What elementary school on The Hill?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you do know that SH has a lower percentage of students who are proficient or better in math (and a lower percentage of kids who are advanced in math) than Jefferson, right? In reading, Stuart Hobson has 61% proficient and Jefferson has 45%, so there is admittedly a distinction there. Jefferson has more than twice the in-bounds percentage of Stuart-Hobson, too. Learndc no longer seems to have the 2014 equity reports posted, but the most recent stats I could find showed a higher median growth percentile at Jefferson than Stuart-Hobson. So I'm not sure that S-H is the only middle school option for kids on the Hill that can provide a "good peer group." Unless you think kids need to be white to be good peers, in which case yes, there are about 40 at Stuart Hobson.

Jefferson is undeniably outperforming SH in student progress. That likely reflects that the school is meeting the needs of its students of color in a way that SH is not. SH has always been fine for advanced students regardless of race, but there is a large performance gap along racial lines. SH is bigger and provides at least some advanced coursework for those capable. SH (and by extension its feeders) are not meeting the needs a lot of students.

The stats don't bear out much of what you're saying. Yes, Jefferson is seeing more progress and meeting the needs of students of color better than SH. But SH has a smaller percentage of kids who are advanced in math than Jefferson does. I don't know what each school does for the couple dozen kids in each grade who are advanced in math and/or reading (separate classes? pull outs? in-class enrichment? all of these, if executed well, can be successful) whatever it is, it's working better at Jefferson than at SH. You can tell this from the median growth percentiles. Those are in the equity reports available at
http://osse.dc.gov/node/739452. MGP is a measure of how much kids grow compared to kids throughout the district who had the same starting point. So a kid who scored in the 25th percentile on last year's CAS is compared to the others who scored at that percentile to see who made more progress, and kids who were at the 90th percentile are compared to each other. The whole idea is for it to be a way of comparing schools while excluding the fact that kids at some schools come in a lot more prepared than kids at other schools.

The DC average is 50. Stuart-Hobson's overall MGP was 36 in math and 49 in reading. Jefferson's overall was 57 in math and 54 in reading. You're right that SH's MGP is especially low for black students and those kids receiving FARMs. But they are also lower than the DC average for white non-Hispanic students: 47 and 57 for math and reading, compared to DC averages of 59 and 62, respectively. So even those kids are not progressing particularly well; they just came in higher and stagnated.

No -- the stats do bear what I posted and you should cite current data <http://www.learndc.org/schoolprofiles/view?s=0428#equityreport>

I wasn't using "white" as proxy for advanced. Not ALL of the white kids at SH are advanced, and one can safely deduce that some of the kids performing lower academically may be just as susceptible to the lack of academic progress as students of color. As a distinct minority at SH those numbers can be easily skewed. Plus SH was hit hard by late withdrawals before SY13-14 during BASIS's first year when families could easily double enroll and not show up for the beginning of one school. They scrambled to fill seats by cut day.

The equity reports were not on learndc this morning and I emailed them. Glad they've been reposted. However, SH's dropped from 2012-3 to 2013-4 in every category in math and reading (except it stayed the same in females' reading MGP). They are below the DC average in every demographic category for math, though they are doing better in reading. I don't think there's any way you can use published statistics to show that SH is doing well compared to other schools in DC for kids who come in with high CAS scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you do know that SH has a lower percentage of students who are proficient or better in math (and a lower percentage of kids who are advanced in math) than Jefferson, right? In reading, Stuart Hobson has 61% proficient and Jefferson has 45%, so there is admittedly a distinction there. Jefferson has more than twice the in-bounds percentage of Stuart-Hobson, too. Learndc no longer seems to have the 2014 equity reports posted, but the most recent stats I could find showed a higher median growth percentile at Jefferson than Stuart-Hobson. So I'm not sure that S-H is the only middle school option for kids on the Hill that can provide a "good peer group." Unless you think kids need to be white to be good peers, in which case yes, there are about 40 at Stuart Hobson.

Jefferson is undeniably outperforming SH in student progress. That likely reflects that the school is meeting the needs of its students of color in a way that SH is not. SH has always been fine for advanced students regardless of race, but there is a large performance gap along racial lines. SH is bigger and provides at least some advanced coursework for those capable. SH (and by extension its feeders) are not meeting the needs a lot of students.

The stats don't bear out much of what you're saying. Yes, Jefferson is seeing more progress and meeting the needs of students of color better than SH. But SH has a smaller percentage of kids who are advanced in math than Jefferson does. I don't know what each school does for the couple dozen kids in each grade who are advanced in math and/or reading (separate classes? pull outs? in-class enrichment? all of these, if executed well, can be successful) whatever it is, it's working better at Jefferson than at SH. You can tell this from the median growth percentiles. Those are in the equity reports available at
http://osse.dc.gov/node/739452. MGP is a measure of how much kids grow compared to kids throughout the district who had the same starting point. So a kid who scored in the 25th percentile on last year's CAS is compared to the others who scored at that percentile to see who made more progress, and kids who were at the 90th percentile are compared to each other. The whole idea is for it to be a way of comparing schools while excluding the fact that kids at some schools come in a lot more prepared than kids at other schools.

The DC average is 50. Stuart-Hobson's overall MGP was 36 in math and 49 in reading. Jefferson's overall was 57 in math and 54 in reading. You're right that SH's MGP is especially low for black students and those kids receiving FARMs. But they are also lower than the DC average for white non-Hispanic students: 47 and 57 for math and reading, compared to DC averages of 59 and 62, respectively. So even those kids are not progressing particularly well; they just came in higher and stagnated.

No -- the stats do bear what I posted and you should cite current data <http://www.learndc.org/schoolprofiles/view?s=0428#equityreport>

I wasn't using "white" as proxy for advanced. Not ALL of the white kids at SH are advanced, and one can safely deduce that some of the kids performing lower academically may be just as susceptible to the lack of academic progress as students of color. As a distinct minority at SH those numbers can be easily skewed. Plus SH was hit hard by late withdrawals before SY13-14 during BASIS's first year when families could easily double enroll and not show up for the beginning of one school. They scrambled to fill seats by cut day.

The equity reports were not on learndc this morning and I emailed them. Glad they've been reposted. However, SH's dropped from 2012-3 to 2013-4 in every category in math and reading (except it stayed the same in females' reading MGP). They are below the DC average in every demographic category for math, though they are doing better in reading. I don't think there's any way you can use published statistics to show that SH is doing well compared to other schools in DC for kids who come in with high CAS scores.

Taking a single year growth scores for any school is not terribly relevant. there are <40 white kids at SH. Even a small variation would have major implications on overall scores. That barely even meets the threshold for reporting as the results have implications on privacy. That's correct that there's a disconnect between 'holding serve' on reading (at best) and a drop in math

Published stats would only tell so much of a story anywhere. There's a reason Jefferson has > 50% lower enrollment than SH which is mostly OOB while Jefferson is under-enrolled and in an under-utilized building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you do know that SH has a lower percentage of students who are proficient or better in math (and a lower percentage of kids who are advanced in math) than Jefferson, right? In reading, Stuart Hobson has 61% proficient and Jefferson has 45%, so there is admittedly a distinction there. Jefferson has more than twice the in-bounds percentage of Stuart-Hobson, too. Learndc no longer seems to have the 2014 equity reports posted, but the most recent stats I could find showed a higher median growth percentile at Jefferson than Stuart-Hobson. So I'm not sure that S-H is the only middle school option for kids on the Hill that can provide a "good peer group." Unless you think kids need to be white to be good peers, in which case yes, there are about 40 at Stuart Hobson.

Jefferson is undeniably outperforming SH in student progress. That likely reflects that the school is meeting the needs of its students of color in a way that SH is not. SH has always been fine for advanced students regardless of race, but there is a large performance gap along racial lines. SH is bigger and provides at least some advanced coursework for those capable. SH (and by extension its feeders) are not meeting the needs a lot of students.

The stats don't bear out much of what you're saying. Yes, Jefferson is seeing more progress and meeting the needs of students of color better than SH. But SH has a smaller percentage of kids who are advanced in math than Jefferson does. I don't know what each school does for the couple dozen kids in each grade who are advanced in math and/or reading (separate classes? pull outs? in-class enrichment? all of these, if executed well, can be successful) whatever it is, it's working better at Jefferson than at SH. You can tell this from the median growth percentiles. Those are in the equity reports available at
http://osse.dc.gov/node/739452. MGP is a measure of how much kids grow compared to kids throughout the district who had the same starting point. So a kid who scored in the 25th percentile on last year's CAS is compared to the others who scored at that percentile to see who made more progress, and kids who were at the 90th percentile are compared to each other. The whole idea is for it to be a way of comparing schools while excluding the fact that kids at some schools come in a lot more prepared than kids at other schools.

The DC average is 50. Stuart-Hobson's overall MGP was 36 in math and 49 in reading. Jefferson's overall was 57 in math and 54 in reading. You're right that SH's MGP is especially low for black students and those kids receiving FARMs. But they are also lower than the DC average for white non-Hispanic students: 47 and 57 for math and reading, compared to DC averages of 59 and 62, respectively. So even those kids are not progressing particularly well; they just came in higher and stagnated.

No -- the stats do bear what I posted and you should cite current data <http://www.learndc.org/schoolprofiles/view?s=0428#equityreport>

I wasn't using "white" as proxy for advanced. Not ALL of the white kids at SH are advanced, and one can safely deduce that some of the kids performing lower academically may be just as susceptible to the lack of academic progress as students of color. As a distinct minority at SH those numbers can be easily skewed. Plus SH was hit hard by late withdrawals before SY13-14 during BASIS's first year when families could easily double enroll and not show up for the beginning of one school. They scrambled to fill seats by cut day.

The equity reports were not on learndc this morning and I emailed them. Glad they've been reposted. However, SH's dropped from 2012-3 to 2013-4 in every category in math and reading (except it stayed the same in females' reading MGP). They are below the DC average in every demographic category for math, though they are doing better in reading. I don't think there's any way you can use published statistics to show that SH is doing well compared to other schools in DC for kids who come in with high CAS scores.

Taking a single year growth scores for any school is not terribly relevant. there are <40 white kids at SH. Even a small variation would have major implications on overall scores. That barely even meets the threshold for reporting as the results have implications on privacy. That's correct that there's a disconnect between 'holding serve' on reading (at best) and a drop in math

Published stats would only tell so much of a story anywhere. There's a reason Jefferson has > 50% lower enrollment than SH which is mostly OOB while Jefferson is under-enrolled and in an under-utilized building.

Of course there is. In fact, I think there are two reasons.

a) parents on the Hill don't want their kids to commute to Jefferson.
b) parents see that there are a couple dozen white kids at SH and feel more comfortable.

We have school choice in DC. People are free to use whatever criteria they want to make their choices. But if their criteria include proficiency and progress scores, and they're able to accurately interpret those stats, they might consider Jefferson. The teachers, principal, and kids seem just as nice there as the other middle schools I've visited.

[Anonymous]

Don't conflate proficiency of incoming students with that of graduating students. There's a ton of intervention and "character building" (which is a term used by the Jefferson principal) because of the dire state of pedagogy at Amidon. That doesn't leave a lot of time or resources for advanced kids or, even more importantly, those stuck in between in a educational "no man's land".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you do know that SH has a lower percentage of students who are proficient or better in math (and a lower percentage of kids who are advanced in math) than Jefferson, right? In reading, Stuart Hobson has 61% proficient and Jefferson has 45%, so there is admittedly a distinction there. Jefferson has more than twice the in-bounds percentage of Stuart-Hobson, too. Learndc no longer seems to have the 2014 equity reports posted, but the most recent stats I could find showed a higher median growth percentile at Jefferson than Stuart-Hobson. So I'm not sure that S-H is the only middle school option for kids on the Hill that can provide a "good peer group." Unless you think kids need to be white to be good peers, in which case yes, there are about 40 at Stuart Hobson.

Jefferson is undeniably outperforming SH in student progress. That likely reflects that the school is meeting the needs of its students of color in a way that SH is not. SH has always been fine for advanced students regardless of race, but there is a large performance gap along racial lines. SH is bigger and provides at least some advanced coursework for those capable. SH (and by extension its feeders) are not meeting the needs a lot of students.

The stats don't bear out much of what you're saying. Yes, Jefferson is seeing more progress and meeting the needs of students of color better than SH. But SH has a smaller percentage of kids who are advanced in math than Jefferson does. I don't know what each school does for the couple dozen kids in each grade who are advanced in math and/or reading (separate classes? pull outs? in-class enrichment? all of these, if executed well, can be successful) whatever it is, it's working better at Jefferson than at SH. You can tell this from the median growth percentiles. Those are in the equity reports available at
http://osse.dc.gov/node/739452. MGP is a measure of how much kids grow compared to kids throughout the district who had the same starting point. So a kid who scored in the 25th percentile on last year's CAS is compared to the others who scored at that percentile to see who made more progress, and kids who were at the 90th percentile are compared to each other. The whole idea is for it to be a way of comparing schools while excluding the fact that kids at some schools come in a lot more prepared than kids at other schools.

The DC average is 50. Stuart-Hobson's overall MGP was 36 in math and 49 in reading. Jefferson's overall was 57 in math and 54 in reading. You're right that SH's MGP is especially low for black students and those kids receiving FARMs. But they are also lower than the DC average for white non-Hispanic students: 47 and 57 for math and reading, compared to DC averages of 59 and 62, respectively. So even those kids are not progressing particularly well; they just came in higher and stagnated.

No -- the stats do bear what I posted and you should cite current data <http://www.learndc.org/schoolprofiles/view?s=0428#equityreport>

I wasn't using "white" as proxy for advanced. Not ALL of the white kids at SH are advanced, and one can safely deduce that some of the kids performing lower academically may be just as susceptible to the lack of academic progress as students of color. As a distinct minority at SH those numbers can be easily skewed. Plus SH was hit hard by late withdrawals before SY13-14 during BASIS's first year when families could easily double enroll and not show up for the beginning of one school. They scrambled to fill seats by cut day.

The equity reports were not on learndc this morning and I emailed them. Glad they've been reposted. However, SH's dropped from 2012-3 to 2013-4 in every category in math and reading (except it stayed the same in females' reading MGP). They are below the DC average in every demographic category for math, though they are doing better in reading. I don't think there's any way you can use published statistics to show that SH is doing well compared to other schools in DC for kids who come in with high CAS scores.

Taking a single year growth scores for any school is not terribly relevant. there are <40 white kids at SH. Even a small variation would have major implications on overall scores. That barely even meets the threshold for reporting as the results have implications on privacy. That's correct that there's a disconnect between 'holding serve' on reading (at best) and a drop in math

Published stats would only tell so much of a story anywhere. There's a reason Jefferson has > 50% lower enrollment than SH which is mostly OOB while Jefferson is under-enrolled and in an under-utilized building.

Of course there is. In fact, I think there are two reasons.

a) parents on the Hill don't want their kids to commute to Jefferson.
b) parents see that there are a couple dozen white kids at SH and feel more comfortable.

We have school choice in DC. People are free to use whatever criteria they want to make their choices. But if their criteria include proficiency and progress scores, and they're able to accurately interpret those stats, they might consider Jefferson. The teachers, principal, and kids seem just as nice there as the other middle schools I've visited.

Jefferson It's an inappropriate feed for a neighborhood school because it's in an entirely different neighborhood. That's the reason. Don't assume SH is that attractive to Hill families, all 30 odd white kids and all. It's attractive for its potential to be a neighborhood school, something Jefferson will never reach from its Hill feeders. Neither are terribly high on any Hill family's list of optimal choices.

[Anonymous]

Red herring. If Jefferson was approaching anything close to being on par with Deal, you wouldn't hear Hill parents bitching about it being in a different meighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Red herring. If Jefferson was approaching anything close to being on par with Deal, you wouldn't hear Hill parents bitching about it being in a different meighborhood.

I like a good story as much as the next person, but this one just has too many plot holes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't conflate proficiency of incoming students with that of graduating students. There's a ton of intervention and "character building" (which is a term used by the Jefferson principal) because of the dire state of pedagogy at Amidon. That doesn't leave a lot of time or resources for advanced kids or, even more importantly, those stuck in between in a educational "no man's land".

If Jefferson does nothing for kids who are already proficient, why are a larger percentage of kids at Jefferson than at Stuart-Hobson advanced in math? They must be teaching something to kids who are proficient, if they're getting them up to the advanced level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Red herring. If Jefferson was approaching anything close to being on par with Deal, you wouldn't hear Hill parents bitching about it being in a different meighborhood.

But how do you get it on par with Deal? Note in the case of Hardy, IB parents are being sold to try it (rather than try to get to Deal OOB, or to charters) based on it being the neighborhood school. If Jefferson got to be on par with say, where Hardy was a year or two ago, it would still have geography against it.

[Anonymous]

There is no doubt that Hill parents are willing to surmount obstacles that many high-SES families in living outside of the District wouldn't even consider taking on. Maybe we are gluttons for punishment or maybe we have an unhealthy obsession with overcoming challenges, but in either case we love living on the Hill and are reluctant to walk away without a fight. Yes, although Jefferson is geographically isolated (in fact, it doesn't even have Metrobus service from the Hill), DCPS is never going to open the doors of Stuart-Hobson to schools like Brent or Maury, perhaps because it is perceived as doing just well enough in terms of the population being served insofar as it is purportedly the "Second Best Middle School in DC.". (Trademark Pending). If anything, Stuart-Hobson should get stronger in just a few years as greater numbers of families IB for the Cluster and Ludlow-Taylor decide to stay in the feeder pattern through at least 8th Grade. From my viewpoint, Jefferson doesn't seem to have any of these attributes going for it. While it has a strong principal, families living in SW currently make up less than half of the student body.

As Tyler will now be feeding to Jefferson, DCPS is adding a sizable cohort of students with no ties to either Jefferson or surrounding community, and whose test scores seem to preset a new set of challenges with fewer than one-third demonstrating proficiency in math and fewer than half demonstrating proficiency in reading. I think it's also fair to assume that many of these kids, some of who, live in Potomac Gardens, will each have their own unique set of hurdles to overcome.

When they arrive at Jefferson, they will be joining kids from Amidon whose test scores demonstrate that only about 30 percent are proficient in either reading or math. While I can applaud the hard work at Jefferson which seems to show remarkable results in terms of attaining proficiency, I have doubts whether there are enough resources to meaningfully advance pedagogy for the minority of students who are already proficient at the time of matriculation (which itself is a relatively low bar in DC) without the introduction of something akin to an honors track. Ironically, one of the few things that Jefferson potentially had going for it was the fact that SW (as well as a swath of the Brent District) had been IB for Wilson. With that off the table, and charters continuing to provide a jumping off point at 5th Grade, I don't see much prospect of change on the horizon. I just can't think of a compelling reason to take a chance on Jefferson for three years if Eastern is a non-starter for former member of the Stroller Brigade, and SWW may or may not pan out as a viable option. While I'll readily acknowledge that I am an in curable pessimist by nature, I can't see any light at the end of the Jefferson tunnel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no doubt that Hill parents are willing to surmount obstacles that many high-SES families in living outside of the District wouldn't even consider taking on. Maybe we are gluttons for punishment or maybe we have an unhealthy obsession with overcoming challenges, but in either case we love living on the Hill and are reluctant to walk away without a fight. Yes, although Jefferson is geographically isolated (in fact, it doesn't even have Metrobus service from the Hill), DCPS is never going to open the doors of Stuart-Hobson to schools like Brent or Maury, perhaps because it is perceived as doing just well enough in terms of the population being served insofar as it is purportedly the "Second Best Middle School in DC.". (Trademark Pending). If anything, Stuart-Hobson should get stronger in just a few years as greater numbers of families IB for the Cluster and Ludlow-Taylor decide to stay in the feeder pattern through at least 8th Grade. From my viewpoint, Jefferson doesn't seem to have any of these attributes going for it. While it has a strong principal, families living in SW currently make up less than half of the student body.

As Tyler will now be feeding to Jefferson, DCPS is adding a sizable cohort of students with no ties to either Jefferson or surrounding community, and whose test scores seem to preset a new set of challenges with fewer than one-third demonstrating proficiency in math and fewer than half demonstrating proficiency in reading. I think it's also fair to assume that many of these kids, some of who, live in Potomac Gardens, will each have their own unique set of hurdles to overcome.

When they arrive at Jefferson, they will be joining kids from Amidon whose test scores demonstrate that only about 30 percent are proficient in either reading or math. While I can applaud the hard work at Jefferson which seems to show remarkable results in terms of attaining proficiency, I have doubts whether there are enough resources to meaningfully advance pedagogy for the minority of students who are already proficient at the time of matriculation (which itself is a relatively low bar in DC) without the introduction of something akin to an honors track. Ironically, one of the few things that Jefferson potentially had going for it was the fact that SW (as well as a swath of the Brent District) had been IB for Wilson. With that off the table, and charters continuing to provide a jumping off point at 5th Grade, I don't see much prospect of change on the horizon. I just can't think of a compelling reason to take a chance on Jefferson for three years if Eastern is a non-starter for former member of the Stroller Brigade, and SWW may or may not pan out as a viable option. While I'll readily acknowledge that I am an in curable pessimist by nature, I can't see any light at the end of the Jefferson tunnel.

Isn't Jefferson starting an IB curriculum?

And I'm curious about the current Jefferson OOB kids. I have a theory that Jefferson is acting like an unofficial magnet - because of its relative strength & history of strength, more ambitious parents are sending their kids there ... but that may also have been due to the Wilson feed?

[Anonymous]

I could be mistaken but it is my understanding that Jefferson wasn't ever formally a Wilson feeder. Rather, Wilson was the historic matter of right school for families living IB for Amidon, Bowen, Van Ness and some parts of Brent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Red herring. If Jefferson was approaching anything close to being on par with Deal, you wouldn't hear Hill parents bitching about it being in a different meighborhood.

But how do you get it on par with Deal? Note in the case of Hardy, IB parents are being sold to try it (rather than try to get to Deal OOB, or to charters) based on it being the neighborhood school. If Jefferson got to be on par with say, where Hardy was a year or two ago, it would still have geography against it.

Forget the geography excuse. Children used to commute from across the city to attend Jefferson when it was one of the top schools. I had friends who lived in Shepherd Park that went to Jefferson. If you build it, they will come.

[Anonymous]

I would seriously consider sending my Hill kid to Deal if OOB was an option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would seriously consider sending my Hill kid to Deal if OOB was an option.

Apropos of nothing. Who wouldn't if that option existed. The angst is that it isn't and won't be.