S/O High SES students will perform well no matter their peer group

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely think that my children love to learn and do work hard, so whatever environment they are in it will work out. Perhaps they won't be ready for Ivies, but my family did well following our passions without that kind of background, into technical fields and law. I don't want my kids to be on a treadmill, I just want them to be happy. I don't really feel like there is a need for them to climb socially or to get out of poverty or anything. Get degrees, find things you'd like to do, be self-sufficient. Leave it to others to work themselves to the bone and enjoy the workahol and the big house.

Perhaps I'm settling. But really I'd rather help others than help my kids or myself. I think they will see it the same way. I know it's not a common belief but I think it'll be fine. If my kids are fine, I am not going to try to find them the "best" school or anything like that.

BUT - if it makes you happy, go ahead! I know I'm offering a minority opinion.

No one said anything about the ivies. People are saying their kids in DCPS are bored and it’s too easy. A ton of parents supplement at Deal and Wilson BTW.

Yes you are settling and in the minority. Every parent wants what is best for their child. You can put whatever idealism and goal you want to help society over your child if you want but don’t think 99% of parents will. Good luck to you but don’t bet on seeing any closing of the achievement gap by sacrificing your children.

Exactly. No one said anything about Harvard or MIT. I don’t particularly care if my kid goes to an ivy or a strong state school. But it is hard to come home in the evenings and hear my kid complain about most of her classes at Wilson and saying all she wants to do is learn and be challenged but she is stuck in large classes with disruptive kids and disinterested teachers. I’m not saying all of her classes are like that. Some teachers are amazing but most seem mediocre or worse. I wish I could have sent her to GDS or Sidwell but we can’t afford those schools. Maybe we should have moved to the suburbs but didn’t realise early enough that she is a high achieving kid who loves academics. Imagine if I put her in Coolidge or Dunbar. It just would not have worked. Kids are all different but you really have to do what is best for your kid and not ultimately what may or may not be for the greater good. I resent the Wilson principal and DCPS for ignoring kids like my kid. They all deserve to learn and be happy at school.

Let her change schools. Did she apply to a test-in school - Banneker or Walls or even Coolidge Early College (not the ‘regular’ Coolidge)? Did you do no research at all?

In a perfect world Wilson should provide what you want. But it doesn’t, and we all know that right now it just isn’t a school with 80%+ of advanced or proficient in WLA) students. For that you go to Walls, Banneker, Latin or BASIS. You CHOSE a school where fewer just 58% of students are proficient or advanced in ELA. For some students, that doesn’t seem to matter. They are proactive, challenge themselves in other ways both inside or outside of school, and go on to be successful in college and life. It is far easier to teach and run a school where most students are well prepared. If thats the cohort and experience you want, it exists. And of course, those schools aren’t overcrowded.

She did get in to Walls but decided not to go as she really wanted a regular high school experience with competitive sports, etc. Also she is a STEM kid and both Walls and Banneker are humanities focused. So yes we did the research but there are very limited options in DC. Coolidge early college just opened so wouldn’t have worked for us. I’m not sure I put much stock in it because kids take a bunch of their classes with regular Coolidge kids. Also their only college partner is Trinity which is more like a community college these days and is desperately trying to survive by partnering with DCPS on every little thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, most parents assume a HS of 1700 kids would have enough tracked options for high achieving students. Also walls is going be harder to get into as they are now limiting the number of white kids specifically.

Can you provide some support for this assertion?

There was an attempt last year to allow students that did not meet the PARCC standard to sit for the test if they were among the top 15 students academically at their middle school. The school did not give proper notice of the policy change and students were not allowed to sit for the test. I am not aware of any plans other that giving proper notice of this policy change this year. That is only allowing students to sit for the test and yes those students are likely POC given the demographics in DC. This is not, however, an attempt to limit the number of “white kids” at SWW.

If they are otherwise looking at changing the standards for admissions I have not heard of read anything about it. I was fairly tuned in to such discussions last year as I had a student applying that is now a 9th grader there.

They eliminated PARCC requirements and also said they wanted more equal representation from all the wards. That means wards 7 and 8. That’s code for less white kids from ward 3. In fact, last year leaders in DCPS personally went to low achieving middle schools to let them know to have the kids apply.

[Anonymous]

I'm thinking of asking when my kid gets to middle school at his EOTP middle school that he get placed right away into Algebra. Any experience with this at Brookland/MacFarland/McKinley (or Wells or Oyster)? This kid could pass any placement test for that kind of thing.

His math skills are always way ahead of peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm thinking of asking when my kid gets to middle school at his EOTP middle school that he get placed right away into Algebra. Any experience with this at Brookland/MacFarland/McKinley (or Wells or Oyster)? This kid could pass any placement test for that kind of thing.

His math skills are always way ahead of peers.

Assuming this is not a joke. I suggest waiting to see where he scores on I ready in 4th or 5th grade before assuming he is ready for Algebra in 6th. Maybe get him outside math instruction or see how he does on Kahn academy. A student needs to be sufficiently knowledgeable about Math 8 skills before they are ready for Algebra, it is not just about aptitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, most parents assume a HS of 1700 kids would have enough tracked options for high achieving students. Also walls is going be harder to get into as they are now limiting the number of white kids specifically.

Can you provide some support for this assertion?

There was an attempt last year to allow students that did not meet the PARCC standard to sit for the test if they were among the top 15 students academically at their middle school. The school did not give proper notice of the policy change and students were not allowed to sit for the test. I am not aware of any plans other that giving proper notice of this policy change this year. That is only allowing students to sit for the test and yes those students are likely POC given the demographics in DC. This is not, however, an attempt to limit the number of “white kids” at SWW.

If they are otherwise looking at changing the standards for admissions I have not heard of read anything about it. I was fairly tuned in to such discussions last year as I had a student applying that is now a 9th grader there.

They eliminated PARCC requirements and also said they wanted more equal representation from all the wards. That means wards 7 and 8. That’s code for less white kids from ward 3. In fact, last year leaders in DCPS personally went to low achieving middle schools to let them know to have the kids apply.

Can you point me to where SWW gave notice they are changing the requirements for sitting for the exam and the statements re ward representation? I would like to see the context. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm thinking of asking when my kid gets to middle school at his EOTP middle school that he get placed right away into Algebra. Any experience with this at Brookland/MacFarland/McKinley (or Wells or Oyster)? This kid could pass any placement test for that kind of thing.

His math skills are always way ahead of peers.

Assuming this is not a joke. I suggest waiting to see where he scores on I ready in 4th or 5th grade before assuming he is ready for Algebra in 6th. Maybe get him outside math instruction or see how he does on Kahn academy. A student needs to be sufficiently knowledgeable about Math 8 skills before they are ready for Algebra, it is not just about aptitude.

This isn't a joke. This kid has always been ahead, and gets everything ahead of his class, but hasn't been pushed beyond grade level. So it's really good to know he needs to build up to 8th grade math to get into Algebra.

(Just for context, I was a kid in a really rural school where they decided to have about a dozen middle schoolers do Algebra in the early 90s. I was put in Algebra at the beginning of 7th grade, some were in 8th grade. We of course were very hard on the teacher because we had been the guys who could goof around and get As regardless, so we hounded our teacher out of our school and made her cry and were basically terrible children. I really hope that teacher's life turned for the better after having us, because we really were terrible. But long story short, I lack references for what you actually need to be qualified for Algebra in a normal school setting as we were just placed in it because of our general grasp of math.)

[Anonymous]

What do you think your kid will do after 6th grade algebra? Why do you think the acceleration is inherently better?

I am more and more convinced that the better way to challenge kids is to go deeper, not faster. Especially with math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm thinking of asking when my kid gets to middle school at his EOTP middle school that he get placed right away into Algebra. Any experience with this at Brookland/MacFarland/McKinley (or Wells or Oyster)? This kid could pass any placement test for that kind of thing.

His math skills are always way ahead of peers.

Assuming this is not a joke. I suggest waiting to see where he scores on I ready in 4th or 5th grade before assuming he is ready for Algebra in 6th. Maybe get him outside math instruction or see how he does on Kahn academy. A student needs to be sufficiently knowledgeable about Math 8 skills before they are ready for Algebra, it is not just about aptitude.

This isn't a joke. This kid has always been ahead, and gets everything ahead of his class, but hasn't been pushed beyond grade level. So it's really good to know he needs to build up to 8th grade math to get into Algebra.

(Just for context, I was a kid in a really rural school where they decided to have about a dozen middle schoolers do Algebra in the early 90s. I was put in Algebra at the beginning of 7th grade, some were in 8th grade. We of course were very hard on the teacher because we had been the guys who could goof around and get As regardless, so we hounded our teacher out of our school and made her cry and were basically terrible children. I really hope that teacher's life turned for the better after having us, because we really were terrible. But long story short, I lack references for what you actually need to be qualified for Algebra in a normal school setting as we were just placed in it because of our general grasp of math.)

Send him to BASIS if you’re looking for truly accelerated math. And yes as PP said there is a great debate about whether accelerated math is a good or bad thing. (Part of the reason they do it at BASIS is so students are prepared for AP Physics and AP Chem earlier and able to take all post-AP classes in 12th).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you think your kid will do after 6th grade algebra? Why do you think the acceleration is inherently better?

I am more and more convinced that the better way to challenge kids is to go deeper, not faster. Especially with math.

NP. Geometry in 7, Alg 2 in 8th, PreCalc in 9th, AP Calc in 10th, AP Stats in 11th, dual-enrollment linear Algebra or other math in 12th.

And no, this sequence this early isn’t appropriate for most students, but there are some for whom it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, most parents assume a HS of 1700 kids would have enough tracked options for high achieving students. Also walls is going be harder to get into as they are now limiting the number of white kids specifically.

Can you provide some support for this assertion?

There was an attempt last year to allow students that did not meet the PARCC standard to sit for the test if they were among the top 15 students academically at their middle school. The school did not give proper notice of the policy change and students were not allowed to sit for the test. I am not aware of any plans other that giving proper notice of this policy change this year. That is only allowing students to sit for the test and yes those students are likely POC given the demographics in DC. This is not, however, an attempt to limit the number of “white kids” at SWW.

If they are otherwise looking at changing the standards for admissions I have not heard of read anything about it. I was fairly tuned in to such discussions last year as I had a student applying that is now a 9th grader there.

They eliminated PARCC requirements and also said they wanted more equal representation from all the wards. That means wards 7 and 8. That’s code for less white kids from ward 3. In fact, last year leaders in DCPS personally went to low achieving middle schools to let them know to have the kids apply.

huh, because I read that as a direct statement that they want more kids from wards 7 and 8 ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you think your kid will do after 6th grade algebra? Why do you think the acceleration is inherently better?

I am more and more convinced that the better way to challenge kids is to go deeper, not faster. Especially with math.

NP. Geometry in 7, Alg 2 in 8th, PreCalc in 9th, AP Calc in 10th, AP Stats in 11th, dual-enrollment linear Algebra or other math in 12th.

And no, this sequence this early isn’t appropriate for most students, but there are some for whom it is.

Ok, I rephrase. At the EOTP middle school, what do you think your kid will do after Algebra in 6th?

[Anonymous]

This is a really good question! I know that Roosevelt is just around the corner from MacFarland. And Wells and Coolidge are even closer basically. I hope they can move along as they learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, most parents assume a HS of 1700 kids would have enough tracked options for high achieving students. Also walls is going be harder to get into as they are now limiting the number of white kids specifically.

Can you provide some support for this assertion?

There was an attempt last year to allow students that did not meet the PARCC standard to sit for the test if they were among the top 15 students academically at their middle school. The school did not give proper notice of the policy change and students were not allowed to sit for the test. I am not aware of any plans other that giving proper notice of this policy change this year. That is only allowing students to sit for the test and yes those students are likely POC given the demographics in DC. This is not, however, an attempt to limit the number of “white kids” at SWW.

If they are otherwise looking at changing the standards for admissions I have not heard of read anything about it. I was fairly tuned in to such discussions last year as I had a student applying that is now a 9th grader there.

They eliminated PARCC requirements and also said they wanted more equal representation from all the wards. That means wards 7 and 8. That’s code for less white kids from ward 3. In fact, last year leaders in DCPS personally went to low achieving middle schools to let them know to have the kids apply.

Can you point me to where SWW gave notice they are changing the requirements for sitting for the exam and the statements re ward representation? I would like to see the context. Thanks.

I've never seen anything precisely about ward representation but the hope is that changing the requirement for sitting for the Walls exam will lead to a more economically diverse student body. They screwed up laslt year by not getting DCPS approval to change the criteria early enough, but intend to use it for 2019-20.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dcs-plan-to-diversify-one-of-its-most-selective-high-schools-is-delayed-by-a-year/2019/02/09/2cceb9a4-2b18-11e9-b2fc-721718903bfc_story.html?arc404=true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, most parents assume a HS of 1700 kids would have enough tracked options for high achieving students. Also walls is going be harder to get into as they are now limiting the number of white kids specifically.

Can you provide some support for this assertion?

There was an attempt last year to allow students that did not meet the PARCC standard to sit for the test if they were among the top 15 students academically at their middle school. The school did not give proper notice of the policy change and students were not allowed to sit for the test. I am not aware of any plans other that giving proper notice of this policy change this year. That is only allowing students to sit for the test and yes those students are likely POC given the demographics in DC. This is not, however, an attempt to limit the number of “white kids” at SWW.

If they are otherwise looking at changing the standards for admissions I have not heard of read anything about it. I was fairly tuned in to such discussions last year as I had a student applying that is now a 9th grader there.

They eliminated PARCC requirements and also said they wanted more equal representation from all the wards. That means wards 7 and 8. That’s code for less white kids from ward 3. In fact, last year leaders in DCPS personally went to low achieving middle schools to let them know to have the kids apply.

Can you point me to where SWW gave notice they are changing the requirements for sitting for the exam and the statements re ward representation? I would like to see the context. Thanks.

I've never seen anything precisely about ward representation but the hope is that changing the requirement for sitting for the Walls exam will lead to a more economically diverse student body. They screwed up laslt year by not getting DCPS approval to change the criteria early enough, but intend to use it for 2019-20.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dcs-plan-to-diversify-one-of-its-most-selective-high-schools-is-delayed-by-a-year/2019/02/09/2cceb9a4-2b18-11e9-b2fc-721718903bfc_story.html?arc404=true

This article refers to exactly what I said, allowing the top 15 students at all DCPS middle schools to sit for the test regardless of whether they make the requisite PARCC scores. This is not lowering the actual bar, which is passing the test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, most parents assume a HS of 1700 kids would have enough tracked options for high achieving students. Also walls is going be harder to get into as they are now limiting the number of white kids specifically.

Can you provide some support for this assertion?

There was an attempt last year to allow students that did not meet the PARCC standard to sit for the test if they were among the top 15 students academically at their middle school. The school did not give proper notice of the policy change and students were not allowed to sit for the test. I am not aware of any plans other that giving proper notice of this policy change this year. That is only allowing students to sit for the test and yes those students are likely POC given the demographics in DC. This is not, however, an attempt to limit the number of “white kids” at SWW.

If they are otherwise looking at changing the standards for admissions I have not heard of read anything about it. I was fairly tuned in to such discussions last year as I had a student applying that is now a 9th grader there.

They eliminated PARCC requirements and also said they wanted more equal representation from all the wards. That means wards 7 and 8. That’s code for less white kids from ward 3. In fact, last year leaders in DCPS personally went to low achieving middle schools to let them know to have the kids apply.

Can you point me to where SWW gave notice they are changing the requirements for sitting for the exam and the statements re ward representation? I would like to see the context. Thanks.

I've never seen anything precisely about ward representation but the hope is that changing the requirement for sitting for the Walls exam will lead to a more economically diverse student body. They screwed up laslt year by not getting DCPS approval to change the criteria early enough, but intend to use it for 2019-20.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dcs-plan-to-diversify-one-of-its-most-selective-high-schools-is-delayed-by-a-year/2019/02/09/2cceb9a4-2b18-11e9-b2fc-721718903bfc_story.html?arc404=true

Notice in the article how it said they quietly tried to roll it out. It also says there is not enough at risk students represented and the student body doesn’t represent same percentages as in the city. So who do you think they are trying to target here? White kids in ward 3? If you can’t read in between the lines, not sure what to tell you.

They are eliminating PARCC scores where you just need to be just competent to apply. comoetent at grade level people, no rocket scientist. Goal to attract black and Hispanic kids who don’t test well. How much more obvious can you be? So you don’t even need to be at grade level on PARCC to apply.

These kids who don’t meet the PARCC requirements will go in taking the test. If they don’t do well on PARCC and testing, what would change with taking the admission test at Walls? I’m betting the kids will be weighted which can easily be done quietly since there is not much transparency with the selection criteria.