Coffee in Lincoln Park with David Catania

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh for goodness sake. Who mentioned SES? Trying to find a way to concentrate well -prepared students in one middle school is not offensive. It is smart. Hopefully Ludlow Taylor, Payne, JO Wilson and Tyler would also be feeding there. Think outside your box please

So by "concentrat(ing) well prepared students in one middle school" you are doing what then? Leaving all the rest of the kids to languish in their crappy schools? Is that the point?

And you don't need to mention SES. I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here.

Just to add if it's just about "well prepared" students, then why add SWS? What measure is she using to be so sure they are "well prepared"? Are the kids there even old enough to have been taking the DC CAS yet?

So please, give me a break.

SWS demographics are virtually identical to Brent and its been sucessful while only entering mandatory test grade 3 this year. If we based success solely on DC CAS then Ludlow Taylor is among the best elementary on the Hill. That's a separate debate, but many others would disagree with that conclusion.

So on what are you basing your assertion that SWS is a successful school? On what you basing your assertion that LT is not a successful school?

if you go by DC CAS scores alone you are missing most of the picture. The fact that SWS hasn't taken thetest doesn't validate or disprove anything. If you knew the faculty, staff, students and school community well you'd understand why it's lumped with the other successful Hill ES. I'm not biting on your weak bait, but if I was making the proposal Elissa Silverman did I would have included LT along with the others. I also don't think her proposal will ever go anywhere even if she gains office.

So in other words, you don't have criteria for "successful" schools. Just that you "know the community." Interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh for goodness sake. Who mentioned SES? Trying to find a way to concentrate well -prepared students in one middle school is not offensive. It is smart. Hopefully Ludlow Taylor, Payne, JO Wilson and Tyler would also be feeding there. Think outside your box please

So by "concentrat(ing) well prepared students in one middle school" you are doing what then? Leaving all the rest of the kids to languish in their crappy schools? Is that the point?

And you don't need to mention SES. I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here.

Just to add if it's just about "well prepared" students, then why add SWS? What measure is she using to be so sure they are "well prepared"? Are the kids there even old enough to have been taking the DC CAS yet?

So please, give me a break.

SWS demographics are virtually identical to Brent and its been sucessful while only entering mandatory test grade 3 this year. If we based success solely on DC CAS then Ludlow Taylor is among the best elementary on the Hill. That's a separate debate, but many others would disagree with that conclusion.

So on what are you basing your assertion that SWS is a successful school? On what you basing your assertion that LT is not a successful school?

if you go by DC CAS scores alone you are missing most of the picture. The fact that SWS hasn't taken thetest doesn't validate or disprove anything. If you knew the faculty, staff, students and school community well you'd understand why it's lumped with the other successful Hill ES. I'm not biting on your weak bait, but if I was making the proposal Elissa Silverman did I would have included LT along with the others. I also don't think her proposal will ever go anywhere even if she gains office.

So in other words, you don't have criteria for "successful" schools. Just that you "know the community." Interesting.

It seems some people in our midst prefer to bicker and impune their neighbors than to open wide the discussion of how to improve public middle school participation in ward 6. Way to go. Way to shut people down and make sure nothing ever changes. What are you trying to accomplish exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My question remains. If Hill parents are rejecting SH because it isn't a neighborhood school, why do they turn to charters or privates that aren't neighborhood schools either. Far from it. There is something else going on that doesn't have to do with neighborhood alone.

Yeah, like safety and an engaged learning environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh for goodness sake. Who mentioned SES? Trying to find a way to concentrate well -prepared students in one middle school is not offensive. It is smart. Hopefully Ludlow Taylor, Payne, JO Wilson and Tyler would also be feeding there. Think outside your box please

So by "concentrat(ing) well prepared students in one middle school" you are doing what then? Leaving all the rest of the kids to languish in their crappy schools? Is that the point?

And you don't need to mention SES. I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here.

Just to add if it's just about "well prepared" students, then why add SWS? What measure is she using to be so sure they are "well prepared"? Are the kids there even old enough to have been taking the DC CAS yet?

So please, give me a break.

SWS demographics are virtually identical to Brent and its been sucessful while only entering mandatory test grade 3 this year. If we based success solely on DC CAS then Ludlow Taylor is among the best elementary on the Hill. That's a separate debate, but many others would disagree with that conclusion.

So on what are you basing your assertion that SWS is a successful school? On what you basing your assertion that LT is not a successful school?

if you go by DC CAS scores alone you are missing most of the picture. The fact that SWS hasn't taken thetest doesn't validate or disprove anything. If you knew the faculty, staff, students and school community well you'd understand why it's lumped with the other successful Hill ES. I'm not biting on your weak bait, but if I was making the proposal Elissa Silverman did I would have included LT along with the others. I also don't think her proposal will ever go anywhere even if she gains office.

So in other words, you don't have criteria for "successful" schools. Just that you "know the community." Interesting.

It seems some people in our midst prefer to bicker and impune their neighbors than to open wide the discussion of how to improve public middle school participation in ward 6. Way to go. Way to shut people down and make sure nothing ever changes. What are you trying to accomplish exactly?

Yup, just go to a charter and let the omniscient ones fix DCPS. Save your elbow grease for your kid, it ain't worth fighting the race-baiters, judgmental dinosaur liberals and short-sighted know-it-alls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh for goodness sake. Who mentioned SES? Trying to find a way to concentrate well -prepared students in one middle school is not offensive. It is smart. Hopefully Ludlow Taylor, Payne, JO Wilson and Tyler would also be feeding there. Think outside your box please

So by "concentrat(ing) well prepared students in one middle school" you are doing what then? Leaving all the rest of the kids to languish in their crappy schools? Is that the point?

And you don't need to mention SES. I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here.

Just to add if it's just about "well prepared" students, then why add SWS? What measure is she using to be so sure they are "well prepared"? Are the kids there even old enough to have been taking the DC CAS yet?

So please, give me a break.

SWS demographics are virtually identical to Brent and its been sucessful while only entering mandatory test grade 3 this year. If we based success solely on DC CAS then Ludlow Taylor is among the best elementary on the Hill. That's a separate debate, but many others would disagree with that conclusion.

So on what are you basing your assertion that SWS is a successful school? On what you basing your assertion that LT is not a successful school?

if you go by DC CAS scores alone you are missing most of the picture. The fact that SWS hasn't taken thetest doesn't validate or disprove anything. If you knew the faculty, staff, students and school community well you'd understand why it's lumped with the other successful Hill ES. I'm not biting on your weak bait, but if I was making the proposal Elissa Silverman did I would have included LT along with the others. I also don't think her proposal will ever go anywhere even if she gains office.

So in other words, you don't have criteria for "successful" schools. Just that you "know the community." Interesting.

It seems some people in our midst prefer to bicker and impune their neighbors than to open wide the discussion of how to improve public middle school participation in ward 6. Way to go. Way to shut people down and make sure nothing ever changes. What are you trying to accomplish exactly?

Yup, just go to a charter and let the omniscient ones fix DCPS. Save your elbow grease for your kid, it ain't worth fighting the race-baiters, judgmental dinosaur liberals and short-sighted know-it-alls.

You don't find it even a little bit questionable that a political candidate would suggest plucking the only schools with any considerable percentage of white kids out of Ward 6 and sending them to their own middle school? Schools that are not otherwise in proximity to each other?

Well, okay then.

That's not about shutting people down. That's about saying, "WTF?"

I don't think anyone would argue that the middle school situation on Capitol Hill is a good one. No one in this thread is arguing that nothing should change, but nice straw man. But if Elissa Silverman is really trying to create a middle school for high SES white kids on the Hill, sorry, you can count me out of that kind of "change". Not to mention that there's simply not a snowball's chance in hell of that happening, so it basically comes down to political pandering at its worst.

I really need to stop reading these Capitol Hill threads because they depress the hell out of me.

[Anonymous]

I didn't read that shred of an email that way at all, I saw it as trying to point those schools toward the same school but not exclusively. I guess I could be wrong. I suppose it is about what kind of bias you bring with you. Your bias appears to depress you. Try thinking the best of people and not the worst and you might feel better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn't read that shred of an email that way at all, I saw it as trying to point those schools toward the same school but not exclusively. I guess I could be wrong. I suppose it is about what kind of bias you bring with you. Your bias appears to depress you. Try thinking the best of people and not the worst and you might feel better.

But it's not really about feel-good. Because if it was that easy we could all come together and sing Kumbayah and hold hands and everyone would feel great about their DCPS.

So, PP, why do YOU think she singled out those schools specifically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've toured Eliot-Hine to take a look, in part, because the Cluster leadership and DCPS seemingly have done everything within their power to make sure my family will never attend Stuart-Hobson, which is within walking distance of our home. Sorry, but not at all impressed. Same with Jefferson. Too much focus on remediation for students who arrive unprepared for academic rigor and no track record of supporting higher achieving students. Ward 6 middle schools may talk a good game but test scores tell a different story.

Where do you live on the Hill not already IB for S-H where you are walking distance to S-H and not to E-H? Roosevelt I can understand if you are IB for Roosevelt, but then you are probably equidistant from S-H and E-H. I don't get the Brent families who want to be IB for S-H. If you took out the weird Cluster boundary from the S-H boundary and put those people in E-H, the two schools that would be closest to S-H and are not already IB would be Maury and Miner, and those kids are currently IB for E-H, which is pretty much walking distance from those families. Brent, under any scenario, should go to E-H before it feeds to S-H.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've toured Eliot-Hine to take a look, in part, because the Cluster leadership and DCPS seemingly have done everything within their power to make sure my family will never attend Stuart-Hobson, which is within walking distance of our home. Sorry, but not at all impressed. Same with Jefferson. Too much focus on remediation for students who arrive unprepared for academic rigor and no track record of supporting higher achieving students. Ward 6 middle schools may talk a good game but test scores tell a different story.

Where do you live on the Hill not already IB for S-H where you are walking distance to S-H and not to E-H? Roosevelt I can understand if you are IB for Roosevelt, but then you are probably equidistant from S-H and E-H. I don't get the Brent families who want to be IB for S-H. If you took out the weird Cluster boundary from the S-H boundary and put those people in E-H, the two schools that would be closest to S-H and are not already IB would be Maury and Miner, and those kids are currently IB for E-H, which is pretty much walking distance from those families. Brent, under any scenario, should go to E-H before it feeds to S-H.

Except Brent parents want SH because it is better.

[Anonymous]

For hells sake people. What we need to be asking for is a test-in Ward 6 Middle at EH. This way, the "well prepared" kids at LT and JO and SWS and Maury can all convene. The brilliant kids languishing at Payne and Miner have an out too... And they exist! Develop a program at Jefferson to support the kids that can't get in. A fast-track for kids that can possibly get well-prepared and get into EH in 7th and a suped up program for the kids that can't manage.

Not rocket science, not racist, not discriminatory - everyone gets what they need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh for goodness sake. Who mentioned SES? Trying to find a way to concentrate well -prepared students in one middle school is not offensive. It is smart. Hopefully Ludlow Taylor, Payne, JO Wilson and Tyler would also be feeding there. Think outside your box please

So by "concentrat(ing) well prepared students in one middle school" you are doing what then? Leaving all the rest of the kids to languish in their crappy schools? Is that the point?

And you don't need to mention SES. I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here.

Just to add if it's just about "well prepared" students, then why add SWS? What measure is she using to be so sure they are "well prepared"? Are the kids there even old enough to have been taking the DC CAS yet?

So please, give me a break.

SWS demographics are virtually identical to Brent and its been sucessful while only entering mandatory test grade 3 this year. If we based success solely on DC CAS then Ludlow Taylor is among the best elementary on the Hill. That's a separate debate, but many others would disagree with that conclusion.

So on what are you basing your assertion that SWS is a successful school? On what you basing your assertion that LT is not a successful school?

if you go by DC CAS scores alone you are missing most of the picture. The fact that SWS hasn't taken thetest doesn't validate or disprove anything. If you knew the faculty, staff, students and school community well you'd understand why it's lumped with the other successful Hill ES. I'm not biting on your weak bait, but if I was making the proposal Elissa Silverman did I would have included LT along with the others. I also don't think her proposal will ever go anywhere even if she gains office.

So in other words, you don't have criteria for "successful" schools. Just that you "know the community." Interesting.

It seems some people in our midst prefer to bicker and impune their neighbors than to open wide the discussion of how to improve public middle school participation in ward 6. Way to go. Way to shut people down and make sure nothing ever changes. What are you trying to accomplish exactly?

Yup, just go to a charter and let the omniscient ones fix DCPS. Save your elbow grease for your kid, it ain't worth fighting the race-baiters, judgmental dinosaur liberals and short-sighted know-it-alls.

You don't find it even a little bit questionable that a political candidate would suggest plucking the only schools with any considerable percentage of white kids out of Ward 6 and sending them to their own middle school? Schools that are not otherwise in proximity to each other?

Well, okay then.

That's not about shutting people down. That's about saying, "WTF?"

I don't think anyone would argue that the middle school situation on Capitol Hill is a good one. No one in this thread is arguing that nothing should change, but nice straw man. But if Elissa Silverman is really trying to create a middle school for high SES white kids on the Hill, sorry, you can count me out of that kind of "change". Not to mention that there's simply not a snowball's chance in hell of that happening, so it basically comes down to political pandering at its worst.

I really need to stop reading these Capitol Hill threads because they depress the hell out of me.

Yes, PP, you are a troll. And you don't have the best interests of the neighborhood at heart and you probably don't have kids that live in DC. There must be a DCUM blog for the suburban county in which you reside; go troll there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've toured Eliot-Hine to take a look, in part, because the Cluster leadership and DCPS seemingly have done everything within their power to make sure my family will never attend Stuart-Hobson, which is within walking distance of our home. Sorry, but not at all impressed. Same with Jefferson. Too much focus on remediation for students who arrive unprepared for academic rigor and no track record of supporting higher achieving students. Ward 6 middle schools may talk a good game but test scores tell a different story.

Where do you live on the Hill not already IB for S-H where you are walking distance to S-H and not to E-H? Roosevelt I can understand if you are IB for Roosevelt, but then you are probably equidistant from S-H and E-H. I don't get the Brent families who want to be IB for S-H. If you took out the weird Cluster boundary from the S-H boundary and put those people in E-H, the two schools that would be closest to S-H and are not already IB would be Maury and Miner, and those kids are currently IB for E-H, which is pretty much walking distance from those families. Brent, under any scenario, should go to E-H before it feeds to S-H.

Uh, no. We are Brent district, probably .75 from SH. It is over a mile for us to EH (1.3ish).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For hells sake people. What we need to be asking for is a test-in Ward 6 Middle at EH. This way, the "well prepared" kids at LT and JO and SWS and Maury can all convene. The brilliant kids languishing at Payne and Miner have an out too... And they exist! Develop a program at Jefferson to support the kids that can't get in. A fast-track for kids that can possibly get well-prepared and get into EH in 7th and a suped up program for the kids that can't manage.

Not rocket science, not racist, not discriminatory - everyone gets what they need.

If you made it a test-in school with truly high criteria, Stuart Hobson would be big enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Where do you live on the Hill not already IB for S-H where you are walking distance to S-H and not to E-H? Roosevelt I can understand if you are IB for Roosevelt, but then you are probably equidistant from S-H and E-H. I don't get the Brent families who want to be IB for S-H. If you took out the weird Cluster boundary from the S-H boundary and put those people in E-H, the two schools that would be closest to S-H and are not already IB would be Maury and Miner, and those kids are currently IB for E-H, which is pretty much walking distance from those families. Brent, under any scenario, should go to E-H before it feeds to S-H.

Except Brent parents want SH because it is better.

No- Brent parents want SH because it is closer. Or at least they did at one time, but with more and more Brent kids finding happiness at charter schools, I suspect that ship has sailed. It's like DCPS is purposefully pushing parents away from DCPS middle schools into charter schools. Henderson herself acknowledges that charters are better at middle school than DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh for goodness sake. Who mentioned SES? Trying to find a way to concentrate well -prepared students in one middle school is not offensive. It is smart. Hopefully Ludlow Taylor, Payne, JO Wilson and Tyler would also be feeding there. Think outside your box please

So by "concentrat(ing) well prepared students in one middle school" you are doing what then? Leaving all the rest of the kids to languish in their crappy schools? Is that the point?

And you don't need to mention SES. I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here.

Just to add if it's just about "well prepared" students, then why add SWS? What measure is she using to be so sure they are "well prepared"? Are the kids there even old enough to have been taking the DC CAS yet?

So please, give me a break.

SWS demographics are virtually identical to Brent and its been sucessful while only entering mandatory test grade 3 this year. If we based success solely on DC CAS then Ludlow Taylor is among the best elementary on the Hill. That's a separate debate, but many others would disagree with that conclusion.

So on what are you basing your assertion that SWS is a successful school? On what you basing your assertion that LT is not a successful school?

if you go by DC CAS scores alone you are missing most of the picture. The fact that SWS hasn't taken thetest doesn't validate or disprove anything. If you knew the faculty, staff, students and school community well you'd understand why it's lumped with the other successful Hill ES. I'm not biting on your weak bait, but if I was making the proposal Elissa Silverman did I would have included LT along with the others. I also don't think her proposal will ever go anywhere even if she gains office.

So in other words, you don't have criteria for "successful" schools. Just that you "know the community." Interesting.

Hey troll - what do you supose are acceptable "criteria?" The DIBELS scores are not published. It's a screening tool for developing early literacy and its used to identify where students are at risk and require intervention. No one boasts about quantitative results because its a tool used by teachers and the school system and not a measure of quantitative success. The fact that you DON'T know that tells me pretty much all I need to know about you.

and just so you know - if you close your eyes it and everything seems dark, that doesn't mean it's night time just becasue you can't see the sun.