Shaw Middle School -- what's the plan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP nailed it. What would a Shaw middle school offer to make it different from Cardozo? You need a critical mass of high achieving students to turn a middle school around.

Shaw MS would have a different group of feeder schools than Cardozo that potentially do in fact have a critical mass of high achieving students. Right now this cluster of schools is divided for the temporary feeder system with two of the schools going to SWW.

The dual feed will be shut off soon, just like it was for Eaton. Especially since. the PK-8 models are being phased out.

what schools would feed to shaw that produce a consistent and large cohort of high achieving students?

If the SWW and Cardozo feeds were combined at Cardozo, you'd get a pretty good number. Using the grade audits from https://osse.dc.gov/page/2017-18-school-year-enrollment-audit-report-and-data and the results dc PARCC info (averaging the math and ELA scores of 4 or 5):

Cleveland: 31 5th graders, 33% proficiency = 10 proficient kids (note: some are in the dual-language program and also have rights to MacFarland)
Garrison: 24 5th graders, 13% proficiency = 3 proficient kids
Ross: 12 5th graders, 75% proficiency = 9 proficient kids (note: if Ross stopped being able to get away with not filling their testing-grades classes through the lottery, there might be a couple more here)
Seaton: 30 5th graders, 29% proficiency = 9 proficient kids
SWW: 44 5th graders, 49% proficiency = 22 proficient kids (note: if middle school left SWW, there'd be room for more 5th graders)
Thomson: 32 5th graders, 23 % proficiency = 7 proficient kids

60 proficient kids per grade with a right to attend is decent, even noting that some will choose charters, OOB, or private schools. I'm sure Deal and Hardy have more 5th graders at their feeder schools who are proficient, but this is a high enough number to offer advanced classes (especially given that my numbers average math and ELA...there may be may kids who'd qualify for advanced math but not ELA or vice versa) and for kids on or above grade level to have some peers. Is it going to work for a family that wants a Lake Wobegone school? No. But the families who send kids to these schools for 5th grade seem open to having a mix of kids.

There is the obvious problem that the proposed middle school would need to do tracking. And DCPS is anti-tracking. At least that is what failed Brookland middle.

Could you clarify what tracking means? I'm not familiar with that.

[Anonymous]

Tracking means grouping kids by ability = e.g. a more advanced english or science or history class for some and putting kids who are at or below grade level in other classes.

It's done in high school and all DCPS middle schools do this for math.

A couple of DCPS middle schools are doing it for English (SH, Hardy). Deal does not.

It's not considered effective by education experts, but parents remember it from their own schooling and lobby hard for it.

[Anonymous]

tracking means offering classes at different levels: remedial, grade-level, advanced, etc. and kids are placed based on how they perform at the beginning of the year or on tests the year before.

[Anonymous]

And Brookland didn't allow such tracking? I can see why that would be an issue. Thanks for the clarification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And Brookland didn't allow such tracking? I can see why that would be an issue. Thanks for the clarification.

"allow" isn't really the right word.

DCPS has tended to do this when there's a critical mass of students who need it - and again then it is only for one subject. Brookland does have students on differeing levels for math.

What Brookland didn't do was guarantee there would be an honors English class, for example, before they opened their doors and saw who was enrolled. At hardy they have all students mixed for the first couple of weeks and then adjust some as needed.

The gentrifier parents hung on the lack of a guarantee as an indication that there would never be a more advanced class, which wasn't necessarily the case. They also really wanted advanced language options, or an IB program -- something that signals to parents that the school will be suitable for their high achieving kids and would allow them to not be in all classes with the rest of the students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And Brookland didn't allow such tracking? I can see why that would be an issue. Thanks for the clarification.

"allow" isn't really the right word.

DCPS has tended to do this when there's a critical mass of students who need it - and again then it is only for one subject. Brookland does have students on differeing levels for math.

What Brookland didn't do was guarantee there would be an honors English class, for example, before they opened their doors and saw who was enrolled. At hardy they have all students mixed for the first couple of weeks and then adjust some as needed.

The gentrifier parents hung on the lack of a guarantee as an indication that there would never be a more advanced class, which wasn't necessarily the case. They also really wanted advanced language options, or an IB program -- something that signals to parents that the school will be suitable for their high achieving kids and would allow them to not be in all classes with the rest of the students.

Really. Well, in any case, no, tracking is not uniformly dismissed by "education experts". It does go in and out of fashion. As for Brookland, whatever the communication was with the community, it has ended up an abject failure, so, perhaps there should have been more listening to what "gentrifiers" wanted. But this circular debate is in almost every thread, and it's pretty tiresome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP nailed it. What would a Shaw middle school offer to make it different from Cardozo? You need a critical mass of high achieving students to turn a middle school around.

Shaw MS would have a different group of feeder schools than Cardozo that potentially do in fact have a critical mass of high achieving students. Right now this cluster of schools is divided for the temporary feeder system with two of the schools going to SWW.

Solving this does not require opening Shaw MS. Just send the SWW middle schoolers (SWW, Ross, and Thomson) to Cardozo along with Cleveland, Seaton, and Garrison. There's room, and it would allow more room at SWW for elementary students (including special ed classrooms and more PK, both of which are in huge demand).

The problem is that they won't send their kids there. The issue with Cadozo MS is that it's connected to a very low performing high school with a history of behavioral problems. It's scary for parents to think about sending their 10 year olds to that kind of environment, regardless of how separate the MS is from the HS. The appeal of a Shaw MS would that it would be a stand-alone, brand new MS. Parents would be more likely to take a chance on a new school than one with a history of low performance. I say this as someone without any kids, without a real stake in the issue, but as someone who had spent time in Cardozo HS.

People send their 3 year olds to schools with 8th graders (some of whom have behavioral problems). Ballou and Roosevelt parents send their kids to school in the same building as adults in the STAY program. Even a stand-alone middle school will have older siblings, parents, and others--some with behavior problems--coming into or waiting outside the building. With so many open DCPS middle school seats, I don't think there's any need to open another school for the few parents who'd be ok with Shaw but have ruled out Cardozo.

But here's another option, probably politically unpalatable to Banneker families and offered too late in the planning process but that would work just as well: open Shaw as a middle school. Send all the kids currently routed to SWW and Cardozo there. And put Banneker in the middle school space at Cardozo.

"Politically unpalatable to Banneker families." What about the hundreds of families who were promised a MS in Shaw? Those people and families who weren't involved and whose input hasn't been taken seriously until recently? I think what's being proposed re: Banneker is short-sighted, not to mention being done completely behind closed doors (unless you're a Banneker family or involved w/ the SIT).

But, fwiw, the idea presented isn't a bad one. Why not do a feasibility study re: the Cardozo site. Co-locate two HSs. I'm on board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP nailed it. What would a Shaw middle school offer to make it different from Cardozo? You need a critical mass of high achieving students to turn a middle school around.

Shaw MS would have a different group of feeder schools than Cardozo that potentially do in fact have a critical mass of high achieving students. Right now this cluster of schools is divided for the temporary feeder system with two of the schools going to SWW.

Solving this does not require opening Shaw MS. Just send the SWW middle schoolers (SWW, Ross, and Thomson) to Cardozo along with Cleveland, Seaton, and Garrison. There's room, and it would allow more room at SWW for elementary students (including special ed classrooms and more PK, both of which are in huge demand).

The problem is that they won't send their kids there. The issue with Cadozo MS is that it's connected to a very low performing high school with a history of behavioral problems. It's scary for parents to think about sending their 10 year olds to that kind of environment, regardless of how separate the MS is from the HS. The appeal of a Shaw MS would that it would be a stand-alone, brand new MS. Parents would be more likely to take a chance on a new school than one with a history of low performance. I say this as someone without any kids, without a real stake in the issue, but as someone who had spent time in Cardozo HS.

People send their 3 year olds to schools with 8th graders (some of whom have behavioral problems). Ballou and Roosevelt parents send their kids to school in the same building as adults in the STAY program. Even a stand-alone middle school will have older siblings, parents, and others--some with behavior problems--coming into or waiting outside the building. With so many open DCPS middle school seats, I don't think there's any need to open another school for the few parents who'd be ok with Shaw but have ruled out Cardozo.

But here's another option, probably politically unpalatable to Banneker families and offered too late in the planning process but that would work just as well: open Shaw as a middle school. Send all the kids currently routed to SWW and Cardozo there. And put Banneker in the middle school space at Cardozo.

"Politically unpalatable to Banneker families." What about the hundreds of families who were promised a MS in Shaw? Those people and families who weren't involved and whose input hasn't been taken seriously until recently? I think what's being proposed re: Banneker is short-sighted, not to mention being done completely behind closed doors (unless you're a Banneker family or involved w/ the SIT).

But, fwiw, the idea presented isn't a bad one. Why not do a feasibility study re: the Cardozo site. Co-locate two HSs. I'm on board.

Politically and logistically impossible. I can’t find current numbers, but I know when they colocated Shaw with Cardozo Shaw’s enrollment was under 100. Cardozo is not set up to house two huge programs. And yeah, Banneker families would never go for it.

I can’t even remember when Shaw closed and moved to Garnett-Patterson. Was it part of Rhee-form or earlier?

[Anonymous]

Here is an idea. Keep Banneker at Banneker. Build a new MS at Shaw. Build it big enough to have a neighborhood stream and a city wide magnet stream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is an idea. Keep Banneker at Banneker. Build a new MS at Shaw. Build it big enough to have a neighborhood stream and a city wide magnet stream.

Hey, that sounds like a great idea!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tracking means grouping kids by ability = e.g. a more advanced english or science or history class for some and putting kids who are at or below grade level in other classes.

It's done in high school and all DCPS middle schools do this for math.

A couple of DCPS middle schools are doing it for English (SH, Hardy). Deal does not.

It's not considered effective by education experts, but parents remember it from their own schooling and lobby hard for it.

Not effective for who? teachers love it. I know DCPS teachers hate having to teach one class of kids who are two grades ahead and two grades behind? the top kids are ignored or just given online assignments. it hurts everyone. the best and the brightest are bored or their parents pull them out and the slowest kids should never have been in that grade to begin with so they end up graduating and are barely literate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP nailed it. What would a Shaw middle school offer to make it different from Cardozo? You need a critical mass of high achieving students to turn a middle school around.

Shaw MS would have a different group of feeder schools than Cardozo that potentially do in fact have a critical mass of high achieving students. Right now this cluster of schools is divided for the temporary feeder system with two of the schools going to SWW.

The dual feed will be shut off soon, just like it was for Eaton. Especially since. the PK-8 models are being phased out.

what schools would feed to shaw that produce a consistent and large cohort of high achieving students?

If the SWW and Cardozo feeds were combined at Cardozo, you'd get a pretty good number. Using the grade audits from https://osse.dc.gov/page/2017-18-school-year-enrollment-audit-report-and-data and the results dc PARCC info (averaging the math and ELA scores of 4 or 5):

Cleveland: 31 5th graders, 33% proficiency = 10 proficient kids (note: some are in the dual-language program and also have rights to MacFarland)
Garrison: 24 5th graders, 13% proficiency = 3 proficient kids
Ross: 12 5th graders, 75% proficiency = 9 proficient kids (note: if Ross stopped being able to get away with not filling their testing-grades classes through the lottery, there might be a couple more here)
Seaton: 30 5th graders, 29% proficiency = 9 proficient kids
SWW: 44 5th graders, 49% proficiency = 22 proficient kids (note: if middle school left SWW, there'd be room for more 5th graders)
Thomson: 32 5th graders, 23 % proficiency = 7 proficient kids

60 proficient kids per grade with a right to attend is decent, even noting that some will choose charters, OOB, or private schools. I'm sure Deal and Hardy have more 5th graders at their feeder schools who are proficient, but this is a high enough number to offer advanced classes (especially given that my numbers average math and ELA...there may be may kids who'd qualify for advanced math but not ELA or vice versa) and for kids on or above grade level to have some peers. Is it going to work for a family that wants a Lake Wobegone school? No. But the families who send kids to these schools for 5th grade seem open to having a mix of kids.

There is the obvious problem that the proposed middle school would need to do tracking. And DCPS is anti-tracking. At least that is what failed Brookland middle.

Could you clarify what tracking means? I'm not familiar with that.

Not even close enough. 60 proficient kids is not a big enough cohort. Especially if a full cohort is closer to several hundred. that mean at least 2/3 of the total cohort is not at grade level.No thank, I don't want my kid in that class where over half are not even at grade level. And middle school is a lot more challenging than elem. The unprepared kids will keep getting promoted and by 8th grade its a disaster.

[Anonymous]

A full cohort will not be "several" hundred.

Hardy or SH or jefferson or Mcfarland is the right comparator. Cohorts are about 140-150 at most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A full cohort will not be "several" hundred.

Hardy or SH or jefferson or Mcfarland is the right comparator. Cohorts are about 140-150 at most.

The 'on grade level' numbers will change drastically with every year, too. Just look at what Pre-K looks like in each of these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP nailed it. What would a Shaw middle school offer to make it different from Cardozo? You need a critical mass of high achieving students to turn a middle school around.

Shaw MS would have a different group of feeder schools than Cardozo that potentially do in fact have a critical mass of high achieving students. Right now this cluster of schools is divided for the temporary feeder system with two of the schools going to SWW.

The dual feed will be shut off soon, just like it was for Eaton. Especially since. the PK-8 models are being phased out.

what schools would feed to shaw that produce a consistent and large cohort of high achieving students?

If the SWW and Cardozo feeds were combined at Cardozo, you'd get a pretty good number. Using the grade audits from https://osse.dc.gov/page/2017-18-school-year-enrollment-audit-report-and-data and the results dc PARCC info (averaging the math and ELA scores of 4 or 5):

Cleveland: 31 5th graders, 33% proficiency = 10 proficient kids (note: some are in the dual-language program and also have rights to MacFarland)
Garrison: 24 5th graders, 13% proficiency = 3 proficient kids
Ross: 12 5th graders, 75% proficiency = 9 proficient kids (note: if Ross stopped being able to get away with not filling their testing-grades classes through the lottery, there might be a couple more here)
Seaton: 30 5th graders, 29% proficiency = 9 proficient kids
SWW: 44 5th graders, 49% proficiency = 22 proficient kids (note: if middle school left SWW, there'd be room for more 5th graders)
Thomson: 32 5th graders, 23 % proficiency = 7 proficient kids

60 proficient kids per grade with a right to attend is decent, even noting that some will choose charters, OOB, or private schools. I'm sure Deal and Hardy have more 5th graders at their feeder schools who are proficient, but this is a high enough number to offer advanced classes (especially given that my numbers average math and ELA...there may be may kids who'd qualify for advanced math but not ELA or vice versa) and for kids on or above grade level to have some peers. Is it going to work for a family that wants a Lake Wobegone school? No. But the families who send kids to these schools for 5th grade seem open to having a mix of kids.

There is the obvious problem that the proposed middle school would need to do tracking. And DCPS is anti-tracking. At least that is what failed Brookland middle.

Could you clarify what tracking means? I'm not familiar with that.

Not even close enough. 60 proficient kids is not a big enough cohort. Especially if a full cohort is closer to several hundred. that mean at least 2/3 of the total cohort is not at grade level.No thank, I don't want my kid in that class where over half are not even at grade level. And middle school is a lot more challenging than elem. The unprepared kids will keep getting promoted and by 8th grade its a disaster.

If you want a school with more than 50% proficient in math and reading, your options are BASIS, DC Prep-Edgewood Middle, or Deal (even there, 45% of kids are not proficient in math). There are not enough seats at those schools for every kid, so some families are going to need to try other options.