International Baccalaureate at Eastern?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's OPINION.

The fact is that major innercities like DC have not become predominatly white, despite an influx of gentrifiers for decades. There are middle class/wealthy, highly-educated Whites and minorities in all of those areas. But that hasn't changed demographics one bit.

DC, quite frankly, is as much of a hell hole as any other innercity. In some ways its worse. DC is definitely not on the path to Manhattan & the other places you've mentioned. You've gotta be trolling me.

Here's a personal invitation to visit DC, since it appears to be many years since you've been here. Demographics are definitely changing, and more than a bit. I don't know about projections of the city becoming majority white city-wide or why that matters to you, but certainly gentrifying neighborhoods have significantly changing demographics.
See: Dupont Circle, Logan Circle, Mt. Vernon Square, Capitol Hill, Eastern Market, SW Waterfront, Navy Yard / Ballpark, Columbia Heights, Petworth, Shaw, even Brightwood (see WP article)... could go on and on about neighborhoods with changing demographics.

I'm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's OPINION.

The fact is that major innercities like DC have not become predominatly white, despite an influx of gentrifiers for decades. There are middle class/wealthy, highly-educated Whites and minorities in all of those areas. But that hasn't changed demographics one bit.

DC, quite frankly, is as much of a hell hole as any other innercity. In some ways its worse. DC is definitely not on the path to Manhattan & the other places you've mentioned. You've gotta be trolling me.

Here's a personal invitation to visit DC, since it appears to be many years since you've been here. Demographics are definitely changing, and more than a bit. I don't know about projections of the city becoming majority white city-wide or why that matters to you, but certainly gentrifying neighborhoods have significantly changing demographics.
See: Dupont Circle, Logan Circle, Mt. Vernon Square, Capitol Hill, Eastern Market, SW Waterfront, Navy Yard / Ballpark, Columbia Heights, Petworth, Shaw, even Brightwood (see WP article)... could go on and on about neighborhoods with changing demographics.

I'm VERY aware of the neighbors you've listed. Please don't assume that you know me.

White people jogging and walking their dogs throughout the neighborhoods has done nothing to change the city. Nearly every school, business etc that I walk into remains majority black. So does the metro....Whites remain sprinkles on a chocolate city ice cream cone.

So the notion that a huge infiltration of whites will take over this city is hilarious.

Historically, Manhattan has always been Manhattan; the Bronx, Brooklyn.... There's been no great white take over over any major (black) city. Ever.

And who are all these wealthy white parents just waiting to deluge DC schools with their kids? Middle class & rich blacks aren't willing to do that!!! Notice how most DC educators send their children off to school in MD & VA before driving to work in the city.

I'm Hispanic and my husband is Asian. Would our kids be sprinkles too, or maybe some sort of topping on the side?

Curious, when you see white people jogging, do you understand that they live in the neighborhood? They're not like running to and from their homes.

Demographics are changing in DC for sure. But I think everyone understands the incredible cultural impact blacks have on DC. No one is dismissing that (I hope!). I think it's also important that gentrifiers are recognized for their contribution to dc as well.

Both sides have a lot in common as we want the best for out kids.

The flavor of the ICE CREAM is chocolate. So yes you and your friend are sprinkles. Red, white, yellow or blue, you're still just sprinkles on a much larger cone.

I do realize Whites live in those neighborhoods (before moving once the kids come, a better job beckons elsewhere, they've satiated their youthful wanderlust, etc). The point is: 1. That's not enough. 2. A white takeover will not happen. That's not how real life works.

Until every governing body in DC/an innercity is no longer 100% black, Whites stand no chance of a takeover. You simply lack the power with a black mayor, council, school board, governor and all their cronies. When I see even just a few diverse faces on governing boards in DC, only then will I believe gentrification little more than selling housing to people who may or may not be invested in the area.

(Wonder if this takeover fantasy includes generations of dysfunctional thinking in the poor black communities being changed overnight. In one year? Two?)

Sorry, but DC has ALWAYS been owned by developers and the only color in play is GREEN. The mayor, chancellor, council, etc. are just props

I'm the poster who's lived in 3 gentrified urban areas.

And you're right. They always had major developments, new businesses coming in, etc. But no one ever connected that growth to gentrification.

And while the major color in play when it came to getting those big business deals into play was green, the governing body had a HUGE say in who got the deals, built in the city,etc. A lot of the politicians were corrupt--getting kickbacks and lining the pockets of friends. Kilpaatrick did it in Detroit & Nagin did it in New Orleans. It was the gentrifiers who didn't seem to have all the power some of you posters would like to claim. They just moved in, worked, lived their lives, etc. Some did great things for/with the kids in the neighborhoods--like starting a baseball team. But they didn't become major power players. And they didn't integrate the schools either. And nobody cared or even expected them to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, but DC has ALWAYS been owned by developers and the only color in play is GREEN. The mayor, chancellor, council, etc. are just props

I'm the poster who's lived in 3 gentrified urban areas.

And you're right. They always had major developments, new businesses coming in, etc. But no one ever connected that growth to gentrification.

And while the major color in play when it came to getting those big business deals into play was green, the governing body had a HUGE say in who got the deals, built in the city,etc. A lot of the politicians were corrupt--getting kickbacks and lining the pockets of friends. Kilpaatrick did it in Detroit & Nagin did it in New Orleans. It was the gentrifiers who didn't seem to have all the power some of you posters would like to claim. They just moved in, worked, lived their lives, etc. Some did great things for/with the kids in the neighborhoods--like starting a baseball team. But they didn't become major power players. And they didn't integrate the schools either. And nobody cared or even expected them to.

If you're arguing that criminal conspiracy and bribery is the goal of gaining power you really don't understand how things work. Who makes more money, Michael Brown with his 'taste of the taste' or Frank Saul?

[Anonymous]

Gentrifiers can't integrate schools on their own, regular claims to the contrary on DCUM not withstanding. They need to build on policy changes promoting integration, particularly pragmatic test-in/magnet middle and high school programs.

The development arc of Blair Montgomery HS in Silver Spring neatly illustrates the case for test-in programs. Blair's study body was almost entirely low-income and minority in the 1970s. But in the 80s, MoCo established two local test-in MS programs (at Takoma Park MS for math/science, and Eastern MS in Silver Spring for humanities) and two test-in magnets at Blair with county-wide draws. TV journalist Connie Chung attended the magnets early on. Before long, whites and Asians poured into Blair and stayed. The school has been around one-third white and Asian for the last 25 years.

I don't see the "Hill middle school problem" getting sorted out in under 15 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, but DC has ALWAYS been owned by developers and the only color in play is GREEN. The mayor, chancellor, council, etc. are just props

I'm the poster who's lived in 3 gentrified urban areas.

And you're right. They always had major developments, new businesses coming in, etc. But no one ever connected that growth to gentrification.

And while the major color in play when it came to getting those big business deals into play was green, the governing body had a HUGE say in who got the deals, built in the city,etc. A lot of the politicians were corrupt--getting kickbacks and lining the pockets of friends. Kilpaatrick did it in Detroit & Nagin did it in New Orleans. It was the gentrifiers who didn't seem to have all the power some of you posters would like to claim. They just moved in, worked, lived their lives, etc. Some did great things for/with the kids in the neighborhoods--like starting a baseball team. But they didn't become major power players. And they didn't integrate the schools either. And nobody cared or even expected them to.

If you're arguing that criminal conspiracy and bribery is the goal of gaining power you really don't understand how things work. Who makes more money, Michael Brown with his 'taste of the taste' or Frank Saul?

You are so unintelligent there's no point in bothering with you. You're always deliberately missing the point, trying to twist things or just plain being stupid.

It's too bad you can't follow a simple argument.

You're dismissed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is to my understanding that the Eastern validictorian and possible others recieved a score of 26 to 28; which I believe entitled them to enter their college/university as an incoming sophomore.

Hey, that's great! I'm the OP who started the thread and really did just want to hear about the program, not the pages and pages of agita about whither goest The Hill. I'm an IB grad and live in bounds so well aware of the community I live in and general goods and bads of IB, just wanted to hear a bit more about how it's coming together here.

[Anonymous]

To score in the 20s, like the students at Eastern did, is simply to scrape by, to barely clear the pass bar (the pass floor is 24 points). It's the academic equivalent of a C. These are really decent results for low-income AA kids in a low-performing school system--congratulations to them--but that's about it. In MoCo, IB Diploma pass averages range from the mid 30s to low 40s.

[Anonymous]

Why should a school or school system invest in an IB Diploma program when they could just offer (more) AP courses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of IB, why not a vocational training program that will allow these kids to get jobs in plumbing, electrical, heating and cooling, automotive, etc. and earn a good living.

Maybe they can get hired by all the contractors that DCPS is always keeping happy.

They have Phelps for that. You still did not answer the question regarding the academically inclined students who are not zoned for Wilson. Are they not deserving of academics beyond the basics?

Are you under the misimpression that Wilson is IB?

[Anonymous]

IB is just a small cohort at the school. AP and Honor classes are offered at the school too. There's programs at the school that embraces the whole child, they have Health Academy, IB and Build all are outlets for the students. Don't get lost in the menu reading for IB