.

I thought part of the gentrification was the black middle class - not necessarily returning to DC, but coming here for the first time -- just like a lot of the young white people coming here after college or grad school for their first job -- and remaining in the city, instead of moving to the suburbs, when they marry and have children.

I agree - gentrification is better for the lower-income people who stay, but not all of them can stay. Be definition, the most of them must go -- somewhere -- in order for the gentrifiers to be in the majority.

Their life could get better, perhaps, if specific efforts were made to help them -- with or without gentrification. But such efforts have not been made. wishing it doesn't make it so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But by enlarge they're all trying to be everything to everybody (just look at the Basis' marketing for example). We only need to look around us to see where that's headed, namely for all of them to be average. For analogies, think about your phone company, internet service providers, cable TV, your grocery stores, your department store, your online suppliers etc.
With few exceptions, the only way they can claim to do better is by "adverse selection"; in plain terms, by helping those somehow performing better self-select out of the rest of the lot. So be it, you may say. But there is actually no added benefit to the individual child, it's just a statistical artifact. In other words, one and the same kid may not do any better here or there, they just sort themselves out into different pockets, which we then equate with "better school".

No, by and large, they are specializing their programs and succeeding beyond what DCPS can do. You have this completely ass-backwards.

Sounds like someone hit a nerve. There is some truth to this if you look beyond the facade and beyond the realm of specials. Completely anecdotal and randomly picking out an example from your list: My child brings home the same math worksheets from the neighborhood school as the neighbor who goes to Two Rivers with an emphasis on "expeditionary learning". So maybe when we unpack what's happening in classrooms on core subjects, it's really not all that different. Just more options of the same thing, with few laudable exceptions.

Lets try that again with the correct formatting:

I don't know anything about expeditionary learning, but it sounds like all that means is that they're using the same math curriculum, probably Everyday Math (KIPP uses Singapore Math, btw which is far superior, but you won't find that in DCPS). In any event that hardly covers the rest of the program, unless all your child does is math worksheets.

Mine brings home Chinese books, btw. I'm relatively confident that's not available at our neighborhood DCPS.

In the past five months, my fifth grader has started Latin, learned about world geography and distant cultures, read contemporary fiction, begun the study of drama, learned some physics and is now moving on to biology, and studied seventh grade math using Saxon. I think that very little of this material would have been available to her at our DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But by enlarge they're all trying to be everything to everybody (just look at the Basis' marketing for example). We only need to look around us to see where that's headed, namely for all of them to be average. For analogies, think about your phone company, internet service providers, cable TV, your grocery stores, your department store, your online suppliers etc.
With few exceptions, the only way they can claim to do better is by "adverse selection"; in plain terms, by helping those somehow performing better self-select out of the rest of the lot. So be it, you may say. But there is actually no added benefit to the individual child, it's just a statistical artifact. In other words, one and the same kid may not do any better here or there, they just sort themselves out into different pockets, which we then equate with "better school".

No, by and large, they are specializing their programs and succeeding beyond what DCPS can do. You have this completely ass-backwards.

Sounds like someone hit a nerve. There is some truth to this if you look beyond the facade and beyond the realm of specials. Completely anecdotal and randomly picking out an example from your list: My child brings home the same math worksheets from the neighborhood school as the neighbor who goes to Two Rivers with an emphasis on "expeditionary learning". So maybe when we unpack what's happening in classrooms on core subjects, it's really not all that different. Just more options of the same thing, with few laudable exceptions.

Lets try that again with the correct formatting:

I don't know anything about expeditionary learning, but it sounds like all that means is that they're using the same math curriculum, probably Everyday Math (KIPP uses Singapore Math, btw which is far superior, but you won't find that in DCPS). In any event that hardly covers the rest of the program, unless all your child does is math worksheets.

Mine brings home Chinese books, btw. I'm relatively confident that's not available at our neighborhood DCPS.

In the past five months, my fifth grader has started Latin, learned about world geography and distant cultures, read contemporary fiction, begun the study of drama, learned some physics and is now moving on to biology, and studied seventh grade math using Saxon. I think that very little of this material would have been available to her at our DCPS.

Safe assumption. I'd bet on that.

[Anonymous]

I have a kid in 5th grade at Latin and also get the chance to observe at close range the 5th grade at our local well-regarded DCPS elementary school. There is no comparison. They are two entirely different educational experiences that has nothing to do with the kids in the seats and has everything to do with the teachers, the leadership and the curriculum. There is no way DCPS is even coming close to what Latin is offering. At least if we take DEal out of the picture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I agree - gentrification is better for the lower-income people who stay, but not all of them can stay. Be definition, the most of them must go -- somewhere -- in order for the gentrifiers to be in the majority.

Right, but the point is the lower-income folks who can't stay were largely transient to begin with. They lost their homes before, but were "replaced" by residents of a similar socioeconomic class. Now they're "displaced" by people who are different.

Their life could get better, perhaps, if specific efforts were made to help them -- with or without gentrification. But such efforts have not been made. wishing it doesn't make it so.

DC does a whole Hell of a lot to provide subsidized housing to the region's poor. Your argument that "such efforts have not been made" has no basis in fact whatsoever. Some might wish--in addition to doing more per capita than any other area municipality--that DC did even more to provide subsidies to the region's poor, but that's a different argument.

The argument that can be made is that DC's supply of subsidies doesn't keep up for demand for subsidies, but that's largely because DC has been the de facto reservoir for poverty in the DC/MD/VA region. That massive concentration of poverty is a symptom of a century of racist policies, and exists to this day. The answer to the question is either a) a complete transformation of federal anti-poverty policy; or b) policies which favor new middle-class residents, and subsidies that poor residents can use to pay for cheaper housing throughout the region.

[Anonymous]

Latin for sure. I heard at least for a middle school they have done excellent job. Some kids leave after 8th grade and where they have been accepted is amazing to say the least. It is a school with solid record. Basis could be a great school, but again who knows. What works in AR might not work in DC. Latin it is!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Latin for sure. I heard at least for a middle school they have done excellent job. Some kids leave after 8th grade and where they have been accepted is amazing to say the least. It is a school with solid record. Basis could be a great school, but again who knows. What works in AR might not work in DC. Latin it is!

ITA. I live relatively close to BASIS (Capitol Hill), but am choosing Latin for my child. Latin has a solid program and I like its philosphy. I do wish BASIS well and hope it succeeds. DC has room for many more good middle and high schools. I think parents who send their children to either school will be making a good choice.

I also think it sad that DCPS cannot do better for my neighborhood. In my neighborhood, I am inbounds for Dunbar on the map, although given my middle school is Stuart Hobson it would feed to Eastern. I don't want my child to attend either of those schools as they are now (and am not optimistic about their improvement by the time my child reaches 9th grade). So, what are my options? Wilson = no OOBs this year. SWW had 1000 applicants for 130 slots (Is my child smart enough to get in???)? Even if I thought S-H was a good fit, it does not make sense for me to choose it given our poor options for HS. So, I think we will continue seeing lots of kids from the hill heading to charters like Basis and Latin. Good for those schools, but it does nothing to strengthen our neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

This film is not just about DC but I think he makes some compelling points about what's happening to local public schools in urban centers in our country. Some reasons why we all should be going to our local public schools.

For those posting about how by their child going to a charter they are freeing up OOB spots for other kids....can't we see this is not about that! This is about making the neighborhood school THE good school to go to. If you live in a certain neighborhood not in Upper NW you should be able to expect a great school as well. But why are they not great? Because there are not enough of "us" in those schools helping to make it great.

http://wearemany.org/v/still-separate-still-unequal-racism-class-and-attack-on-public-education#.Tz2_nlp2q7U.twitter

It's not just about YOUR child. It's about all children.

[Anonymous]

So, I assume you send YOUR child to your neighborhood middle/high school ? Which one is that? If you actually do, I guarantee it is Stuart Hobson, Deal or Hardy.

[Anonymous]

so smug aren't you? No we're not at SH, D or H but you all don't seem to think that folks who care actually consider other schools that might be within walking distance to them. Jefferson for us. But thanks for asking.

[Anonymous]

and we're not all white!