Latin replication pulled from PCSB agenda

[Anonymous]

I know several families who left one of these schools. They may not be a great as the numbers suggest. There are other reasons people chose to leave. IJS

[Anonymous]

From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

The schools above don't have enough MS seats to meet demand.

I think the point is that students from really challenging circumstances can learn and achieve proficiency -- but it isn't easy. I think WL and all of the other so-called HRC's really need to be reaching out and learning what they are doing to get better outcomes.

[Anonymous]

The at-risk analysis presented at the PCSB meeting was for middle schools only. The data presented is below. The list is ordered by lowest % at-risk to highest %.

School | % at risk | 2018 Original PMF | At Risk only PMF | Delta At Risk to Original
Washington Latin MS 6% 72.2 39 -33.2
Basis MS 9% 70.8 31.8 -39
DCI 19% 68.1 46.9 -21.2
Capital City MS 31% 58 46.4 -11.6
DC Prep - Edgewood MS 34% 67.3 86.6 +19.3
Friendship Woodridge MS 39% 74.7 79 +4.3
KIPP WILL 39% 46.5 50.6 +4.1
EL Haynes MS 39% 52.3 48.1 -4.2
Paul PCS - MS 40% 34 32.6 -1.4
Howard Univ MS 45% 39.4 30.4 -9
DC Prep - Benning MS 46% 68 82.4 +14.4
KIPP KEY 48% 51.9 49 -2.9
KIPP NE 48% 59.3 58.4 -0.9
Cesar Chavez Prep 49% 46.8 46.4 -0.4
KIPP AIM 54% 56.3 47.5 -8.8
KIPP Valor 55% 56 58.7 +2.7
Washington Global 56% 37.8 30.8 -7
Friendship Chamberlain 58% 61.9 63.8 +1.9
Achievement Prep MS 60% 37 41.7 +4.7
SEED PCS 63% 37.2 29.9 -7.3
Friendship Tech Prep MS 67% 44 40.8 -3.2
Somerset Prep 67% 30.8 27.9 -2.9
Cesar Chavez Parkside MS 70% 35.2 36.8 +1.6
Friendship Blow Pierce MS 71% 56.4 72.1 +15.7

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

The schools above don't have enough MS seats to meet demand.

I think the point is that students from really challenging circumstances can learn and achieve proficiency -- but it isn't easy. I think WL and all of the other so-called HRC's really need to be reaching out and learning what they are doing to get better outcomes.

This is not true - most of these schools have available MS seats, at least at their entry years (which often are the only years they accept new students).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

The schools above don't have enough MS seats to meet demand.

I think the point is that students from really challenging circumstances can learn and achieve proficiency -- but it isn't easy. I think WL and all of the other so-called HRC's really need to be reaching out and learning what they are doing to get better outcomes.

This is not true - most of these schools have available MS seats, at least at their entry years (which often are the only years they accept new students).

I just checked the My School DC website and don't see any seats at these schools for middle grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The at-risk analysis presented at the PCSB meeting was for middle schools only. The data presented is below. The list is ordered by lowest % at-risk to highest %.

School | % at risk | 2018 Original PMF | At Risk only PMF | Delta At Risk to Original
Washington Latin MS 6% 72.2 39 -33.2
Basis MS 9% 70.8 31.8 -39
DCI 19% 68.1 46.9 -21.2
Capital City MS 31% 58 46.4 -11.6
DC Prep - Edgewood MS 34% 67.3 86.6 +19.3
Friendship Woodridge MS 39% 74.7 79 +4.3
KIPP WILL 39% 46.5 50.6 +4.1
EL Haynes MS 39% 52.3 48.1 -4.2
Paul PCS - MS 40% 34 32.6 -1.4
Howard Univ MS 45% 39.4 30.4 -9
DC Prep - Benning MS 46% 68 82.4 +14.4
KIPP KEY 48% 51.9 49 -2.9
KIPP NE 48% 59.3 58.4 -0.9
Cesar Chavez Prep 49% 46.8 46.4 -0.4
KIPP AIM 54% 56.3 47.5 -8.8
KIPP Valor 55% 56 58.7 +2.7
Washington Global 56% 37.8 30.8 -7
Friendship Chamberlain 58% 61.9 63.8 +1.9
Achievement Prep MS 60% 37 41.7 +4.7
SEED PCS 63% 37.2 29.9 -7.3
Friendship Tech Prep MS 67% 44 40.8 -3.2
Somerset Prep 67% 30.8 27.9 -2.9
Cesar Chavez Parkside MS 70% 35.2 36.8 +1.6
Friendship Blow Pierce MS 71% 56.4 72.1 +15.7

This is really interesting, thanks for posting. Looks like we need to bottle what DC Prep is doing and distribute it to all schools.

[Anonymous]

That's because the entry year is 4th grade for most of them - several clear their waiting list in 4th (or sometimes 5th) grade and then have WL for older grades. But that is not a lack of demand, exactly, it's the school using a BASIS or Latin-like model to limit admission to certain entry grades.

At least 3 of the Friendship schools already cleared their WL for 4th and 5th grades this year. DC Prep Benning and Edgewood cleared their lists for 4th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's because the entry year is 4th grade for most of them - several clear their waiting list in 4th (or sometimes 5th) grade and then have WL for older grades. But that is not a lack of demand, exactly, it's the school using a BASIS or Latin-like model to limit admission to certain entry grades.

At least 3 of the Friendship schools already cleared their WL for 4th and 5th grades this year. DC Prep Benning and Edgewood cleared their lists for 4th.

They can't accommodate the 90 students that WL is hoping to enroll in its new campus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

The schools above don't have enough MS seats to meet demand.

I think the point is that students from really challenging circumstances can learn and achieve proficiency -- but it isn't easy. I think WL and all of the other so-called HRC's really need to be reaching out and learning what they are doing to get better outcomes.

What if they are "teaching to the test"? "Drill n kill"? Is that what WL should learn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

The schools above don't have enough MS seats to meet demand.

I think the point is that students from really challenging circumstances can learn and achieve proficiency -- but it isn't easy. I think WL and all of the other so-called HRC's really need to be reaching out and learning what they are doing to get better outcomes.

What if they are "teaching to the test"? "Drill n kill"? Is that what WL should learn?

Stop being ridiculous. Here's the thing -- WL works for many kids. The other schools work for many kids. The focus shouldn't be on pitting school against school and trying to prove what's best. The focus should be on making sure the measuring tool fairly shows that both WL and other schools are working for kids.

The reason there are charters is to give families quality options. For some families WL is the best option, for others it might be another school. Rather than tearing down some schools, how about we all come together and get the charter board to fix the flaws in the PMF so that schools that serve more at-risk kids have a chance to show up as well as those that don't?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the list above, WL doesn’t need to expand to “underserved” parts of the city because they are being served so well already. Which is it?

The schools above don't have enough MS seats to meet demand.

I think the point is that students from really challenging circumstances can learn and achieve proficiency -- but it isn't easy. I think WL and all of the other so-called HRC's really need to be reaching out and learning what they are doing to get better outcomes.

What if they are "teaching to the test"? "Drill n kill"? Is that what WL should learn?

And what if they are providing some innovative wrap around services? Support to families so students come to school more able to focus on schoolwork? A particular tutoring or tracking approach so no one falls through the cracks?

You don’t know what they’re doing and neither do I. And I bet WL doesn’t either.

[Anonymous]

Schools should not be in the business of providing wrap around services for families. School counseling, yes, but these counselors can provide only so much support. It is very difficult for most school districts, including MoCo, to provide the kind of extensive support at risk students need. Should Latin make changes that would help at risk kids? Sure. But it doesn't have the staff and resources to provide wrap around services to families.

Latin has all kids do the same level of work in MS, which could be a problem for kids who are already behind. Maybe they could do a better job of offering remedial instruction to kids who need it. At schools with a larger at risk population, it is easier to target the needs of kids who are behind (assuming all at risk kids are behind which I know is not the case)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Schools should not be in the business of providing wrap around services for families. School counseling, yes, but these counselors can provide only so much support. It is very difficult for most school districts, including MoCo, to provide the kind of extensive support at risk students need. Should Latin make changes that would help at risk kids? Sure. But it doesn't have the staff and resources to provide wrap around services to families.

Latin has all kids do the same level of work in MS, which could be a problem for kids who are already behind. Maybe they could do a better job of offering remedial instruction to kids who need it. At schools with a larger at risk population, it is easier to target the needs of kids who are behind (assuming all at risk kids are behind which I know is not the case)

Well schools are providing wrap around services to families and there is evidence it can help outcomes.

That may well not be what’s needed to WL. But to assume that ‘drill and kill’ is the only way at-risk kids achieve is ignorant.

As for changes that only help one group of students ... do you also think that providing support services and specialized instruction to kids with disabilities is unfair since it only helps one group?

It really isn’t any different. A good school needs to meet everyone where they are help them learn.

Or - they could stop taking tax dollars and convert to a private school. The current charter is up for renewal in 2020-21.

[Anonymous]

What are the teacher demographics at WL? Are there roughly the same numbers of teachers of color as the student population?