Latin replication pulled from PCSB agenda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Im not being ridiculous. Wl and kipp work for many kids..they are very different. If one studies and mimics the other they may well stop working well for the kids they serve. And we lose the diversity in offerings that is the hallmark charters. DC Prep (if you visit their website) appears to start in preK3/4. How does WL pull early childhood education out of a hat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's well know that many schools that intentionally serve low income students and offer wrap around programming are highly regimented. This is a well known critique of them, and yet they work. If you study them.i would certainly expect to find some examples of that. If that's what you want WL to be, so that students can excel on a really badly written test, I suggest you may have some unforseen consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:White non-hispanics at Latin appear to get a lower share of PARCC 4s than the DC average. Where are the high scorers going to middle school?

And how are the suspension rate numbers read? Is an 8 percent suspension rate saying that 8 percent of all students are suspended? Suspensions look better than DC average, but I'm not sure I'm reading this right.

Achievement gap is hard to crack in general, and I would guess it's even harder for a middle school taking kids from all over. Is anyone doing well here?

Exactly. It's NEARLY impossible to fix child neglect during the first three foundational years.

Most well-meaning educators seem to ignore this fact, or they would scream (and demand) for change where it really counts.

[Anonymous]

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

Probably not, though their principal is. A lot of their teachers are ivy and baby leaguers. Are there roughly the same number of people of color in the ivy league who go into teaching as students of color in Latin? Maybe they should reach out to TFA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White non-hispanics at Latin appear to get a lower share of PARCC 4s than the DC average. Where are the high scorers going to middle school?

And how are the suspension rate numbers read? Is an 8 percent suspension rate saying that 8 percent of all students are suspended? Suspensions look better than DC average, but I'm not sure I'm reading this right.

Achievement gap is hard to crack in general, and I would guess it's even harder for a middle school taking kids from all over. Is anyone doing well here?

Exactly. It's NEARLY impossible to fix child neglect during the first three foundational years.

Most well-meaning educators seem to ignore this fact, or they would scream (and demand) for change where it really counts.

DC Prep had Pk3. Maybe they should add WL opening a nursery school to the list of demands? If people want the achievement gap fixed in DC, that's where it begins.

[Anonymous]

Totally agree that interventions in early grades produce results. Taking a kid in 5th grade who is 2-3 grade levels behind is unlikely to catch up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Probably not, though their principal is. A lot of their teachers are ivy and baby leaguers. Are there roughly the same number of people of color in the ivy league who go into teaching as students of color in Latin? Maybe they should reach out to TFA?

You don't need to have gone to an Ivy to teach at a school like Latin. And yes, teachers of color are in high demand.

But recruiting them is worthwhile and should be a priority. There is plenty evidence to show that students of color are more successful when there are more than a few teachers who look like them in their schools. Those teachers are less likely, although not immune, from carrying internal biases about capabilities and behavior. Doesn't have to be a majority but they shouldn't be 1 out of 7 each year. Same for any support staff that work closely with students, from psychologists and social workers to asst principals.

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/16/05/where-are-all-teachers-color
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/education/minority-teachers-students-same-race-research/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775715000084

[Anonymous]

Have any of you visited WL? When I went, I saw several teachers of color. In fact, some of them graduated from WL.

Schools are not saviors. Learning begins and is nurtured in the home. If parents can't help their children succeed, then maybe free tutoring should be offered and required for struggling students.

[Anonymous]

Latin parent here. My DC has always had more 2-3 AA teacher each year. Faculty is already pretty diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you visited WL? When I went, I saw several teachers of color. In fact, some of them graduated from WL.

Schools are not saviors. Learning begins and is nurtured in the home. If parents can't help their children succeed, then maybe free tutoring should be offered and required for struggling students.

It isn't already available at Latin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Latin parent here. My DC has always had more 2-3 AA teacher each year. Faculty is already pretty diverse.

In its 5-year strategic plan, Latin's Board said hiring a more diverse faculty was one of their strategic objectives. Perhaps they have achieved that goal in the 2 years since that was written.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you visited WL? When I went, I saw several teachers of color. In fact, some of them graduated from WL.

Schools are not saviors. Learning begins and is nurtured in the home. If parents can't help their children succeed, then maybe free tutoring should be offered and required for struggling students.

It isn't already available at Latin?

What kids get at Latin which they wont get at lots of other HS is very close relationships w faculty. . It's a small school. Mentoring for teenagers isi nvaluable. Curious, when the charter board does this review is is entirely based on this one test or is it more of a school review - what they're doing great at (ahem, college placement which is an actual real world result. Is it not at or near 100%???) Or is this all about the stupid PARCC? I agree, if the achievement gap must be closed latin needs to start with neonatal programming. They should look at neonatal through 4th, before they look at a second site if closing the achievement gap is the only value folks see in the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you visited WL? When I went, I saw several teachers of color. In fact, some of them graduated from WL.

Schools are not saviors. Learning begins and is nurtured in the home. If parents can't help their children succeed, then maybe free tutoring should be offered and required for struggling students.

It isn't already available at Latin?

What kids get at Latin which they wont get at lots of other HS is very close relationships w faculty. . It's a small school. Mentoring for teenagers isi nvaluable. Curious, when the charter board does this review is is entirely based on this one test or is it more of a school review - what they're doing great at (ahem, college placement which is an actual real world result. Is it not at or near 100%???) Or is this all about the stupid PARCC? I agree, if the achievement gap must be closed latin needs to start with neonatal programming. They should look at neonatal through 4th, before they look at a second site if closing the achievement gap is the only value folks see in the school.

Watch the hearing. TLDW: The questions are about PARCC achievement and growth, far out of proportion suspensions between at-risk and students of color compared to the rest of the school, lack of growth toward proficiency for at-risk students (only relevant at MS; not measured for HS), inequitable distribution of stop for the Latin bus, lack of outreach to underserved communities.

No one ever said the achievement gap needed to be completely closed, or that was a reasonable goal. But should anyone be ok with no progress or a widening gap?

Four-year graduation rates are taken into account in STAR ratings as well as the PCSB PMF (Tier reports). College acceptances are not; probably because that's not the only positive outcome (military, an apprenticeship program, the workforce are equally valid). It's also really hard to capture.

[Anonymous]

Also noted by the concerned PCSB members:

Dramatically fewer numbers of at-risk and minority students compared to the early years of the school.

[Anonymous]

In 2017-18 WL had an 87% 4-year graduation rate (a decrease from 16-17 when it was 90%).

100% of white students, 81% of black students and 69% of at-risk students graduated in 4 years.

The 5-year graduation rate was 93% in 2018.

https://dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/151-1118/metric/graduation_rate_4yr?lang=en